Ara and I recently had a cute little online chat you might enjoy. He emailed me a picture of his son and daughter. His daughter just had her Bat Mitzvah on Saturday, and as I viewed the picture the following conversation transpired:
There's More...
August 31, 2003
Read this.
The last photo bothered me the most. Because it drove home for me that unity will never exist among we frail and foolish mortals.
But I know what side I'm on.
The last photo bothered me the most. Because it drove home for me that unity will never exist among we frail and foolish mortals.
But I know what side I'm on.
I've been a fan of the great Les Paul for many years. One of my goals in life has long been to get to Manhattan so I can see him live. Alas, I often wonder if I'll ever make it. He's a great musician and also a great inventor. Blogcritics has a great profile and interview of Les Paul that you music fans, and especially you electric guitar fans, should read.
I'm amazed that Ed Driscoll, the interviewer, didn't think to ask Mr. Paul about his "Les Paulverizer." I've seen enough video of that thing in action to know that it obviously works, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how.
This brings me to the Rolling Stone list of the 100 greatest electrict guitarists. It's a pretty good list, actually, although I wonder how they compiled it. There are a few absences that Lysander complains about, rightly I suppose, although I suppose everyone who loves guitar music will have an entry or two they wish were there. I was thrilled to notice that most of my favorites are there. And that Duane Allman is very near the top, as he very well should be. (Les Paul's too low, though. The man influenced so many people!)
I'm amazed that Ed Driscoll, the interviewer, didn't think to ask Mr. Paul about his "Les Paulverizer." I've seen enough video of that thing in action to know that it obviously works, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how.
This brings me to the Rolling Stone list of the 100 greatest electrict guitarists. It's a pretty good list, actually, although I wonder how they compiled it. There are a few absences that Lysander complains about, rightly I suppose, although I suppose everyone who loves guitar music will have an entry or two they wish were there. I was thrilled to notice that most of my favorites are there. And that Duane Allman is very near the top, as he very well should be. (Les Paul's too low, though. The man influenced so many people!)
Just reading this is astounding, isn't it?
In the comments to an earlier article, Lilli Marleen wondered whether there was a men's rights movement to help the many men who are ignored and even victimized by our family court system.
The answer is "yes," and about half of those involved in this movement are women, I'm incredibly happy to say. Dianna Thompson and Glenn Sacks detail this in Why Are There So Many Women In the Father's Movement? As they detail, such women are, of course, routinely derided as right-wingers, cranks, and "anti-woman." This is so typical of how many Gender Feminists play the game here in the United States: when your opponent cannot be out-argued, she must be bashed and ridiculed.
Glenn Sacks is quickly becoming my new personal hero, by the way. Sacks, for example, points to the growing crisis of boys in education. He also courageously takes on the myth--and it is a myth--that the vast majoritiy of domestic abusers are men. He also documents, repeatedly, the horrible abuse men take in our lopsided family court system.
Everyone should make a point of reading Glenn's columns on a regular basis.
Any real feminist--one who believed in equality and equity between the sexes--certainly would.
The answer is "yes," and about half of those involved in this movement are women, I'm incredibly happy to say. Dianna Thompson and Glenn Sacks detail this in Why Are There So Many Women In the Father's Movement? As they detail, such women are, of course, routinely derided as right-wingers, cranks, and "anti-woman." This is so typical of how many Gender Feminists play the game here in the United States: when your opponent cannot be out-argued, she must be bashed and ridiculed.
Glenn Sacks is quickly becoming my new personal hero, by the way. Sacks, for example, points to the growing crisis of boys in education. He also courageously takes on the myth--and it is a myth--that the vast majoritiy of domestic abusers are men. He also documents, repeatedly, the horrible abuse men take in our lopsided family court system.
Everyone should make a point of reading Glenn's columns on a regular basis.
Any real feminist--one who believed in equality and equity between the sexes--certainly would.
Peter Berkowitz wrote a fascinating article in Policy Review earlier this year: The Liberal Spirit in America. It's about so much that it's difficult to know where to begin describing it. Indeed, some of you may find it too dense and layered--I had to try three times to get through it. But by the time I was finished, I was most impressed.
Basically, it's about the classic liberal and conservative impulses, the way they often get misidentified, and, most importantly, the severe challenges that the modern world presents to both--challenges which simply didn't exist prior to the mid-20th century or so.
As Moe notes, Berkowitz brilliantly points out how both the progressive and conservative traditions, paradoxically, work in different ways to preserve, extend, but also possibly destroy, our liberal traditions. (Thanks for yet another terrific link, Moe.
Basically, it's about the classic liberal and conservative impulses, the way they often get misidentified, and, most importantly, the severe challenges that the modern world presents to both--challenges which simply didn't exist prior to the mid-20th century or so.
As Moe notes, Berkowitz brilliantly points out how both the progressive and conservative traditions, paradoxically, work in different ways to preserve, extend, but also possibly destroy, our liberal traditions. (Thanks for yet another terrific link, Moe.
August 30, 2003
I am 100% on these people's side. Just in case you were wondering.
If you're interested in checking out the "jam band" phenomenon, may I say that you could hardly do better than to check out Jupiter Coyote: Live?
It's a fabulous mix of rock'n'roll, bluegrass, and jazz, in the style of groups like the Marshall Tucker Band. I got ahold of this little treasure a couple of days ago and I like the first disc (it's a two-disc set) I haven't even gotten around to listening to the second one yet. The first alone is worth the price of admission, and I think the laser in my CD player may already be burning a hole in the disc.
Oh yeah, and check out the Jupiter Coyote web site. There are some free MP3s that you can download from there. Although the live stuff is cooler.
It's a fabulous mix of rock'n'roll, bluegrass, and jazz, in the style of groups like the Marshall Tucker Band. I got ahold of this little treasure a couple of days ago and I like the first disc (it's a two-disc set) I haven't even gotten around to listening to the second one yet. The first alone is worth the price of admission, and I think the laser in my CD player may already be burning a hole in the disc.
Oh yeah, and check out the Jupiter Coyote web site. There are some free MP3s that you can download from there. Although the live stuff is cooler.
Well. Here's a web site called Gender Genie which claims to be able to identify your sex simply by analyzing a sample of your writing. Not your handwriting, but just based on the words and word patterns you use.
It, uh, didn't work very well for me. Either that or there's something I need to tell my wife...
(Via Lilac Rose.)
It, uh, didn't work very well for me. Either that or there's something I need to tell my wife...
(Via Lilac Rose.)
I finally got a chance to see big, bright Mars the other night. Moe and I spotted it while sitting on my front porch.
It was neat. But I do have to admit that this is a good point.
Heh.
It was neat. But I do have to admit that this is a good point.
Heh.
Here in the United States, at least in many states, our divorce laws are draconian toward men. I see it all the time, and it's genuinely sickening to see.
I have a friend who I'll call Frank. About a year ago his wife decided she was bored with him and got herself a new man. She filed for, and got, an immediate no-fault divorce. While they were married she frequently abused him physically, and he's got scars on his body that she gave him. But he was raised never to hit girls so he never hit her back--and also, like so many men, suffered in silence and humiliation, thinking there was something wrong with him. Like most men, he had no idea that this is far more common than most people think.
Because her family has money and his doesn't, she was able to get everything: the house, the furniture, and everything in it. She refused to even give him his clothes back.
She now forces the kids to call her new stud "daddy," and generally refuses to let Frank see them. However, the court is ordering him to pay such a large amount of child support, that he'll have less than $200 a week to live on. On that he must pay for rent, food, his car, and insurance. No lawyer will see him for less than $3,000 up front--money which he doesn't have. (Did I mention that the wife ran up all the credit cards and left him with the bill, too?)
The man has contemplated suicide and is in amazingly good shape for someone in such a state--and he's far from the first man I've seen in such circumstances. He's doing his best to try to stay sane, and doing an admirable job.
Can anyone help advise him on what to do, and where he might get some legal advice he's actually able to afford? He's here in Michigan.
(You guys didn't think that the Marriage Strike was a joke, did you? The situation for men in divorce in this country is truly horrible. The way no one seems to care only makes it worse.)
I have a friend who I'll call Frank. About a year ago his wife decided she was bored with him and got herself a new man. She filed for, and got, an immediate no-fault divorce. While they were married she frequently abused him physically, and he's got scars on his body that she gave him. But he was raised never to hit girls so he never hit her back--and also, like so many men, suffered in silence and humiliation, thinking there was something wrong with him. Like most men, he had no idea that this is far more common than most people think.
Because her family has money and his doesn't, she was able to get everything: the house, the furniture, and everything in it. She refused to even give him his clothes back.
She now forces the kids to call her new stud "daddy," and generally refuses to let Frank see them. However, the court is ordering him to pay such a large amount of child support, that he'll have less than $200 a week to live on. On that he must pay for rent, food, his car, and insurance. No lawyer will see him for less than $3,000 up front--money which he doesn't have. (Did I mention that the wife ran up all the credit cards and left him with the bill, too?)
The man has contemplated suicide and is in amazingly good shape for someone in such a state--and he's far from the first man I've seen in such circumstances. He's doing his best to try to stay sane, and doing an admirable job.
Can anyone help advise him on what to do, and where he might get some legal advice he's actually able to afford? He's here in Michigan.
(You guys didn't think that the Marriage Strike was a joke, did you? The situation for men in divorce in this country is truly horrible. The way no one seems to care only makes it worse.)
I've long been a fan of th folks at Homestar Runner. They put out some very funny stuff. So imagine how tickled I was when Peter Wood and NRO gave them a great review and endorsement. Nice to see them getting the attention they deserve.
(Thanks to Jeff Liquia for the heads-up.)
(Thanks to Jeff Liquia for the heads-up.)
August 29, 2003
Recently, a judge in Alabama named Ray Moore has gotten a lot of press for his desire to keep a copy of the 10 Commandments posted in his courtroom. He believes he has a Constitutional right to have them posted there, and the Federal courts have said he's wrong and are forcing him to remove them.
Rick DeMent thinks he is wrong on historical grounds. My girl Sheila is basically on board with that, saying that they don't belong there. She agrees with Jeff Jarvis on the matter. The great Bovious thinks Ray Moore is breaking the commandments with his position. Michele basically takes the position that Moore is a manipulative cynic and probably crazy. Meanwhile, Ara wondered in an Instant Message he sent me why I haven't weighed in on this.
Well, what do I think?
I'm a Bright. But I think there is nothing wrong with a copy of the 10 Commandments in a public courtroom. I think there is nothing--zero, zip, nada--in conflict with the 1st Amendment or the values this country was founded on to have such a thing. It is in no significant way a violation of the principle of "separation of church and state" either.
And by the way, the words "separation of church and state" appear nowhere in the Constitution. I'm glad of that, because religion has a perfectly legitimate place in any truly pluralist and tolerant liberal democracy.
By the way, I feel exactly the same way about school prayer and the displaying of chreches and whatnot by public institutions. There's no conflict with the 1st amendment there, either. None. The courts over the past few decades have signed on to a view of the 1st Amendment that is, indeed, fundamentally illiberal and intolerant in this regard. Ultimately, while I don't share his theology, I think Tim the Michigander gets it right.
I view this whole controversy as an outgrowth of the anti-Christian paranoia that's come to afflict so much of America--including some self-hating Christians who've interenalized society's hostility in the exact same way as so many self-hating Jews have.
Moore should be allowed to display his copy of the 10 Commandments. This should be a non-issue. That it is one at all disappoints me.
But I also recognize that my view is the losing view in today's courts, and among many so-called "liberals." I also have enough faith in the American system that these injustices--and ordering Moore to remove the 10 commandments is an injustice--will eventually be corrected by future generations, who'll probably be more sane about these things.
Indeed, even if I accept that Moore is a cynical manipulator and a little crazy--and he probably is--I honestly believe his cause will eventually prevail.
As it should. Because America's a good, decent place, and future generations will likely be appalled at the anti-Christian paranoia that's led to to ordering him to take those words down.
That's about all I have to say on the matter.
Rick DeMent thinks he is wrong on historical grounds. My girl Sheila is basically on board with that, saying that they don't belong there. She agrees with Jeff Jarvis on the matter. The great Bovious thinks Ray Moore is breaking the commandments with his position. Michele basically takes the position that Moore is a manipulative cynic and probably crazy. Meanwhile, Ara wondered in an Instant Message he sent me why I haven't weighed in on this.
Well, what do I think?
I'm a Bright. But I think there is nothing wrong with a copy of the 10 Commandments in a public courtroom. I think there is nothing--zero, zip, nada--in conflict with the 1st Amendment or the values this country was founded on to have such a thing. It is in no significant way a violation of the principle of "separation of church and state" either.
And by the way, the words "separation of church and state" appear nowhere in the Constitution. I'm glad of that, because religion has a perfectly legitimate place in any truly pluralist and tolerant liberal democracy.
By the way, I feel exactly the same way about school prayer and the displaying of chreches and whatnot by public institutions. There's no conflict with the 1st amendment there, either. None. The courts over the past few decades have signed on to a view of the 1st Amendment that is, indeed, fundamentally illiberal and intolerant in this regard. Ultimately, while I don't share his theology, I think Tim the Michigander gets it right.
I view this whole controversy as an outgrowth of the anti-Christian paranoia that's come to afflict so much of America--including some self-hating Christians who've interenalized society's hostility in the exact same way as so many self-hating Jews have.
Moore should be allowed to display his copy of the 10 Commandments. This should be a non-issue. That it is one at all disappoints me.
But I also recognize that my view is the losing view in today's courts, and among many so-called "liberals." I also have enough faith in the American system that these injustices--and ordering Moore to remove the 10 commandments is an injustice--will eventually be corrected by future generations, who'll probably be more sane about these things.
Indeed, even if I accept that Moore is a cynical manipulator and a little crazy--and he probably is--I honestly believe his cause will eventually prevail.
As it should. Because America's a good, decent place, and future generations will likely be appalled at the anti-Christian paranoia that's led to to ordering him to take those words down.
That's about all I have to say on the matter.
* Update * I agree with every word of this. Yelena is completely correct. And maybe I'm living in a fool's paradise, but I honestly believe that sanity will eventually prevail. (Thanks, Mike.)
* Update 2 * Michele is upset with me, and asks me a point-blank question: would I support words from the Koran carved in stone and placed in a public courthouse? The answer is yes, of course. Why not? Throw in some stuff from the Baghavad-Gita, the code of Hammurabi, or sayings from the Buddha if you want to, too. Or don't. I'm just fine with it either way. If I weren't, I'd make my feelings known the next time I voted.
(I said more in her comments, for anyone who cares to read them.
Don't say you don't have enough time. You have exactly the same number of hours per day that were given to Helen Keller, Pasteur, Michaelangelo, Mother Teresa, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson, and Albert Einstein.
H. Jackson Brown(Via Dietz Smith.)
It's 6:45 a.m. Moe just left my house after sitting on my porch all night talking to me. He may just have convinced me that there is a God.
Fancy that.
I may have more to say later...
Fancy that.
I may have more to say later...
August 28, 2003
Wrap your head around this: Steve from Blues Clues (replaced a few years ago by Joe) is now an up-and-coming rock star.
He seems to be handling the transition with class and humor, too.
He seems to be handling the transition with class and humor, too.
Colby Cosh has an excellent entry on bashing fast food. Actually he's always excellent, but I particularly liked this one.
I also declare now to all and sundry: I love Burger King's whoppers. I love McDonald's french fries. I love the Colonel's chicken. Not because I've been brainwashed by corporate America, either. I love 'em because their food is good.
On the other hand, I dislike Pizza Hut. I bear them and their fans no ill will, but being from Chicago, I have some rather strong feelings about what makes a good pizza.
Which is not to say that I have no taste for finer things. I do. I love a good merlot, a heady frothy microbrew, a fine steak, Thai Food, a great Italian restaurant, Cajun cuisine, and all kinds of other fine stuff too. I also love soul food--or what the folks in the south refer to as just plain "food."
I also declare now to all and sundry: I love Burger King's whoppers. I love McDonald's french fries. I love the Colonel's chicken. Not because I've been brainwashed by corporate America, either. I love 'em because their food is good.
On the other hand, I dislike Pizza Hut. I bear them and their fans no ill will, but being from Chicago, I have some rather strong feelings about what makes a good pizza.
Which is not to say that I have no taste for finer things. I do. I love a good merlot, a heady frothy microbrew, a fine steak, Thai Food, a great Italian restaurant, Cajun cuisine, and all kinds of other fine stuff too. I also love soul food--or what the folks in the south refer to as just plain "food."
Many others linked this earlier this week, but I wanted to link it too. Ray Bradbury's birthday was this week, and in its honor it's hard to think of a better tribute than reading, and thinking about, this essay entitled There's More Than One Way to Burn a Book that he wrote some years ago.
James Bowman has a nice piece in The New Criterion called The Bush Junta. Best part:
(Via Craig Schamp.)
Or of those who want to bring down the president and who are at least as unscrupulous as they represent him as being about the means to their favored end. At the least, they have made the easy, post-Clintonian assumption that accusations of bad faith against one's political opponents are all just part of the cut-and-thrust of politics in twenty-first-century America and not, as in fact they are, a poisoning of the wells of civic culture. Virtually since the day he took office, Bush has been repeatedly, almost routinely, accused of dishonesty in matters of political and economic substance by the likes of Paul Krugman, Jonathan Chait, and Michael Kinsley, and no one seems disposed to suggest that such accusations are or ought to be outside the bounds of civilized discourse.He may be wrong about one thing though. I'm not sure this kind of political nastiness hasn't always been the norm.
(Via Craig Schamp.)
August 27, 2003
My friend Moe, an Orthodox Jew, tells me that he is convinced that I am not a Bright--a label which, still, I stubbornly insist that the rest of you are far too defensive about. But anyway:
Okay Moe. Tell me why.
Okay Moe. Tell me why.
Welcome home, Scott. I'm glad I can finally call you by name.
I'm proud to say I know you. Even if we've only ever met online.
And yes, Scott, she is beautiful.
(I also want to thank Gary Utter, Gary Renick, and every other vet I know. You are greater men than I'll ever be.)
I'm proud to say I know you. Even if we've only ever met online.
And yes, Scott, she is beautiful.
(I also want to thank Gary Utter, Gary Renick, and every other vet I know. You are greater men than I'll ever be.)
Can't think of much more to say to this than, "Yep."
Oh, wait, yes I can.
While I agree with her analysis, it should be pointed out that the Democratic Party... There's More...
Oh, wait, yes I can.
While I agree with her analysis, it should be pointed out that the Democratic Party... There's More...
E. Nough has a great piece on something that I talk about a lot: self-righteous political demagoguery and the way it gets in the way of reasoned debate. The whole essay's good, but I'm going to quote one of the best parts:
(Thanks to Jane Finch.)
Frankly, I hate the sanctification/vilification exercises both sides of the political debate engage in; I know liberals, and I know conservatives, and the fruitcake contingent of each camp aside, most have the same principles, and want roughly the same things, which is why our society is so successful. (If either side were anything like its opponents describe, the U.S. would be one miserable hellhole to live in, that's for sure -- between all those crypto-fascist racist brown-people-killin' conserrrvatives and the proto-communist authoritarian France- and UN-worshippin' librulls.) But hey, occasional demagoguery is fun...Now go read the rest of it. It's good.
(Thanks to Jane Finch.)
Some time in the next week or so, you might want to set aside some time to spend here.
I'm still angry, and will never forget. But reminders don't hurt a bit.
(Thanks, Moe.)
I'm still angry, and will never forget. But reminders don't hurt a bit.
(Thanks, Moe.)
As one of those odd men who does not follow sports, this isn't my cup of tea. But Kevin Aylward seems to have a pretty good Sports Blog going, and you may want to check it out.
He's also looking for contributors, so if you're a sports fan and like to write, you might want to drop him a line.
He's also looking for contributors, so if you're a sports fan and like to write, you might want to drop him a line.
August 26, 2003
Gerard Van der Leun urges bloggers across America to join SenComBlogUSA's Save James Lileks campaign. As a Sensitive 'n Compassionate Blogger in the USA, I heartily encourage you all to sign on for this important cause.
Not everyone is a blues fan. Like many great things in Western civilization, real authentic blues is an acquired taste, and not everyone acquires it.
Yet I am a blues fan. A true blues fan. I can tell you things about this quintessentically American form of music that most people don't know. I know who Blind Lemon Jefferson was, who Sonny Boy Williamson I and II were. I know what it means when the Eagle flies, and what a mojo really is. I know what makes Muddy Waters and Bo Diddley great. I will tell you all this at length, if you've got the patience to listen--and most of you probably don't.
I honestly believe that those of us who are serious blues fans do not hear the blues as music. We hear it like a language, process it like a language, understand it like a language. Do you know what I'm talking about? Well, not to sound elitist but, you either do or you don't, and I can't explain it either way.
But let me tell ya: I have my nomination for the single greatest blues track every laid down. Want to know what it is? There's More...
Yet I am a blues fan. A true blues fan. I can tell you things about this quintessentically American form of music that most people don't know. I know who Blind Lemon Jefferson was, who Sonny Boy Williamson I and II were. I know what it means when the Eagle flies, and what a mojo really is. I know what makes Muddy Waters and Bo Diddley great. I will tell you all this at length, if you've got the patience to listen--and most of you probably don't.
I honestly believe that those of us who are serious blues fans do not hear the blues as music. We hear it like a language, process it like a language, understand it like a language. Do you know what I'm talking about? Well, not to sound elitist but, you either do or you don't, and I can't explain it either way.
But let me tell ya: I have my nomination for the single greatest blues track every laid down. Want to know what it is? There's More...
...that Justene is also a birthday girl this week.
Shame on me. After all the hard work she put in over the weekend on my behalf, too!
(Three of my favorite bloggers have virtually the same birthday. What are the odds?)
Shame on me. After all the hard work she put in over the weekend on my behalf, too!
(Three of my favorite bloggers have virtually the same birthday. What are the odds?)
As Bill notes, everything old is new again.
It's Rick DeMent's birthday. Go on and wish him a happy one, and check out the always-fun, always thought-provoking, frequently-mistaken weblog that he runs with Dietz Smith!
I know you probably don't all read Instapundit every day, but if you haven't seen this roundup of so-called WMD 'sexing up' on the part of an apparently dishonest BBC reporter, you really should.
Methinks that Tony Blair is increasingly being vindicated. Nice to see.
Methinks that Tony Blair is increasingly being vindicated. Nice to see.
You know, I had never realized that Michele was a Zionazi Jewpagandist. That makes her seem even more powerful than ever--if such a thing were possible.
(Happy Birthday, Michele!)
(Happy Birthday, Michele!)
These people need to get a medal or something. Not to mention government grants for millions of dollars and/or pounds to promote their cause.
God bless 'em.
(By the way, I suspect that Bob the Angry Flower is already a member.)
God bless 'em.
(By the way, I suspect that Bob the Angry Flower is already a member.)
Bigwig makes note of a significant new study on global warming, and compares it to some other studies that all cast doubt on the notion that human CO2 emissions are causing catastrophic global warming. (You can see the current study here, if you have Acrobat Reader.)
Every time I hear about Global Warming, it seems like I hear or read that "the vast majority of scientists" agree that human CO2 emissions are causing the earth to heat dangerously. Yet, as Bigwig notes, studies keep coming out to question this hypothesis. On top of that, I note that The Oregon Petition continues to receive little notice in the popular press, despite the fact that over 17,000 scientists so far have signed it. It states, unequivocally:
Now why is it that such people are routinely derided as right-wingers, cranks, and lunatics, do you suppose?
Every time I hear about Global Warming, it seems like I hear or read that "the vast majority of scientists" agree that human CO2 emissions are causing the earth to heat dangerously. Yet, as Bigwig notes, studies keep coming out to question this hypothesis. On top of that, I note that The Oregon Petition continues to receive little notice in the popular press, despite the fact that over 17,000 scientists so far have signed it. It states, unequivocally:
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.It's the biggest such petition, although the Leipzig Declaration is also still out there and, so far as I know, has not been repudiated by its signers.
Now why is it that such people are routinely derided as right-wingers, cranks, and lunatics, do you suppose?
There's a new show on Comedy Central: Reno 911. It's utterly inappropriate for family viewing. It's mean-spirited and stupid and very, very funny. But you have to watch each episode from the beginning, or you don't get the full flavor.
As usual, Shamus Young is funny as hell. Someone needs to put him, Frank J., Fritz, and Scott Ott in the same room.
August 25, 2003
I am a lover of the English language. I do not claim that it is a language superior to all others, and do not deny its deficiencies. They are manifold. Indeed, I would say that its #1 weakness, outside of its maddeningly unpredictable spelling, is its lack of precision. For example, in some languages, you can say any of the following in one or two words:
Nevertheless, the great strength of English is that we'll accept all kinds of new words, phrases, and ways of speaking. We'll also accept many different words that effectively mean the same thing. Just look at an English thesaurus entry for "child," for example, and you'll probably find all of the following:
The beauty of this is that you can go decades as a native speaker of the language and still come across words you've never heard. I recently came across just such a word, and it astonished me. Because I'd seen it several times in print, including in comments left to articles here on Dean's World. Yet every time I'd seen it, I assumed it was a mis-spelling. I thought the writers meant to say "whining," but had just produced a typo. But no, the word is:
Thank you (I, the individual, thank you the individual)...and so on. In some languages, I can express such subtleties in one or two simple words. In English, we have to exhaust ourselves with several extra words to make our meaning explicit, or, we just accept the ambiguity and allow the listerner to infer whatever he wants.
Thank you (I, the individual, thank you the group)
Thank you (We, the group, thank you, the individual)
Thank you (We, the group, thank you, the group)
Thank you (I, a man, thank you, a woman)
Thank you (I, a woman, thank you, a man)
Thank you (I, an adult, thank you, a child)
Nevertheless, the great strength of English is that we'll accept all kinds of new words, phrases, and ways of speaking. We'll also accept many different words that effectively mean the same thing. Just look at an English thesaurus entry for "child," for example, and you'll probably find all of the following:
adolescent, ankle biter, babe, baby, bairn, bambino, brat, cherub, chick, cub, descendant, dickens, grommet, grub, imp, infant, innocent, issue, juvenile, kid, kiddie, lamb, larva, little angel, little darling, little doll, little one, minor, mite, moppet, neonate, nestling, newborn, nipper, nursling, offspring, pickaninnie, preteen, progeny, pubescent, punk, rug rat, shaver, small fry, sprout, squirt, stripling, suckling, tadpole, teenager, teenybopper, toddler, tot, tyke, urchin, whippersnapper, young, youthHard to beat, ain't it?
The beauty of this is that you can go decades as a native speaker of the language and still come across words you've never heard. I recently came across just such a word, and it astonished me. Because I'd seen it several times in print, including in comments left to articles here on Dean's World. Yet every time I'd seen it, I assumed it was a mis-spelling. I thought the writers meant to say "whining," but had just produced a typo. But no, the word is:
WHINGING: To complain or protest, especially in an annoying or persistent manner.What a fabulous word. Thank you for those who've introduced me to it!
Here's an interesting question for Paul Burgess, Allen Brill, Donald Sensing, and any other sincere, thoughtful Christian Protestants. It's a question I am deeply interested in (don't ask me why, I just am--I may have an interesting question for Jews coming out of this later on though):
Let's say the Holy See in Rome--if not this one, then the next one, or another one some time within our lifetimes--one day makes a startling declaration. The doctrine of Petrine Succession is not repudiated, but is instead reinterpreted. They ask that a certain historical deference is granted to the bishopric of Rome, given that it's where Peter and Paul formed the basis of the Church, and is where Christianity moved from being a small Jewish radical movement into a mainline religion intended to achieve the salvation of all men ("men" in its historic root meaning to include women). Despite asking some historical deference to Rome's position, all Protestant and Orthodox denominations are henceforth to be brought in as full and complete brothers in the holy Catholic church--if they merely ask for it. Disagreements over such matters as predestination, transubstatiation, the literal meaning of "resurrection of the body," priestly chastity and fidelity, and so on, to be viewed as mere disagreements, varying movements within the same body of Christ's church. So long as all are willing to swear allegiance to the Nicene creed, all will be embraced within the holy Catholic church. Anything beyond such issues to be viewed as matters of conscience within any given communion within the church--not much different from the way the Augustinians, the Brothers of the Rice, and other movements within today's Roman Catholic Church are viewed now.
Out of curiosity: would you be willing to sign on to such a movement?
I'm honestly curious about the answer.
(I'm also burningly curious to know if there are any Catholic Priests out there who'd like to give a perspective on such a question.)
Let's say the Holy See in Rome--if not this one, then the next one, or another one some time within our lifetimes--one day makes a startling declaration. The doctrine of Petrine Succession is not repudiated, but is instead reinterpreted. They ask that a certain historical deference is granted to the bishopric of Rome, given that it's where Peter and Paul formed the basis of the Church, and is where Christianity moved from being a small Jewish radical movement into a mainline religion intended to achieve the salvation of all men ("men" in its historic root meaning to include women). Despite asking some historical deference to Rome's position, all Protestant and Orthodox denominations are henceforth to be brought in as full and complete brothers in the holy Catholic church--if they merely ask for it. Disagreements over such matters as predestination, transubstatiation, the literal meaning of "resurrection of the body," priestly chastity and fidelity, and so on, to be viewed as mere disagreements, varying movements within the same body of Christ's church. So long as all are willing to swear allegiance to the Nicene creed, all will be embraced within the holy Catholic church. Anything beyond such issues to be viewed as matters of conscience within any given communion within the church--not much different from the way the Augustinians, the Brothers of the Rice, and other movements within today's Roman Catholic Church are viewed now.
Out of curiosity: would you be willing to sign on to such a movement?
I'm honestly curious about the answer.
(I'm also burningly curious to know if there are any Catholic Priests out there who'd like to give a perspective on such a question.)
I read this interesting Fareed Zakaria piece Ara sent me. I must admit to being rather bemused by it.
Zakaria lays out, in splendid fashion, just how amazingly well the situation in Iraq has gone since the Baathist regime was toppled. By any measure, the invasion was a success, and the average Iraqi is better off than he has been in decades. That war quite apparently saved more Iraqi lives than it cost, and the subsequent occupation's cost has been entirely bearable. Indeed, we're losing more soldiers on a daily basis to things like traffic accidents and heart disease than we are from the steadiliy weakening guerilla operations.
Despite acknowledging all this, Zakaria thinks it's "irrelevant" because, after only four months, electricity still isn't on everywhere and there is still light guerilla resistance, and he thinks we need to bring in the UN to take things over.
To be blunt? I can't think of a worse fate for the Iraqi people than to let the UN take charge of things. Iraq is already in better shape than Japan or Germany were four months after hostilities ended in World War II, and things are going swimmingly well. I am constantly bemused by people who see different. To me, it just reaffirms something I have come to believe over the years: some people will always believe that things are hopelessly screwed up, no matter what the situation under discussion.
Zakaria lays out, in splendid fashion, just how amazingly well the situation in Iraq has gone since the Baathist regime was toppled. By any measure, the invasion was a success, and the average Iraqi is better off than he has been in decades. That war quite apparently saved more Iraqi lives than it cost, and the subsequent occupation's cost has been entirely bearable. Indeed, we're losing more soldiers on a daily basis to things like traffic accidents and heart disease than we are from the steadiliy weakening guerilla operations.
Despite acknowledging all this, Zakaria thinks it's "irrelevant" because, after only four months, electricity still isn't on everywhere and there is still light guerilla resistance, and he thinks we need to bring in the UN to take things over.
To be blunt? I can't think of a worse fate for the Iraqi people than to let the UN take charge of things. Iraq is already in better shape than Japan or Germany were four months after hostilities ended in World War II, and things are going swimmingly well. I am constantly bemused by people who see different. To me, it just reaffirms something I have come to believe over the years: some people will always believe that things are hopelessly screwed up, no matter what the situation under discussion.
I have long had a love affair with the English language. I admit to a bit of provincialism in the matter since, as far as other languages go, I know only some rudimentary Spanish and only a smattering of words in a half-dozen other languages. But English's loose structure, compounded by its flexibility and its easy adaptation of the features of other languages, is just so much fun. Besides, as they say, in what other language can your nose run while your feet smell?
I particularly like certain words. I'm never sure what quite attracts me to a word. It's not necessarily the meaning of the word: indeed, one of my favorite words is "fistula," which is a somewhat disturbing medical phenomenon but has a wonderful sound. To my ear, anyway.
Some of my other favorite words, in no particular order, include: There's More...
I particularly like certain words. I'm never sure what quite attracts me to a word. It's not necessarily the meaning of the word: indeed, one of my favorite words is "fistula," which is a somewhat disturbing medical phenomenon but has a wonderful sound. To my ear, anyway.
Some of my other favorite words, in no particular order, include: There's More...
I'm still horribly behind on my email, so I'm only just getting around to this piece you might enjoy that was published a couple of weeks ago by Allen Brill. It's more on that brights meme that is, despite some people's wishes, not yet dead.
For the record, I still like this term, and am rather bemused at the (to my eyes) disproportionate reaction against it in some quarters--especially among believers who describe themselves as "washed," "cleansed," "God's chosen," or "redeemed," but who think I should never take offense at the implication that I am filthy, unchosen by God, or unredeemed.
Although I find, most amusingly, that every working pastor I've shared the term with has found it amusing and intriguing. Even "slick," as Paul Burgess put it.
As for those who think it "debases the language," to be blunt I cannot take this seriously. For example, I've never seen a black person, have you? Most of them look kinda brown to me. And while you're wrestling with that one, could you please go after the Greens, the gays, the Bloods, and the Democrats, since all of these terms involve some "perversion" of words with older meanings?
Anyway, Allen Brill has published, side-by-side, a letters from Jack Good, a retired United Church of Christ pastor, and Richard Dennett, a bright who has defended the term. You can read it here. It's fascinating reading, a debate between two people who share a lot of the same assumptions and values. There's More...
For the record, I still like this term, and am rather bemused at the (to my eyes) disproportionate reaction against it in some quarters--especially among believers who describe themselves as "washed," "cleansed," "God's chosen," or "redeemed," but who think I should never take offense at the implication that I am filthy, unchosen by God, or unredeemed.
Although I find, most amusingly, that every working pastor I've shared the term with has found it amusing and intriguing. Even "slick," as Paul Burgess put it.
As for those who think it "debases the language," to be blunt I cannot take this seriously. For example, I've never seen a black person, have you? Most of them look kinda brown to me. And while you're wrestling with that one, could you please go after the Greens, the gays, the Bloods, and the Democrats, since all of these terms involve some "perversion" of words with older meanings?
Anyway, Allen Brill has published, side-by-side, a letters from Jack Good, a retired United Church of Christ pastor, and Richard Dennett, a bright who has defended the term. You can read it here. It's fascinating reading, a debate between two people who share a lot of the same assumptions and values. There's More...
August 24, 2003
I got a Tivo for my birthday. (My birthday is Tuesday but since I have business commitments that day, I am vainly trying to reschedule my birthday to this weekend. The family is skeptical.)
I don't really know how the AI works. I haven't recorded anything yet and most of the weekend has been spent watching FoxNews and science shows. I have flipped through the guide and told it up or down on a few shows but since yesterday was Saturday, my usual sitcom diet wasn't on.
Yet, today in the middle of a news report on Bill Simon's withdrawal, Tivo popped on and suggested I might like it to switch over and record Radio Days, a Woody Allen movie. I don't care much for Woody Allen but my husband does. So I gave it permission. I'm not sure what led it to think we would like such a thing.
BTW, yes, I know I've given up some of my privacy but heck I have a blog. Anyone who wants to know anything about me has ample access to information more revealing than how many hours a day Fox News is on.
I don't really know how the AI works. I haven't recorded anything yet and most of the weekend has been spent watching FoxNews and science shows. I have flipped through the guide and told it up or down on a few shows but since yesterday was Saturday, my usual sitcom diet wasn't on.
Yet, today in the middle of a news report on Bill Simon's withdrawal, Tivo popped on and suggested I might like it to switch over and record Radio Days, a Woody Allen movie. I don't care much for Woody Allen but my husband does. So I gave it permission. I'm not sure what led it to think we would like such a thing.
BTW, yes, I know I've given up some of my privacy but heck I have a blog. Anyone who wants to know anything about me has ample access to information more revealing than how many hours a day Fox News is on.
Calpundit has posted the latest Microsoft Windows annoyance. Then he directs his readers that they are alllowed to bash Microsoft in the comments but they can't head off into the usual Windows vs. Mac or Windows vs. Linux discussion. Let's see how long that lasts.
In addition to my weekend stint here, I am doing a longer guest stint over at Southern California Law Blog while we all wait for his first child to be born. Drop by and pick a date in the Baby Pool.
Robert Prather notes that Howard Dean is raising so much money that he may forego public financing and rely entirely on his own warchest.
I've been hoping for some time that Bush would have the courage to eschew all public matching funds and spending caps. I'd applaud wildly if Dean (or whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is) were to do the exact same thing.
Campaign donations limits are an assault on the very core of the 1st amendment. Public financing of campaigns is repugnant to 1st amendment values, too. If both major party candidates were to eschew public financing and spending limits--which is exactly what they should do--we might finally see the end of the campaign finance restructions that have done so much to damage our democracy since the first limits were put in place back in the 1970s.
If we could only get rid of all that silliness, maybe we could get campaign finance laws that made sense, would make the system more accountable than it ever has been, and would (shock of shocks) actually be in keeping with American tradition:
Our campaign finance laws are 1st Amendment-trashing garbage, and have been from day 1. Just about anything to help destroy them would be a good thing.
I've been hoping for some time that Bush would have the courage to eschew all public matching funds and spending caps. I'd applaud wildly if Dean (or whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is) were to do the exact same thing.
Campaign donations limits are an assault on the very core of the 1st amendment. Public financing of campaigns is repugnant to 1st amendment values, too. If both major party candidates were to eschew public financing and spending limits--which is exactly what they should do--we might finally see the end of the campaign finance restructions that have done so much to damage our democracy since the first limits were put in place back in the 1970s.
If we could only get rid of all that silliness, maybe we could get campaign finance laws that made sense, would make the system more accountable than it ever has been, and would (shock of shocks) actually be in keeping with American tradition:
1) No limits whatsoever on what individuals can give.If Dean, Bush, and other candidates have the courage to this--which is not only smart, but also the morally upright thing to do--I could do nothing but applaud. In fact, my respect for Dean would go up several notches.
2) Anonymity as an option--but candidates must list each anonymous donor (not donation, but donor) and how much that individual anonymous donor has given.
3) Outright bans on corporate, union, and trade association donations unless raised in 100% voluntary manner.
4) Instant disclosure, in indexed form on the internet, listed by donor, so informed citizens can see who's given what, over what time period, and in total, and decide what they like or dont' like on the donor's list.
Our campaign finance laws are 1st Amendment-trashing garbage, and have been from day 1. Just about anything to help destroy them would be a good thing.