Fire and Deep Water

Today, I am an uncle. My sister gave birth to a baby girl. Mother and child are well.

Also today, my father died.

Trump vs. Chavez

As Venezuela enters its end-game, the news reports seem strangely unable to diagnose its problem.  Could it be, for instance, that the country's destruction resulted from electing leaders with the wrong personality?  That didn't help, I'm sure, but as this author points out,
Look, I’m as scared of a Trump presidency as any reasonably sane center-right pro-democracy millennial. But Trump is not surrounded by a loony team of Marxist advisors hellbent on destroying the economy for the sake of denying that there is such a thing as a market.
In the meantime, I'm still not sure what the final cataclysm will look like, but Venezuelans already are beginning to eat their cats, dogs, pigeons, and zoo animals--those that haven't starved first.

72 Killed Resisting Gun Confiscation in Boston

True story.

Free Fire Zone

Uncle J and Kurt Schlichter cut loose, on a topic we've just been discussing here.

I mean really, really loose.

Kim Rhode: One of Us

She may tomorrow become the first woman to win six straight medals in an Olympic sport. Today, she's a spokesman for us.
Yet Rhode, who is funny and personable in conversation, doesn’t resort to typical athlete dodges when talk turns to gun control. “We should have the right to keep and bear arms, to protect ourselves and our family,” she says. “The second amendment was put in there not just so we can go shoot skeet or go shoot trap. It was put in so we could defend our first amendment, the freedom of speech, and also to defend ourselves against our own government.”

It’s a view Rhode plans to pass down her three-year-old son as he grows up. “I hope to have him out there shooting, when he becomes of age,” she says. “I started when I was like 7 or 8 years old, and it was something that was a big deal in my family, to gain that right of passage.”

I Believe I've Heard This Song Before

CENTCOM’s intelligence analysts already are concerned that the DoD IG report will not have as much teeth as the House Republican task force report. These military analysts told The Beast that the head of CENTCOM’s intelligence directorate, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove, and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman, had deleted emails and files from computer systems before the inspector general could examine them.
I'm sure the servers won't be "cleaned in a manner designed to prevent complete forensic recovery." I mean, what are the chances of that?

"Not-So-Dark Ages"

The excavation of that Arthurian site at Tintagel reveals luxury goods, National Geographic reports.
Although only a few trenches in undisturbed areas of the site were excavated this summer, they exposed massive rock walls—some more than 3.3 feet (one meter) thick—that are the most substantial structures known from the period. Hundreds of small finds provide more evidence for imported luxury goods transported from the sunny shores of the Eastern Roman Empire to this blustery British outcrop.

Jesus, Outlaw?

The Art of Manliness is doing a series of interesting articles exploring masculinity and Christianity. I didn't plan to post here about it until I read the following paragraph:

In fact, during [Jesus's] life critics called him a lestes — a word that meant an insurrectionist, rebel, pirate, bandit. Though the label was often associated with violent thievery, Jesus practiced what anthropologists call “social banditry” — groups of men operating on the margins of society who refuse to submit to the control and value system of the ruling elite, and who fight for the justice, independence, and emancipation of the common people. While the existing power structure considers them criminals, the exploited see these outlaws as their champions.

That sounds familiar. Given his peripatetic life, I can easily imagine Jesus and the apostles riding down the road on motorcycles.

The Only Thing That Keeps Me Hanging On

In these dark and foreboding times ...

A good pairing is Tincup, an American whiskey out of the Rocky Mountains. The flavor is sharp and spicy, like a bourbon and rye blend, and it comes with its own tin cup.

Olympics Update

Things are still going well.

That was 2012. This year, we're beating the crap out of everyone and capturing an asteroid.

Olympic Jousting?

If English Heritage has its way ...

Updated with videos!

Also, this might come in handy soon.

And, I'll move my drink pairing up from the comments: I actually have little idea what jousters drank, so I'll pair it with a drink from Merry Olde England, Samuel Smith's "Oatmeal Stout." With the brewery only founded in 1758, it's unlikely to have been part of a tournament champions celebration, but some horse cavalry might have enjoyed it. Should stand up well for sieges, too.

Update 2: Grim brings us up to speed on jousting beers and suggests a hoppy lager. None actually spring to mind. I'll have to go looking for one.

Also, check out these Shire horses Samuel Smith's uses for deliveries. Beautiful.

A Sensible Point from Vox

Dara Lind gets it right:
Trump caricatures conservatives in the same way some liberals do

Every time something like this happens, you can count on at least a few liberal pundits to erupt in shouts of triumph. Aha! they say. That’s the logical conclusion of the position held by “reasonable” conservatives. Donald Trump just made the subtext text!

When Trump called on “Second Amendment people,” people argued that what he said was no different from pro–gun rights tropes like “you can have my guns when you take them from my cold dead hands.”...

The problem with treating Donald Trump as the conservative id, though, is that Trump isn’t a conservative. He’s not saying things he believes because he doesn’t know he’s not supposed to say them; he’s saying things he doesn’t believe because he thinks other people do.

Maybe in some cases, for some people, he’s right. But for other people, he’s wrong. There are plenty of conservatives who’ve thought hard about the implications of their positions and drawn principled lines.

The pro–gun rights groups who’ve pushed for a broader interpretation of the Second Amendment in recent years have done so by filing lawsuits on behalf of people whose guns were illegal where they lived — not by encouraging those people to try to fire on officers if they confiscated their weapons....

But Trump doesn’t know any of this. He’s new to conservatism, and when he tries to appeal to these voters, it shows.
Perhaps part of the reason that the media and the Clinton people hear "assassination" from what he said isn't their own ignorance or malice, but Trump's own ignorance as a speaker. It's quite possible that even he doesn't know how what he said sounds to us, or what we think about questions of violent crime versus a heritage based in morally proper revolutions.

That would be appropriately symbolic for this year. We aren't really a part of the 2016 election. It's being fought by people who don't understand us, and that's never more obvious than when they fight about us.

Revolution Is Not a Crime But A Duty

Let's stipulate that Trump's remarks yesterday about "2nd Amdendment guys" were a dogwhistle to the 2A community. Is it representative of ignorance that the media and the Clinton campaign alike don't understand how the 2nd Amendment community would interpret the remark? Or is it malice, in which they are intentionally forwarding a false and damaging impression about both the 2nd Amendment community and also Donald Trump?

The media is following the Clinton line that this remark by Trump was an "apparent Clinton assassination threat." Possibly that is how it sounds to them because they don't understand the 2nd Amendment community at all. The same community that produces these journalists produces the EEOC workers who can misinterpret the Gadsden flag as having something to do with racism, for example. They really don't seem to get what we're doing here, and so they think that the flag somehow must be a coded signal for white animosity -- rather than a clear and obvious signal that the government had better respect its constitutional limits and stop treading on our traditional freedoms.

Likewise, in decades of hanging around 2nd Amendment folks, going to gun shows, shooting, and so forth, I've never heard anyone argue that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to protect the capacity to assassinate one's political opponents. Such a claim would be obviously false and easy to reject, for one thing. Yet perhaps the press -- and Clinton herself, who hates hunters as well as other kinds of gun owners, and who refuses to admit that the 2nd Amendment protects any constitutional right at all -- really doesn't understand what we're talking about to such a degree that they think this is a plausible reading. There are three hundred million guns in America legally owned by tens of millions of Americans, who are taken together one of the most law abiding communities in the country. It is absurd to think that they are a nest of murderers. If that were true, you'd know it: after all, there are tens of millions of us with 300,000,000 guns. Yet gun violence is at historic lows, and two thirds of it are suicides and almost the whole of the rest conducted by guns that are not lawfully owned.

What the 2nd Amendment people endorse is the idea that the 2nd Amendment protects the capacity for a second American revolution. Now, you might say: "Revolutions are even more violent than assassinations! What kind of people would endorse revolution as a solution to political problems?"

Well, Bernie Sanders talked about it all last year. In fact, "time for a revolution!" is a standard line on the left.  So let's not pretend that suggesting a revolution is somehow beyond the pale in American politics.

When we do it, we are thinking of the same people who gave us the Culpepper and Gadsden flags, as well as the Plattsburg flag, as well as the American flag.

These people:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
You can't argue against that without arguing against the whole American project. It is obviously legitimate to overthrow the government if it betrays its mission -- indeed, its sole legitimate purpose -- of securing the unalienable rights of the People.

Clinton has openly said that she intends to appoint justices who will restrict first amendment rights, both in terms of Citizens United and in terms of religious liberty and free association. She has made fairly clear her intention to infringe upon 2nd Amendment rights, which she does not even recognize as legitimate rights at all. It is striking that a woman so frequently proven to be willing to say anything at all to get elected cannot even bring herself to say that the 2nd Amendment protects a real right. We regard her as the enemy of our rights for good reason. She, by her own admission at the first Democratic debate, regards both the NRA and the Republican party as her "enemies."

Whether ignorance or malice motivates them, her faction had better learn to hear this message clearly. We have heard them clearly enough, and the long train of abuses grows longer by the day. They have elected to turn the law into a weapon against us, and a shield to protect their own from prosecution for obvious and provable crimes. They cannot now hide behind an appeal to the majesty of the law, not those who have done so much to undermine our faith in its legitimacy. The only question remains just how much longer the train must grow before the American people decide that "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such a Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

And that is the most American of questions.

Another Maligned Community

The Motorcycle Profiling Project provides statistics to show that criminality is not actually all that common among "Outlaw motorcycle clubs," in spite of Federal arguments to the contrary.

I understand that the name must be confusing. It's like Outlaw Country music, though. Their ethic is about a spirit of rebellion and a devotion to personal freedom more than it is about actually breaking the law. I suspect that, at worst, most people in both communities are more indifferent to whether they violate the law rather than committed to violating it. Probably this is especially true in matters of marijuana use, which is regrettably common in both communities.

Though I myself have never made use of any illegal drugs, and regard them as generally bad ideas, I can see why many people might take it as improper for the government to involve itself in the question of what relatively harmless substances they ingest. I tend to be more focused on the enumerated liberties and rights, which are in grave enough danger where they are not already -- as especially in the case of the 10th Amendment -- being openly violated by the government. In such an environment, being in some sense an Outlaw is the only way not to lay down your freedom.

Just Another Russian Information Operation

Wikileaks is now claiming that their source for those DNC emails wasn't Russian hackers, but the recently murdered DNC employee killed in DC.

Well, it might be true.

The thing to remember is, where the Russians are concerned -- and Wikileaks is very much Russian intelligence -- even if it's true, they're telling you for a reason.

Who Are Your Friends?

NYT Headline: "Do Your Friends Actually Like You?"

Well, that depends on what you mean by "friends." If you mean the people I deal with socially and professionally, some of them do, and a lot of them are just being polite. That seems to be what they mean: "THINK of all the people with whom you interact during the course of a day, week, month and year."

OK, I guess. I imagine a lot of them really don't like me, but aren't ready to tell me so.

But I know some guys I don't see every year, that I don't even talk to every year, but we were together 18 hours a day in Iraq. I'm pretty sure I could go look any of them up tomorrow and we'd start back right where we left off. Certainly it's been that way every time I have ever been able to run into any of them.

Got close friends too, and family. Don't see them every day. I know who I can count on, though, and there's a few of them. Maybe one fewer, soon. That's the other side of this kind of thing. If it's just people you happen to run into every so often, well, they come and they go. The ones who count are people you miss.

Winners? Not Yet

You'll remember the first time they do win, if you raise them this way.

They will, too.
The Clinton campaign responded with a statement, with campaign manager Robby Mook saying: “This is simple — what Trump is saying is dangerous. A person seeking to be President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way.”
First of all, that's nonsense as phrased: Clinton herself has been 'suggesting violence' in terms of talking about what she would do with regard to Syria and terrorism. The government is little but an instrument of violence, extracting taxes here and sending people to prison there, deploying a drone strike here and a Combined Joint Task Force there. Talking about how you'd apply the power of the state is most of what you do as a candidate for President. The only other topic Clinton ever discusses is whom she's going to reward with the wealth extracted from the disfavored. Everything else she talks about is suggesting violence at some level of abstraction -- that's what her calls for greatly increased taxes amount to, violence and nothing else.

What this Mook guy really meant to say is that no one running for President should ponder out loud that citizens might take up arms against the state.

It occurs to me that Thomas Jefferson ran for President.

Words versus Deeds

Clinton stories from the last few hours:

* Orlando shooter's father attends Clinton rally, seated right behind her.

* Clinton's reckless handling of national security information in emails leads to execution of American agent in Iran.

* Parents of Benghazi victims sue Clinton for contributing "to the death of both men, as well as defamation and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress."

Trump stories:

* Last ditch GOP effort to kill Trump's candidacy by running an independent candidate who can't even get on all the ballots, but who could cost some swing states.

* Susan Collins announces she will not vote for Trump, citing his "cruel comments."

* Donors for Bush, Christie and Kaisch are turning to Clinton instead of Trump.

* Poll: Clinton has double-digit lead over Trump.

Now, Trump is clearly the anti-establishment candidate left in the race. In a way, the Republican establishment's efforts to destroy him make perfect sense. The Republican establishment feels more secure with the Clinton machine, which is itself a central part of America's political establishment, than with the insurgent voters propelling Trump or Sanders. Clinton is a crony capitalist, and you can get along with her if you're rich and connected and willing to pay (in money or in favors).

That just leaves the rest of us out. We have nothing she needs or wants. And that might be fine, because she has nothing I need or want either. It just can't be fine because of what she will do to the Constitution through the appointment of 'living document' justices, and of what she'll do to American sovereignty through support of deals like the T-TIP and TPP.

What Becomes of the Irish Borders?

Following Brexit, Ireland wonders if its borders are going to become tense again. They aren't now.

Worked So Well on the "Iran Deal"

The Washington Post reports that “President Obama has decided to seek a new United Nations Security Council resolution that would call for an end to nuclear testing.” Going to the Security Council could represent a deliberate effort to bypass the Senate, which rejected the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in 1999. Despite Obama’s adamant support for CTBT, senior officials have consistently pledged to pursue a nuclear test ban by means of a bipartisan dialogue with the Senate. Any effort to enact a test ban through the Security Council without the consent of the Senate would both violate these promises and subvert the checks and balances that enable lawmakers to restrain presidents in matters of national security.
The way this worked last year was that the President got the UN Security Council to pass Resolution 2231, which ratified the so-called "Iran deal." Only then did he submit it to Congress for ratification, and without providing the full text along with any side deals as required by the Corker-Cardin law. Then, the Democrats filibustered the resolution of disapproval, so that the 'deal' was deemed to have passed without the Senate ever taking a vote on it at all.

Of course, the next President will be free to walk away from that 'deal,' since it was not ratified as a proper treaty. It's non-binding on Obama's successor, and if the UN doesn't like it they can go jump. Knowing this, the President is all in on electing his chosen successor, in the hope that she will continue his policy. (Good luck with trusting Hillary Clinton to keep her word once she doesn't need you any more, chief.)

Lacking willing Republican suckers to play along, the President won't be able to smuggle this one in on a filibuster. But he can still force his successors to be subject to the rhetorical cudgel that they have violated an agreement ratified by their ambassador at the UN. All he can accomplish here is to hand a weapon to America's enemies on the world stage.

So that's what he's going to do.

Marksmanship Update

Most of the US Rio golds have come from marksmanship, which isn't too surprising. America has one of the last true gun cultures in the modern world, as well as the resources to train people who come up in it to high levels of expertise. It turns out there's more of a military connection than you might have guessed from the use of air rifles, though.
The United States has won more Olympic medals in marksmanship than almost any other sport, and Army Soldiers make up more than a third of the team. This year, five Soldiers will be competing in the Rio Olympics.

2016 Olympic Qualified Soldiers

Sgt. 1st Class Glen Eller
Earned a 2016 Olympic Team nomination in double trap
Won a gold medal at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and has competed in four previous Olympic Games

Sgt. 1st Class Michael McPhail
Earned a 2016 Olympic Team nomination in men’s 50-meter rifle prone
Competed in the 2012 London Olympics

Sgt. 1st Class Josh Richmond
Earned a 2016 Olympic Team nomination in double trap during the May 2016 Shotgun Olympic Trials in Tillar, Arkansas
Competed in the 2012 London Olympics

Spc. Daniel Lowe
Earned a 2016 Olympic Team nomination in Air Rifle by winning the 2016 Air Olympic Trials June 3-5 at Camp Perry, Ohio
This will be his first Olympics

Sgt. 1st Class Keith Sanderson
Earned a 2016 Olympic Team nomination in 25-meter rapid fire pistol
Rio will be his third Olympic appearance
The Army apparently takes this Olympic shooting stuff seriously, and provides real support to potential Olympians.

A Contrast in Cultures

An essay, with photos, of the very different uniforms employed by the women's volleyball teams of Egypt and Germany. It strikes me that the Egyptians are competing at a major disadvantage, although it is wintertime in Brazil.

(Ironic, given that this is the summer Olympics, but it's true.)

Still, this will probably resolve itself. The way Germany is going, they'll be competing in burqinis any day now.

John Pilger on Obama & Clinton

This harsh criticism from the Left, by veteran Australian correspondent John Pilger, sounds very much like things I heard at the Philly rallies. I transmit it for that reason.
Take Obama. As he prepares to leave office, the fawning has begun all over again. He is “cool”. One of the more violent presidents, Obama gave full reign to the Pentagon war-making apparatus of his discredited predecessor. He prosecuted more whistleblowers – truth-tellers – than any president. He pronounced Chelsea Manning guilty before she was tried. Today, Obama runs an unprecedented worldwide campaign of terrorism and murder by drone.

In 2009, Obama promised to help “rid the world of nuclear weapons” and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. No American president has built more nuclear warheads than Obama. He is “modernising” America’s doomsday arsenal, including a new “mini” nuclear weapon, whose size and “smart” technology, says a leading general, ensure its use is “no longer unthinkable”....

In Asia, the Pentagon is sending ships, planes and special forces to the Philippines to threaten China. The US already encircles China with hundreds of military bases that curve in an arc up from Australia, to Asia and across to Afghanistan. Obama calls this a “pivot”.

As a direct consequence, China reportedly has changed its nuclear weapons policy from no-first-use to high alert and put to sea submarines with nuclear weapons. The escalator is quickening.

It was Hillary Clinton who, as Secretary of State in 2010, elevated the competing territorial claims for rocks and reef in the South China Sea to an international issue; CNN and BBC hysteria followed; China was building airstrips on the disputed islands. In a mammoth war game in 2015, Operation Talisman Sabre, the US and Australia practiced “choking” the Straits of Malacca through which pass most of China’s oil and trade. This was not news.

Clinton declared that America had a “national interest” in these Asian waters. The Philippines and Vietnam were encouraged and bribed to pursue their claims and old enmities against China. In America, people are being primed to see any Chinese defensive position as offensive, and so the ground is laid for rapid escalation. A similar strategy of provocation and propaganda is applied to Russia.

Clinton, the “women’s candidate”, leaves a trail of bloody coups: in Honduras, in Libya (plus the murder of the Libyan president) and Ukraine. The latter is now a CIA theme park swarming with Nazis and the frontline of a beckoning war with Russia. It was through Ukraine – literally, borderland – that Hitler’s Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, which lost 27 million people. This epic catastrophe remains a presence in Russia. Clinton’s presidential campaign has received money from all but one of the world’s ten biggest arms companies. No other candidate comes close.

The "Rorke's Drift Paras"

This is one of the great stories of military history.
For nearly two months, the 88 men of Easy Company – a mix of Paratroopers and the Royal Irish – had faced the overwhelming force and firepower of up to 500 Taliban determined to over-run the remote Helmand outpost of Musa Qala....

Hungry and frequently at the point of exhaustion, they were forced to somehow fend off 360-degree attacks from the Taliban, with little protection beyond a series of low mud walls.

They used up a quarter of all the British Army’s Afghan ammunition for that entire year.
There's going to be a documentary that ought to be worth the candle.

Bang, Bang

American women shooters are tearing it up at the Olympics this year. Corey Cogdell took bronze in trap.

I'd pair that with a good mass-produced American brew, but not a light beer. It's only a bronze, after all. It's not the very best there is. But it's not nothing, either. Maybe a PBR, or a full-strength Coors.

Drink/Thought Pairings

So, I guess we are doing this. Co-bloggers are encouraged to suggest a drink to go along with the thought or reflection they are proposing to the Hall. It can be fancy, like Tom's suggestion of Chianti Classico, or brutal, like my suggestion of Jerry Rum. I trust you're all experienced hands.

Well, That's Inconvenient

Regarding Galileo, "The Inquisition followed sound science," according to the Boston Globe.

There's an issue about punctuation.

The Hell You Say

The government’s top watchdog revealed in a new report that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) essentially maintained a database of law-abiding gun owners by ignoring its own policies.... FFLs are required to report to the ATF the names of customers who purchase multiple firearms at once. ATF is supposed to keep the names on file for no longer than two years, after which policies require that the agency remove identifying information about the buyers if the firearms haven’t been linked to a crime.

But for more than two decades, the agency has failed to comply with the privacy protection policies with regularity.
How shocking.

Porco Rosso

On the topics of honor and Eric's series of anime, let me mention Porco Rosso, the Crimson Pig:

It's Hayao Miyazake again. The story is about Porco, a self-employed fighter pilot who also happens to be a pig, in the Mediterranean in the 1930s. He used to be Marco, a human pilot. He and his best friend joined the Italian air force to become fighter pilots in World War I, but his best friend, and most of his squadron, was killed in combat. This is the spell that turned Marco into Porco. (All of the dates and countries are rough analogues; the story is not intended to be historical, but merely rhyme with history.)

Porco is a bounty hunter who hunts pirates, of which there is no shortage. He is challenged by a man the pirate gangs hired to take him out. Honor compels him to the fight. Along the way, he is helped by Fio, a young woman who turns out to be a budding young aviation engineer, and she gets involved in the duel. In part for his own honor, and in part to save her, he stakes everything on one dogfight.

For her part, designing the best amphibian fighter plane in the world is Fio's challenge, and also finding the answer to whether or not Porco can be saved from his spell.

It is worth watching for the imagery, the music, and the story. You will not be enlightened, but who says every movie must make you rethink your life?

One caveat: In an odd juxtaposition, the early part of the movie is much more for children than the latter part. When I first saw the early part, I thought, oh, that's cute. After seeing this movie several times, I just put up with the first part in order to get to the story I'm interested in. It's a good time to make popcorn.

A second caveat: There is a point in the movie where a good friend is asking Porco not to get into this fight. In the translation, Porco replies: "A pig's gotta fly." However, the actual Japanese is: 飛ばない豚はただの豚だ. "A pig who doesn't fly is just a pig."

I understand the difficulties of translating for a movie. You have to get the meaning across, but also stick to the time allowed the scene. However, the Japanese reply carries a deeper meaning in the context of Porco's transformation from human to pig, and his insistence on personal honor when his friends have died in a lost battle and things like national honor and pride have been demolished.

UPDATE: Normally, I suppose, you watch the movie and then review it, but I had seen it maybe half a dozen times, maybe more, so I didn't bother to watch it again before posting this. I didn't intend to watch it again today, but after posting I couldn't get it out of my mind, and I had a bottle of Italian wine in the cupboard ... The children's part is shorter than I had remembered, and the whole story does depend on personal honor. The topic is brought up at several points in the story. Also, during this time Italy is turning to fascism, which is one reason why Porco doesn't return to the air force, and why he can no longer rely on national pride or honor, but only the honor of one man, er, pig, standing against the world. (Really, one man and one woman.)

I watch it in Japanese, so maybe I'm not the best one to offer advice here. In considering a non-Japanese-speaking audience, I tried watching it dubbed in English, but Michael Keaton's voice was jarring. He may be Batman, but Porco? I don't think so. I recommend it in Japanese with English subtitles if you don't mind subtitles. If you do mind subtitles, well, Michael Keaton's not terrible.

If you are the type who matches movies with drinks, allow me to recommend the Gabbiano Chianti Classico for a richer taste, or the Placido Chianti for a smoother taste, for this movie.

"A Good Gift For Bad People"


I strive to be an honorable man, but increasingly I wonder if that is always consistent with being a good man. We all know that mafias have honor codes, but aren't good men in spite of living by these codes. It's an interesting question. Assuming for the moment that honor and goodness don't always line up, which one should be preferred? Alternatively, can you give an account of why they should always line up, one that would explain that codes like the mafia's aren't really honorable?

You might want to have a drink while considering the question. It's the kind of thing we live or die by.