Bill Competition

Uh-Oh: Bill T's Got Some Competition

Not to suggest that I approve of such humor, but the wag commenting on this post deserves some kind of a prize. Perhaps a marmoset.

George Bernard Shaw

George Bernard Shaw:

I was looking through Arts & Letters Daily in the hope that they'd have a nice collection of Zinn obituaries for our reading pleasure. However, what I found instead was an old movie of "The World's Outstanding Literary Genius," George Bernard Shaw.



Complete with praise for Mussolini's 'kindly nature'!

But confer with this, starting at the four minute mark (h/t Dad29):



Now, how great a 'genius' do you have to be to appreciate that? But at least you know why he was giving the fascist salute. That part was merely playful. The rest appears to have been in deadly earnest.

G. K. Chesterton and Shaw managed to be great friends, plying their considerable wits against one another.

Chesterton: I see there has been a famine in the land.
Shaw: And I see the cause of it.

Shaw: If I were as fat as you, I would hang myself.
Chesterton: If I were to hang myself, I would use you for the rope.

They also had remarkable debates that infuriated much of the population and interested other parts of it. Perhaps it was easier to take Mr. Shaw's remarks on having 'gentlemanly gas chambers' as merely a transgressive idea before certain regimes began actually to employ that idea. Yet Chesterton did not do so: he said that he thought Shaw was the most serious of men, that 'even his jokes are serious.' Fortunately, perhaps, Chesterton died before the reality of his friend's ideas was laid bare before the world.

Chesterton said many things about Shaw, but he felt his best was this:

And there is no more subtle truth than that of the everyday phrase about a man having "his heart in the right place." It involves the idea of normal proportion; not only does a certain function exist, but it is rightly related to other functions. Indeed, the negation of this phrase would describe with peculiar accuracy the somewhat morbid mercy and perverse tenderness of the most representative moderns. If, for instance, I had to describe with fairness the character of Mr. Bernard Shaw, I could not express myself more exactly than by saying that he has a heroically large and generous heart; but not a heart in the right place.

It ought to be terrifying to see just how far a "heroically large and generous heart" can carry you.

Loser

Giving the Lie, Again:

The President slammed the Supreme Court to its face last night.

Nearly every president finds something to criticize about the Supreme Court, but not every one gets to do it to the justices’ faces, on national television, in the State of the Union speech.

Actually, pretty much every President has the chance to do it, since the Supreme Court normally has at least one member present. The fact that it doesn't usually happen has to do with the fact that it's cowardly and unfit to strike someone who cannot strike back.

The opposition party gets to respond formally at the end of the speech, so a certain amount of political grandstanding towards them is fine. (Less fine: calling your opponents liars to their faces, then acting like you're the one who deserves an apology when they give you the lie right back.)

The Supreme Court has no such opportunity to speak directly to the People. They may not, by protocol, even applaud things they like from the President's speech, nor stand to applaud, nor cheer. They are supposed to be outside of politics, and they cannot answer the blow.

It does not help that the President's claim about just what they had done was a... well, it was 'not true.'

The Justices did not deserve to be treated in that way. It was an honorless insult, and a cowardly act.

Teddy on Populism

Populist:

Confer.

Pope and Patriarch

Pope and Patriarch:

Here is an amazing story about people who may really fix a social problem that is many centuries old. (H/t: Dad29.)

The international mixed commission for theological dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches started discussing this text in Paphos, on the island of Cyprus, from October 16-23, 2009.

It has started to examine the preaching of Peter and Paul in Rome, their martyrdom and the presence of their tombs in Rome, which for Irenaeus of Lyons confers preeminent authority on the apostolic Roman see.

From there, the discussion continued by examining the letter of Pope Clement to the Christians of Corinth, the testimony of St. Ignatius of Antioch, who identifies the Church of Rome as the one that "presides in charity," the role of popes Anicetus and Victor in the controversy surrounding the date of Easter, the positions of St. Cyprian of Carthage in the controversy over whether or not to rebaptize the "lapsi," meaning the Christians who had sacrificed to idols in order to save their lives.

The intention is to understand to what extent the form that the primacy of the bishop of Rome had in the first millennium can act as a model for a rediscovered unity between East and West in the third millennium of the Christian era.

In the middle, however, there has been a second millennium in which the primacy of the pope was interpreted and lived, in the West, in increasingly accentuated forms, far from the ones that the Churches of the East are willing to accept today.

And this will be the critical point of the discussion. But the delegations from the two sides are not afraid to face it. Benedict XVI himself said this last January 20[.]

This is one of those things like having discussions between the United States and England over us rejoining the Commonwealth. You'd tend to think that there's just no possibility that an egg so badly broken can be restored.

Sometimes, though, things can go the other way. A Christianity that is set upon by external pressures may start to cling together more than it did at other times. One might not be so shocked to see it start to pull together; and from that, it would not be shocking to see it flower anew.

Book Review

The Time It Never Rained:

Joel Leggett has posted a short book review of a story about a man who refuses to take Federal handouts. I remember this story from the New York Times about people who live on nothing but food stamps:

About six million Americans receiving food stamps report they have no other income, according to an analysis of state data collected by The New York Times....

Their numbers were rising before the recession as tougher welfare laws made it harder for poor people to get cash aid, but they have soared by about 50 percent over the past two years. About one in 50 Americans now lives in a household with a reported income that consists of nothing but a food-stamp card.

The map breaks down the data in several different ways.

What I find odd is how many of the people are in the South, outside of urban areas. I realize that the rural South is poor, but it's a good place for growing food -- one would think that there would be less need for rural Southerners to buy food. Even poor, you'd expect that they would (as we do) substitute much of their food needs out of what they can produce.

Freakonomics says that may not be true:

Is it cheaper to grow your own food? It’s not impossible but, as my little ice cream story above illustrates, there are huge inefficiencies at work here. Pretend that instead of just me making ice cream last weekend, it was all 100 people who live in my building. Now we’ve collectively spent $1,200 to each have a few scoops of ice cream. Let’s say you decide to plant a big vegetable garden this year to save money. Now factor in everything you need to buy to make it happen — the seeds, fertilizer, sprout cups, twine, tools, etc. — along with the transportation costs and the opportunity cost. Are you sure you really saved money by growing your own zucchini and corn? And what if 1,000 of your neighbors did the same?

I have trouble buying that. Specialization is efficient, yes, if there is work to do. However, there aren't really any "opportunity costs" if you're otherwise unemployed. This is true especially in a region like rural Kentucky where there are few new jobs coming online, so there's little reason to devote a lot of time to looking for work.

Seeds are not that expensive, if you're talking about 'enough food to feed a family of four,' for example. Many things like seed cups can be made out of re-used jars or other things that might have been thrown away (soda cans? Yogurt cups? Paper cups?). If you're starting with the model of making an expensive luxury item like ice cream, sure; but if you're just talking about staples, of course we can grow them cheaply at home. This is how most people live worldwide, where population density is often much higher.

It's also how we used to do things here, before the idea came along that the government would pay you to do nothing. Charity is a great virtue, when it comes to helping those who can't help themselves. I'd hate to think that one in fifty Americans really can't, and some of them living on good earth that could bring up corn or wheat, vegetables, fruits and peppers.

Folks in the cities, sure, I understand you can't grow your own food. I grew up in poor, rural Georgia though, and I know perfectly well that most of us could.

Who Are You?

"Who Are You?"

From the archives, October, 2008:

"The most dangerous question Sen. Obama has ever had to face is, 'Who are you?'"

From the New York Times, today:

"Who is Barack Obama?"

The danger isn't, though, the one that Bob Herbert expects: that we'll answer the question for him in a way that will be a negative for his agenda.

The danger is that there may be no answer at all.

Potential Disruption

Potential Disruption:

Apparently my beloved Haloscan comments system is dying. I've been told that we (along with all other Haloscan users) will see it end on 10 FEB.

The company that took them over is called Echo, and they say they are willing to let me try their system for free for 30 days. You can see an example of an Echo comment system here.

I can also export the comments (actually, I did that already this evening), to be imported to another system later. Complication: no other system is currently designed to import old Haloscan comments, so there's no guarantee I'd be able to do that.

The comments are the most important part of this operation, since there's much less of value in what I have to say than in the pleasure of conversing with this fine company. So, take a look at the Echo blog, if you would, and see if you can stand it. If not, we'll try something else.

Suggestions? Hit the comments (while they're still there!).

I Love Fight Club

I Love Fight Club References:

So, regarding Mr. Klein, the question is are you Tyler Durden? (h/t Indy.)



Not nearly.

The thing, though, is that Mr. Klein and company really ought to be afraid of those of us who might be. We don't really need them. The country doesn't need them. Our civilization doesn't need them. We can tear this thing down any time we want to, because it depends on us.

It doesn't depend on Time magazine writers. The ones who have fought for it, built it, know how it works? Well, that was Tyler's point when he spoke to the mayor: we're the ones they depend on.

It's best not to mess with us.

Pirates v. Ninjas

Pirates v. Ninjas: Presidential Edition

I wasn't going to post this over the top of Eric's tribute to the late Jean Simmons, but with the Peasant to serve as a buffer, I think it's safe.

Via Southern Appeal:

So let’s get it on: 43 men enter, one man leaves. No “over the top rope” battle royale, because Taft and Cleveland would have an unfair advantage. All men are at the physical peak of their presidency, because Wilson deserves a chance. No firearms.

We are sticking with the classics: 43 men on a remote island, forced to fight to the death in a series of individual battles with a soundtrack by Stan Bush. It will be called Beyond Capitoldome, and it will cost $49.95 on pay-per-view. Who wins?

I think it's Old Hickory, easy. He beat the Creeks, the Seminoles, the British veterans of Waterloo, and fought 13 duels besides.

Now, what I'd like to see is the presidents v. Congress. That would be entertainment.

Dennis the Peasant tears Joe Klein a new hole. (warning: strong language)

Richly deserved, I might add.

Normblog had 3 interesting posts today:

1. He notes the passing of the actress Jean Simmons. As Grim has a habit of noting the cultural ideals and what not of classic Hollywood films, it seems appropriate to note some of Simmons' movies:
Guys and Dolls

I have a soft spot for this movie, having been in the play in high school. Marlon Brando, unfortunately, cannot carry a tune to save his life.

The Robe

Nice smile as there as they're being led off to get martyred. This is the sort of movie that nobody would get caught dead making anymore, but seemed to be a staple of 1950's Hollywood.

Elmer Gantry

This is a interesting film that can be looked at a number of ways. I'll leave it each to get what they want from it.

But it shows I think, how Simmons was one of those 'visions of beauty' that Grim was on about.

RIP

2. Norm also notes Martin Amis behaving badly. Pleading it was 'just satire' is both weak and craven.

3. Norm also notes the British government behaving badly. Which I suppose, is nothing particularly new, but as he notes, the cynicism is rich. Neat trick if you can pull it off.

Situation #1

Situation #1:

Looks like the evidence is coming hard and fast, which is suggestive of a 1 or 3 situation rather than a 2 (see comments of the post below). Per Bthun, here's some circumstantial evidence pointing to "an international PR firm."

They mention the "Ethan Winner Affair" in the post. What is forgotten about that, but was the most important part of the story, was that the connection between that matter and the government of France.

That would explain the regularity of the Baltimore Chronicle being targeted. The Chronicle is ideal if one of your overarching goals is moving America to yield some of its sovereign authority to the ICC (as is a standing front-page goal of the Chronicle's).

So: although this evidence is circumstantial, I'd say it creates an even stronger probability of a #1 situation (which was always the most likely of the three).

What remains is to finish proving it, and then decide what to do about it beyond making it public knowledge. It might be hard to make a criminal case out of it, for example; which part is illegal?

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia:

Patterico asks a question:

Ed Morrissey forwarded me an e-mail he received from Ellie Light several days ago. The mail appears to have been routed through the IP address 212.24.236.50, which comes back to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia??

I assume this is some sort of masking or spoofing device and not the actual location of “Ellie Light.” Which makes you wonder: why does a grandma writing letters on behalf of Obama use an IP spoofer?

Actually, there's another question that's just as interesting if we assume "Ellie Light" is really writing from Saudi Arabia. Either way, it's a mystery that requires some explanation; though, if it is merely foreign allies of the President's attempting an information operation on his behalf, but without his knowledge, there's nothing illegal about it.

Bendigo Shafter 4-23

Grim's Hall Book Club: Bendigo Shafter, Chapters 4-23

We start right off with an examination of the culture clash between the Indians and the Americans.

No Indian could get a wife or be counted a warrior until he had taken a scalp, and Indians were celebrated among themselves for their victories, just as were the knights at King Arthur's court.

While that is true for at least some of the Indian nations, it doesn't hold for all of them. What L'amour does here is provide a frontiersman's viewpoint, I think; but it is important also to realize how much we changed the Indians we encountered. The Lakota changed rapidly with the introduction of the horse, becoming a power that swept the plains of many other nations. The Commanche achieved their almost imperial power in part because of their relations with the Spanish in Mexico and points south. The greatest of the Indian nations became powerful because of their interactions with the West; that was where they absorbed the wealth and power to go on to conquer their neighbors. The standard narrative -- that the Indian was there, more or less unchanged, until the White Man came to steal his land -- ignores that fact entirely. The great nations had only just finished stealing that same land from someone else, using horses or rifles or wealth that they got through trading with Europeans. The powerful, city-based Indians that De Soto had discovered on his voyage were already gone, collapsing either through disease or their own internal wars.

At this point Bendigo is reading Montaigne, while trying to show mercy to a man who wants to kill him. This is also a culture clash: there is no reason to believe that the indian would do the same for him. It is Christian ethics that drives him here -- L'amour makes only passing references to the religious meetings the town holds, but never shows us one. The religion is a background influence, present and powerful but not in the foreground of consciousness.

There is a discussion of theology in this section, though: the point where Indians are said to be unmentioned in the Bible, and Bendigo points out that the Bible doesn't mention the English either. L'amour views the proper role of religion as humane, and is annoyed by religious prejudice, whether it is toward Mormons or Indians or just people in the community who are different.

How does this comport with your own view of the proper role of religion?

The rest of this section is taken up with the beginnings of the cattle drive. We see that the reputation of his town has spread. A lot of time passes here with only a few words, so when the letter reaches him at the end of this section, it reminds us that he's been gone for months. While he has been gone, things are changing at home.

What is that old saying about a woman scorned?

On first glance, it could be the ultimate Valentine's Day card -- a gigantic billboard that towers over New York's Times Square, featuring a happy couple with the text: "You are my soulmate forever, Charles & YaVaughnie."

But as every scorned lover knows, looks can be deceiving. This billboard -- which also has gone up in Atlanta and San Francisco -- is the ultimate act of revenge -- a very public retaliation by a dumped mistress aimed at a very wealthy, and married, businessman who is an adviser to President Obama.

I wonder if it was worth it.

The Passenger

The Passenger:

I was going back through some old archives tonight. A few months ago, Eric posted this video, which has a lot to do with the "vision of beauty" that once defined our nation.



If there is a clear message in it, it is this: There is joy in a life boldly lived; and yet we are all going to pass, and therefore die. God save us!

And, given that, let's ride.

UPDATE: For the ladies, and the brave ones: Cassandra calls.

"Let's see what's mine." What is?

UPDATE: Looking through that video this morning, I realize that the sense of 'we are all going to pass' is something that comes from sitting in a place where all of these things have passed. At the time they made these films, they were meant to be vibrant statements of how to live now.

In some ways, we learn from our place in this late hour. They were right about how to live. We'll be gone someday, as they are now, and should try to leave such a legacy.

76. Cattle die, and kinsmen die,
And so one dies one's self;
But a noble name will never die,
If good renown one gets.

77. Cattle die, and kinsmen die,
And so one dies one's self;
One thing I know that never dies,
The fame of a dead man's deeds.

Grim's Tour Guide to Iraq

Grim's Tour Guide to Iraq:

Hey, I've been to several of these places!

Iraq littered with high levels of nuclear and dioxin contamination, study finds.

For example, here I am at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Facility just about a year ago:



Oh, well. Did you want to live forever?

Those Who Understand

Those Who Understand:

...will understand.

Cork Hill - Haggis Rampant

The Scottish Warpipes are that kind of thing, you know.

High Road to Gairloch/Brown Ha...

The Unexamined Life

The Unexamined Life:

Via Dad29:

I had read that week an article by Ashley Montagu of Princeton University on what he called “A Life Worth Living.” He listed the qualifications for a life worth living: good health, a stable family, economic security, educational opportunity, the prospect of a satisfying career to realize the fullness of one’s potential. These were among the measures of what was called “a life worth living.”

And I remember vividly, as though it were yesterday, looking out the next Sunday morning at the congregation of St. John the Evangelist and seeing all those older faces creased by hardship endured and injustice afflicted, and yet radiating hope undimmed and love unconquered. And I saw that day the younger faces of children deprived of most, if not all, of those qualifications on Prof. Montagu’s list. And it struck me then, like a bolt of lightning, a bolt of lightning that illuminated our moral and cultural moment, that Prof. Montagu and those of like mind believed that the people of St. John the Evangelist—people whom I knew and had come to love as people of faith and kindness and endurance and, by the grace of God, hope unvanquished—it struck me then that, by the criteria of the privileged and enlightened, none of these my people had a life worth living. In that moment, I knew that a great evil was afoot.

It is easier, I have heard, for a camel to pass through an eye of the needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Here, perhaps, is part of the reason why.