|
"Greater things are believed of those who are absent."
-Tacitus |
Aboot Reader's Rep Home RSS Feed POSTS BY TOPIC 2010 Election Baseball Beer Beer of the Week Books Business Culture Drinking Economics Football Global Warming Health Care Hockey (02-05) Hockey (06-07) Hockey (08-09) Media-Local (02-04) Media-Local (05-07) Media-Local (08-09) Media National (02-06) Media National (07-09) Media National (10-11) Movies Music NARN (04-05) NARN (06-07) NARN (08-09) NARN (10-11) Politics-Local (02-03) Politics-Local (04-05) Politics-Local (06-07) Politics-Local (08-09) Politics-National (02-04) Politics-National (05-07) Politics-National (08-10) Ralphie Religion Separated At Birth? Television Terrorism Travel CHAD THE ELDER: rightwinger23 at hotmail.com Twitter SAINT PAUL: saintp at excite.com JB DOUBTLESS: abunodisceomnes at hotmail.com ATOMIZER: atomizer77 at yahoo.com SISYPHUS: NIHILIST IN GOLF PANTS: NihilistPaul at yahoo.com Twitter THE CRAZY UKE: karkoc5 at earthlink.net FEATURES Beer Ratings 
Recommended Reading Fraters At The Fair Hugh Hugs A Tree Separated At Birth? Travels With Ralphie ATOMIZER's A-LIST JB's SACK SITES SAINT PAUL'S SHOW STOPPERS ELDER's ELITE THE USUAL SUSPECTS IN AGGREGATE CENTER OF GRAVITY INVISIBLE AIRWAVES |
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Raging Bull(sh*t)
Say what you want about Minnesota?s conflicted, confused millionaire Senator, he seems to be a temperate man. Unlike his former colleague Paul Wellstone, Mark Dayton is not prone to wild-eyed emotional outbursts and flourishes of heated, saliva sputtering, irresponsible rhetoric. That is, apparently, unless you threaten his most closely cherished core beliefs. If today?s paper can be believed, this has occurred, with Congressional attempts to reduce the standard for soundproofing houses near the airport by up to 5 decibels. The story: [A Congressional Conference committee] was working on a bill providing funds for the Federal Aviation Administration. Part of the debate centered on whether air-traffic control should be turned over to private companies. The new language restricting federal funds for expanded noise mitigation was added without having been debated in the House or the Senate. The new language would forbid agencies such as the Airports Commission from using federal airport grants to insulate homes exposed to noise less than an average of 65 decibels. The commission has been insulating houses exposed to 65 or more decibels since the early 1990s. In 1996 it also agreed to eventually provide some degree of noise mitigation to houses exposed to an average of 60 to 64 decibels. Senator Dayton?s reaction: Dayton said he was "enraged" at what he called a "back-door attempt" by Northwest to keep the commission from expanding its $208 million noise-insulation program to additional neighborhoods. He said the amendment appeared directed at Minnesota because few if any other airport agencies are planning to insulate houses below the 65-decibel threshold. He alleged that Northwest persuaded someone -- "reportedly Sen. Trent Lott," a Mississippi Republican -- to insert the mitigation limits in the conference committee report. Dayton said Northwest lobbyists used "the most devious means I've encountered since I have arrived in Washington" in January 2001. He called the episode "exhibit A for a unicameral Congress and the elimination of conference committees." Setting the standard at 65 decibels. A change in Minnesota standards by 5 decibels, to a level already adopted by most of the country. And Mark Dayton is ?enraged,? accusing Trent Lott of personally targeting Minnesota neighborhoods, slurring Northwest Airlines, and calling for a complete overhaul of the Constitution and of our system of governance? By the way, according to the League for the Hard of Hearing (whom I?ve always felt were much more objective than the Association of Folks Who Are A Might Deef), 85 decibels is the point at which noise, over a prolonged period of time, could damage hearing. 10 decibels is the sound of normal breathing. And the standards are being reduced by half of that level, which I guess is equivalent to the sound of a squirrel wistfully sighing (which is heartbreaking I grant you, but not a threat to anyone's eardrums). Yes, Senator Dayton's reaction seems more than a little over the top. A cynic might suggest he's once again clumsily trying to ingratiate himself to the middle and lower classes by defending each and every public subsidy to the death, in the hopes of grabbing some headlines. But optimist that I am, I'll just assume that he's just hyper-sensitive to noise. Or he hates squirrels. Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Long Time Listener, First Time Choker
Nice to know that I have some company in the ranks of those who have made depressingly poor calls to talk radio shows. Now only did our own Saint Paul write about a less than stellar experience of his a few years ago in a post below, but he also mentions this confession by Brad Jones at Infinite Monkeys that details his recent failure as a caller to Hugh Hewitt's show. Forgetting to plug the blog? What kind of pathetic loser would forget to plug the blog? It happens to the best of us Brad. At least that's the illusion we need to maintain to salvage what's left of our dignity.
I?m Also Very Big In Japan
It ain?t easy to be entertaining on the radio. From my own experience as a mere caller, it ain?t even easy to be coherent. A few weeks ago I wrote about my misadventures with Frank Pastore, when he was filling in on the Hugh Hewitt show. My other on-air lowlight was a call to the Jason Lewis program a couple of years ago. His topic was public financing of a stadium for the Twins. Jason was against it and so was I. But in his prepared remarks I felt Jason was being a little too loose with the facts. Specifically, something about all revenues produced from such a stadium would be a result of a substitution effect. That is, the spending would merely be transferred from other entertainment options in the Twin Cities. I had some picayune evidence to the contrary, and even though I agreed with 99% of his argument, it was that one point of disagreement that motivated me to call in. Why? I think it has something to do with the competitive nature of talk radio, or perhaps the overly competitive nature of this particular host and this particular listener. So after hearing whatever mildly objectionable point he made, I leapt off the couch, dialed in and within 30 seconds I was on the air with the man himself. I made my narrowly focused little rebuke, without even qualifying it by telling him I generally agreed with him. Then Jason, master debator (?) that he is, dismissed my argument, subtly changed the subject to a facet of the stadium debate I didn?t comment on, and confronted me with a new set of unarguable facts ? all in about two sentences. Needless to say I became flustered. So sure was I that I was right and that the brilliance of my argument would render him helpless and begging me for forgiveness, I hadn?t bothered to think of counter arguments or the broader context of the debate. So after he turned the tables on me and fired off an accusatory question .... I stuttered, hemmed, hawed, paused, and then merely restated my original point. While I suppose I deserve credit for staying ?on message,? it now sounded to the casual listener like I was changing the subject and avoiding the main question at hand. After allowing me to languish about, spewing nonsense for a few more seconds, Jason landed another couple crushing blows to the straw man of an argument he had created of me, then he threw it to commercial by laughing at me and shouting ?Nice try Saint Paul!? Lesson learned the hard way: think before you call. Brad Jones over at Infinite Monkeys does think before he calls talk shows. In fact, often times he thinks in Latin. But even that doesn?t mean things go exactly as you plan. Today he writes about his experience calling the Hugh Hewitt show. The key sentences: It's become painfully obvious that co-Monkey Ben and I sit in front of our respective computers all day listening to the Salem Radio Network talk line up. (At least we're in good company alongside James Lileks, and St. Paul of Fraters Libertas.) It?s all true, even cool guys like me and James listen to a lot of talk radio. Although to be fair, we?re not always sitting side-by-side. Sometimes he?s in the house tidying up, while I?m in the back yard, christening a new case of James Page. So Brad in Phoenix and chronic talk radio listeners all over the country you have nothing to be ashamed of. (Unless you?re listening to Mike Gallagher ? then you have a lot to be ashamed of). Tuesday, July 29, 2003
What's In A Name?
By now most of you have probably noticed that we shortened the URL of the blog a bit last Friday to make it more user friendly. Not that fraterslibertas.com exactly rolls off the tongue and wedges itself firmly in your memory but it is a slight improvement. < navelgazing > We're often asked why we elected to go with a name that isn't easily remembered, pronounced, or even understood. The truth is that we never really considered the possibility that we would have any kind of wider readership at all, to say nothing of being occasionally mentioned on a national talk radio show (credit to Mr. Hewitt for pronouncing it correctly the first time unlike a certain local talk radio host who butchered the name repeatedly). The idea for a web site sprang up one day while my brother JB Doubtless and I were on one our lengthy long distance phone conversations. JB was living in Boston at the time and once every couple of weeks we would spend two hours discussing the state of the world. In between phone conversations we would trade almost daily e-mails (often including other friends as well) offering our opinions on various matters and promoting worthwhile articles we had read elsewhere. If I recall correctly the actual inspiration for the site might be credited to Lileks who had written in a Bleat on the need to leave something behind to let people know you were here. We had both been reading Lileks on a daily basis since 1998 and had a great deal of respect for his writing. While we knew that we could never hope to approach his level of skill we decided that a site where we could collect and share our own writing was the way to go. So we needed a name. We talked about using our family name in a similar manner to Lileks.com. But we had concerns about possible repercussions at our workplaces. We wanted to be able to write anything we wanted about any subject we wanted without having to worry about offending anyone's sensibilities. Most of our material would be unobjectionable but at times we might be a bit offensive and we wanted to reserve the right to be. So we opted for the cloak of anonymity. We tossed around a lot of names but nothing seemed to fit. We started to explore Latin names in order to provide a hint of mystery and intellectualism. It seemed like a good way to class the joint up a bit. Plus we were Catholic and enjoyed the history and tradition of the language. Finally one day I put the words fraters (brothers) and libertas (liberty) together and submitted it to JB. "It's a little pretentious but I think it will work", he replied. It is pretentious but it did work. After all we were brothers who were looking for a forum to freely express our views. At that time (Spring 2001) we were not really aware of the world of blogs other than Lileks who was and still is not really a traditional blogger. We set up a basic web page at fraterslibertas.com with an index of our writing. I had a number of e-mails I had collected from previous correspondence that I published at the site. As new material emerged we would publish it as well. It was a rather slow and time consuming process and as a result we didn't have fresh material on a regular basis. We also did little or nothing to promote the site preferring rather to use it more a storing house for our writing for some unknown future use. Gradually we did begin to discover some of the big name bloggers such as Andrew Sullivan and Instapundit. After September 11th our interest in blogs grew dramatically as I'm sure it did for many others. Our e-mail exchanges also became longer and in some case more heated. In fact the gentleman who would one day became known as Saint Paul and I engaged in a furious debate immediately after 9/11 on the course of action that should be pursued. This isn't the time or place to reexamine whose arguments have been proven correct by the course of history but let's just say that while Saint Paul was defending the positions of Hunter S. Thompson, I was backing the rhetoric of George W. Bush. 'Nuf said? By the beginning of January 2002 I realized that blogging was indeed the wave of the future and that we needed to get our feet wet. In March we launched the Fraters blog. And it was indeed much easier to publish, update, and link than before. We decided to publicize the site to some of our friends to get their reaction. I thought that with the writing of JB Doubtless and myself we would have enough material to keep things interesting but unfortunately JB had some technical difficulties getting set up on Blogger and then had work commitments which restricted his ability to participate. For five months I slogged along solo (for the most part) at the Fraters controls and it wasn't easy. I have admire those unibloggers like Mitch Berg at Shot in the Dark who can consistently write enough to keep readers interested. For us the group blog model was the only way to go. Even after our minor dust up I had continued to exchange e-mails with Saint Paul who was at this point a regular Fraters reader (one of six at the time I believe) and was impressed with his wit and creative writing style. Plus I was really frickin' desperate for some help. And so the Saint Paul era was born in August 2002 commencing with this post called The Best Hockey Player in Ecuador, a satirical look at Minnesota politics that gave us our first glimpse of his wise acred stylings that we would come to know and love. Meanwhile JB's job situation in Boston took a turn for the worse when he was released on unconditional waivers. For a period of time he cooled his heels in Bean town and took advantage of the rather generous unemployment benefits offered by Massachusetts. Eventually he realized that it was only a matter of time before a mob of outraged taxpayers of the commonwealth, armed with torches and pitchforks, would descend on his apartment and drag him away to be sold into chattel slavery to recoup a small portion of the costs of keeping him on the dole and so he returned to Minnesota in December. He stepped in and stirred up some controversy almost at once with this post on the death of Joe Strummer (at that time his moniker was going to be The Younger). The solid core of the Fraters line up was now set with our triumvirate of scribes. A few other contributors have come and gone in the meantime but haven't had the staying power or the stamina to last. In June the Atomizer was brought on board after an exhaustive interview process (although I think next time you can skip the full body cavity search Saint Paul) and background check. So far it appears as if he has the right stuff for a long and prosperous career here at Fraters Libertas. If not we'll dump his arse faster than KSTP cuts morning show hosts and he'll join the others on the ash heap of history. Remember Atomizer, your job security is as solid as your latest post. The question of using our real names has come up from time to time from friends and readers. While using our proper names would certainly have its benefits we have decided to remain veiled, at least for the time being. We're not all that secretive about it anyway and if you really must know we'll be happy to divulge our identities. Again the desire for anonymity is based primarily on possible repercussions at work, a concern not wholly without merit based on the experiences of other bloggers. After all I don't think the Atomizer would be quite so cheeky writing about sabotaging the office stereo system or stiffing his coworkers on gifts if his actions could be easily traced back to him. And it's annoying enough to have drunk friends offer up unsolicited advice on how to run the site. We don't need coworkers doing the same. < /navelgazing > So what is in a name? Could we have possibly gotten more hits, links, and pub if we had an easier handle? Definitely. But who could have foreseen what things would come when we kicked off this little hobby two years ago? Besides they've already started work on the engraved marble entryway in the new Fraters World Headquarters and those stone masons get pretty surly with last minute work order changes. Fraterslibertas.com it is and fraterslibertas.com it shall be.
(sometimes you need) More Than A Feeling
Steven Den Beste at USS Clueless looks at why the left's anti-war arguments failed: I think that there may have been some sort of deep feeling that if only those demonstrating against the war could somehow adequately communicate how strongly they opposed the war, that this would be enough to convince the rest of us to give up the entire enterprise. If the validity of a point of view is entirely a function of the sincerity with which it is held, then if enough people are emphatic enough about their sincerity, they should prevail for that reason alone. And how many on the left have reacted to that failure: Attempts by the leftists to show how emphatically they oppose war don't seem to be having any impact. Invective and ridicule has failed to discredit those of us who have been advocating war. (And that's puzzling, too. In college, denouncing someone as being "conservative" would instantly discredit them and silence them. Why hasn't that been working in the debate about the war?) So they're turning up the intensity of the ridicule and invective. If they can somehow find the right magical ad hominem characterization for their opponents, the opponents will vanish and take their dangerous messages with them. (So if "conservative" doesn't work, maybe "psychotic" or "racist" will.) Read it all. For a Den Beste post it's actually rather brief and to the point.
Everyone knows by now that Ronald Reagan and Adolf Hitler were practically genetic copies of each other. Well, now it seems that we can include Stalin, Kruschev and Castro into the ranks of the "politically conservative". This article from WorldNetDaily explains it all and, wouldn?t you know it, it involves a researcher from the University of California at Berkeley.
You get a sense of what the article's subject (a piece in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin entitled "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition") is all about from the opening paragraph: In a study that ponders the similarities between former President Ronald Reagan, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Rush Limbaugh, four American university researchers say they now have a better understanding of what makes political conservatives tick. Of course. In order to find out what makes conservatives tick we have no need to look any further than the four men mentioned above. There's more: Underlying psychological motivations that mark conservatives are "fear and aggression, dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity; uncertainty avoidance; need for cognitive closure; and terror management," the researchers wrote" We are, however, reminded later in the text that these aren't necessarily BAD things: (Professor Jack) Glaser (UC Berkeley) allowed that while conservatives are less "integratively complex" than others, "it doesn't mean that they're simple-minded." Now there's a backhanded compliment if I ever read one. Next comes the setup: The researchers also contend left-wing ideologues such as Joseph Stalin and Fidel Castro "might be considered politically conservative in the context of the systems that they defended." Never mind that the systems that Stalin and Castro defended and the one that Reagan defended were polar opposites! And here's the clincher: The researchers acknowledged left-wing ideologues such as Stalin, Castro and Nikita Kruschev resisted change in the name of egalitarianism after they established power. So Stalin, Castro and Kruschev redeemed themselves "after they established power" because of their strong belief in human equality while the likes of Reagan never did see the error of his ways. Their motivation for "resisting change" became a noble goal while Reagan continued his ways of "fear and aggression" and his "endorsement of inequality." Lest any of you conservatives take offense at this study, the researchers would like us to know that their findings "are not judgmental" and that: the research could be viewed as partisan because it focused on political conservatism, but he (Glaser) argued there is a vast amount of information about conservatism and little about liberalism. You be the judge. Labels: Politics-National (02-04) Monday, July 28, 2003
Moore Or Less Obliterated
There have been many fine pieces in the last year lambasting Michael Moore but this article at OpinionJournal.com by Kay S. Hymowitz is likely the most comprehensive and takes Moore's work apart down to an almost molecular level.
Citing Precedent
Last night I was watching a program on the Discovery Channel chronicling the history of our good buddy Saddam. One interesting detail emerged that I was previously unaware of. In 1963 after a Baathist coup toppled the military government of Brigadier Abdul-Karim Qassem , the Baathists executed Qassem and then showed his corpse (as well as the corpse of one of his aides) on national television in order to convince Iraqis that he was indeed dead. Perhaps I missed it but I don't recall ever hearing this fact mentioned by the major media in the recent debate about whether to show the bodies of the departed Hussein brothers. There was some discussion about the Iraqis having a history of such behavior but no specific examples were cited. Might not this have been considered relevant to the story? Maybe we'll hear about it when Big Daddy Saddam buys the farm. UPDATE: Rick e-mails to say that the actual executions of Qassem and his aide were televised live, which seems credible given the fact that they were killed in the Iraqi national television studios.
Sound Off Like You Got a Pair
I just realized, in my previous thousand word post about the firing of John Wodele, I forgot to comment on the firing of John Wodele. In short, KSTP?s dismissal of him is a good thing, a necessary thing, and an inevitable thing (in the context of free market economics). Despite Wodele?s attempts to blame the listeners for not liking him, because he was supposedly too moderate and reasonable, his failures as a broadcaster come down to more elemental matters. First, he had a lousy voice. His natural tone comes off as prissy and uptight. Plus, his delivery always sounded like he was being sanctimonious and had a subtext of ?how dare you!? but in a limp dishrag, pouting sort of way. Worse yet, his cadence sounded like it was developed through years of working for various government bureaucracies and public relations gigs (and what do you know - it was!). He sounded officious and condescending and scolding, even when he was talking about traffic. And there?s nothing worse than hearing East I-94 is backed up to Snelling, then being made to feel that somehow it?s your fault. Wodele?s vocal inadequacies alone were probably enough to get him dismissed. A station like KSTP has to worry about ratings and employing a voice the audience finds grating is a sure loser. This is not the case for a station that doesn?t care if it has listeners or not (because of government subsidy). Anyone familiar with Carl Kasell on NPR reading the news with what sounds like a mouth filled with vinegar soaked cotton balls knows what I?m talking about. But beyond his pipes, the substance of Wodele?s comments only added to his problems. The main issue wasn?t the fact that he wasn?t as conservative as the audience. Although this is true, Wodele could fairly be considered a moderate Democrat in his orientation. The main problem is that Wodele was never comfortable in the persona he adopted for the radio. He never came out and honestly presented himself for who he was. Instead he tried to emphasize whatever mildly conservative positions he had and tried to gloss over his dominant liberal orientation. This resulted in him not being able to articulately support his purported conservative beliefs (because, I suspect, he hadn?t thought much about them and didn?t really care to). Furthermore, his liberal opinions would often times slip out in unintended ways. Not during his prepared remarks or planned soliloquies. Rather, during a conversation with a guest or caller, he?d make statements that put him more in line with Dennis Kucinich than Dennis Hastert. Then the caller or guest would challenge him on these remarks, and typically Wodele would get flustered, start making excuses, then ultimately retreat to the position that the callers were being mean to him and they should stop it. Inevitably that?s how these situations would be resolved. Not with frank and complete exchange of ideas, but with Wodele whining that he was being treated unfairly, so they should stop the conversation. Both him and his partner Mark O?Connell would laugh about how hard the callers were being on him, only because Wodele was unable, or unwilling, to defend himself. They even started using a caller?s comment ?Wodele, you?re killing me!? as the sounder whenever a call like this came in (which, towards the end was about once an hour). It would have been better for John Wodele if he would have been brave enough to present himself for who he was. And if he indeed was intelligent, principled, and able to communicate the liberal position effectively and in an entertaining manner, there?s a good chance he would have succeeded at KSTP. But, ultimately, Wodele added no value to the broadcast, other than as a figure of justifiable ridicule for the audience. Which is OK for a third or fourth wheel on the show, but it?s not acceptable for one of the supposedly dominant personalities. Therefore, he had to get the axe, and so he did. Feels like market justice to me. Sunday, July 27, 2003
I'mSickOfThisCrap-Gate
It's been thirty freaking years! Can we PLEASE get over this ridiculously botched snooping mission?!?!?!?
What The Pig Starts To Look Like At A Floyd Concert After 13-14 Hits
 Actually it's a site from this weekend's Rib Fest in downtown Minneapolis. I was not in the area to attend the event but happened to be passing by when the pig caught my eye. Apparently he enthusiasticly endorses the consumption of his swine mates.
There He Goes Again
Today, St. Paul Pioneer Press entertainment columnist (and liberal media bias denier) Brian Lambert gets on his high horse once again to denounce conservative talk radio and its listeners. This time in regard to the firing of one of KSTP?s morning hosts, John Wodele. Lambert interpretation of the firing is that Wodele was too ?reasonable? and ?respectful? to live up to the listener?s expectations for the genre. Using a professional wrestling metaphor, here?s Lambert?s characterization of Wodele?s short lived career behind the mic: "It's science fiction to think he's going to convince his opponent, the oiled, 400-pound simian in the executioner's mask, the posse of strippers and hucksters hanging on the ropes, or any of the shrieking, drooling fans to stop for a moment and consider a more reasonable argument. Quite simply, the shtick has nothing to do with reasonableness, civility or logic." Remember, Lambert?s not a political columnist. His job is to write about Twin Cities entertainment and media. And he?s the only one the newspaper offers on these topics. Unlike the editorial pages (at least those from respectable newspapers), there isn?t a conservative also reviewing these same issues and presenting a more conservative (shall I say more ?reasonable?) viewpoint. He?s all we got. Given the fact that he? s just admitted he thinks of conservative broadcasters as ?400-pound simians in executioner?s masks? and the listeners of these programs as ?shrieking, drooling fans,? any chance he?s going to be fair minded in reporting the issues surrounding these shows? Any chance he?s even going to duely respect the fact these programs dominate the ratings for their time slots? Lambert?s motives for not being able to report objectively are revealed in the above comments. And the smoking gun proof that he doesn?t report objectively can be found in almost every column he writes. No matter what the topic is, he?s able to slip in a slur against conservatives, sometimes subtly sometimes not. All the while blithely denying from his bully pulpit that there is such a thing as liberal media bias. For example, take his his column from last Wednesday (please). In his review of the upcoming PBS National Geographic special on the FBI, he sprinkles in this objective observation: "Because it's the National Geographic, and not, say, Fox News or al-Jazeera, "The FBI" gets relatively unique access to FBI director Robert Mueller." Then there was his column from Friday. The topic was the controversy surrounding a local reporter?s plans to work as a policewoman during the Minnesota State Fair. Mr. Lambert takes a brief detour from his central point to dismiss even the possibility of liberal media bias, characterizing the accusations as: "...the exploitative hammering the mainstream press regularly takes for bias and sloppiness from self-serving conservative interest groups." In the past few weeks I?ve done numerous posts on the hypocritical bias of Brian Lambert and if necessary I could do twice weekly updates on it. But I suspect the interest level for this type of thing is limited among our national readership (and by that I mean you, Maria Ibanez in Davis, CA. Orale chica!). Plus, to take the time to publicly expose Lambert on every column he writes means I would have to read every column Lambert writes. I don?t think even I deserve to suffer that much. (Plus, I read the City Pages almost every week, and that?s enough suffering for anyone.) Yes, I admit it is fun to occasionally check in with Mr. Lambert and see how many paragraphs and how many twists and turns from the subject it takes for him to work in an unjustifiable slur or elitist barb in one of his reports. But do I really need to keep exploitively hammering him for self serving purposes in the forum of the conservative interest group that is Fraters Libertas? Probably not. If the world is willing to stipulate that Brian Lambert?s writing is ridden with liberal bias and his denials of such are disingenuous and hypocritical, then my work here is done. We can all move on with our lives and focus ourselves on more productive pursuits. And by that of course, I mean the extreme liberal bias present in Al Sicherman?s ?Mr. Tidbit? column. Here?s the lede from his Thursday column: "Apparently the wave of cute miniature cookies that appeared in the early 1990s is returning in force." Al Sicherman - get ready for a war!!!! Saturday, July 26, 2003
A Super Hero Concept That Just Never Caught On
It's a bird! It's a plane! It's um.. Spandex Man?!? Last March, when two 18-year-old women were taking the elevator to their apartment in a Plymouth building, they were approached by a man wearing light-colored spandex tights and a T-shirt, Lindman said. The man asked if his outfit was too revealing and then asked if he could use the mirror in their apartment to see for himself how he looked. Once in the apartment, he drew attention to his groin area and asked the women to rate him from one to 10. The women told him to leave and he did, Lindman said. However, the women neglected to lock their door, and the man soon returned, this time wearing only a thong, he said. The man attempted to hug his victims, began to masturbate and pulled down the pants of one of the women, Lindman said. They screamed and the suspect fled, he said. ?Spandex Man? began exposing himself to victims at least 10 years ago but the incidents now are escalating to attempts to touch his victims, Lindman said. There have been no recent reports of incidents involving the suspect, but police throughout the metro area and from as far away as Mankato and Wisconsin have had similar cases, he said. The jokes pretty much write themselves with this guy. Spandex Man: able to pleasure himself with a single stroke. Have more fear ladies, Spandex Man is here. Friday, July 25, 2003
What's The Red Head Up To This Weekend?
Thankfully I don't know the answer to that question. Now that the weekly Friday morning segment with James Lileks has mysteriously disappeared without mention, I no longer have any reason to listen to local radio host Ian Punnett's show and therefore am not privileged as to the plans that his wife has made for the weekend which were usually revealed on air right before Lileks came on. Compelling radio indeed.
Going Down Home
David Adesnik from Oxblog has an excellent post about leaving Oxford to return to the United States and what he has learned about being an American while in Britian: The more I read about America, the more I identified with its historical sense of mission. I began to recognize that I had always had that sense of mission, but did not understand the degree to which it was part of my American heritage. Over the past two years, that degree became apparent precisely because there was no comparable sense of mission on the far side of the Atlantic. Again, one cannot reduce the question of invading Iraq to cultural differences. But that was a part of it. Even before Sept. 11, I had begun to sense Britain's nation discomfort with the concept of a mission.
I Did The Iggy
In a post yesterday that dealt with talk radio show host Sean Hannity I apparently provided some misleading information on Hannity's career path. I assumed that Hannity had entered the talk radio field after the success of his Fox television show and didn't bother to fact check my assumption before running with it (my resume is on its way to the NY Times as we speak) which resulted in this thorough dressing down from Franklin (he's not just a member of the Sean Hannity Fan Club-he's the president!): When did Hannity crossover from TV to radio? He was on in Huntsville AL, then Atlanta, GA, then NYC, then syndication. At some point after moving to NYC, he crossed over to TV. You got it backwards. I was taught to respect my elders, but, jeeze, man, you sound like Abe Simpson right now. I'm just waiting for your pants to drop and what dignity you have left to tumble with them. Hello? Hello! You have my pills! Hello? I'm cold, and there are wolves after me. Sorry. I slipped into Grandpa mode for a moment there. I apologize for my misstatement on Hannity and promise not to allow such a lazy mistake to occur again. At least until next time. Not all of our readers are fanatical Hannity fans like Franklin. James agrees with my assessment of him: You could not be more right about Hannity. My complaint about him is he is simply not smart enough to handle himself with certain guests. On Wednesday he had some arrogant, obnoxious, New Jersey Democrat Congressman (gee, four terms that all mean the same thing) who cleaned Hannity's clock. It was embarrassing, and Hannity's inability to respond to some of the Congressman's statements made his positions appear indefensible. Well, on the bright side, at least Hannity is not stupid and aggressively obnoxious like O'Reilly. Unfortunately for Hannity not being O'Reilly isn't going to be enough. Time to get going. If I'm not back at the home by nine they declare me legally dead and collect my insurance!
Just When You Thought It Was Safe To Go Back Into The Editorial Pages
Over the years there have been a number of poorly written, meaningless, and pointless editorials published in the pages of the Star Tribune (including some not written by Syl Jones). There are days when I read the editorial page dumbfounded, unable to grasp how a particular piece ever saw the light of day and wondering what the editors were thinking or if they even reviewed the work before publishing it. I don't really mind reading editorials whose opinions that I happen to disagree with (around 85% of what the paper publishes) but I can't stand reading sloppy, shoddy work that wouldn't pass muster in a high school composition class. This piece by Karin Winegar, who claims to be a writer, was published in yesterday's paper and it is the worst piece of garbage I've come across in some time. It's a whiny diatribe about greed or "pathological greed" as Winegar calls it. And it's the root cause of just about everything wrong with the world: This is the insatiable appetite that turned the once-forested and green Mediterranean into rocks and semi desert, that killed all but the last handful of plains buffalo, that consumed the carrier pigeon and the dodo and thousands of other species, that plundered the Georges Bank fishing grounds, that wanted to and still insists that it needs to harvest all the whales, the last of the redwoods and old-growth pines, and lift wilderness designation on land to get at the minerals. I'm going to spare you from having to read much more of her dreck. Every one of her sentences could easily be Fisked and her arguments gutted. But it's just painful to suffer through in it's entirety. Often the advice "read the whole thing" is offered. In this case I say the opposite, "don't read the whole thing". In fact read as little of it as possible. Suffice it say that she's against people having "too much" and believes that greed is an addiction. She confesses to suffering from a bit of "toxic excess" herself by owning too many pairs of shoes and boots including a pair of beaded moccasins and mukluks. Why she felt the need to mention this is beyond my abilities of comprehension. She does manage to separate herself from the "greedaholics" though by admitting that she is embarrassed about the size of her shoe collection. Earth to loony lady; NO ONE CARES. While she doesn't come right out and say it you get the feeling that she's looking for the heavy hand of government to step in and correct this "problem" through confiscatory taxation or limits on wealth: I propose we look at salaries -- perhaps starting with MBNA's Alfred Lerner ($194.9 million) -- and consider intervention and treatment using the Twelve Step addiction recovery model. Minnesota is, after all, home of Hazelden Foundation. We know how to help those who cannot help themselves, even at the upper-bracket end of society. This is not socialism; it is treating a disease that imperils the stock market, the integrity of the financial system, our faith in our leaders, the health of the planet. The words "we know how to help those who can't help themselves" is quite revealing and frightening. We know what's good for you. And yes she is talking about socialism no matter how she want to couch it as "treating a disease". Up to this point the piece was crap. But it wasn't worthy of the crap hall of fame. It needed a big crappy finish to push it over the top. And Lordy did Winegar deliver one. Too much of a good thing, be it bathrooms, furnaces, shoes or liquor or even salary, is not wonderful. It's a symptom of a disorder as widespread as AIDS, as communicable as SARS. When I first read this yesterday I was rendered speechless. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. What the hell was going through her mind when she wrote that last sentence? Did she think it a clever, powerful closing statement? Consider for a moment how utterly silly it really is. She's trying to compare people's desire to acquire material wealth to deadly diseases. According to recent stats about .3% of the US population has AIDS/HIV so to claim that "pathological greed" is as widespread as AIDS tends to diminish, not strengthen her contention. And how, pray tell is the "greed disorder" in any possible way, shape, or form communicable like SARS? HOW? My God! If a ten year old tried to make that comparison I maybe would understand (and would also feel the need to correct them) but we're talking about an adult woman here. And an alleged writer as well! I realized that the standards of the Strib editorial page had been compromised when I started seeing pieces appear by unprofessional hacks who run blogs but I had no idea the quality of writing had sunk to such depths.
An Easy Answer
My boss just called me and asked me if I wanted the "opportunity" to represent our division on our company's diversity council. After considering the proposal for all of three seconds I turned down the generous offer.
Take My Breath Away
Stillwater hosts Lumberjack Days this weekend. Per usual, shock and awe inspiring events are scheduled. The shocker: on Saturday, FREE concerts by the Teddy Bear Band and the Dweebs (typically a double bill like this would set back a family of four at least five bucks). But before that, the awe. Today at 1:20, two F-16As from the Minnesota Air National Guard?s 148th Fighter Wing will take off from their home base at the Duluth international airport and ten minutes later are scheduled to come roaring down the St. Croix river valley, for a low altitude pass over the historic Stillwater Lift Bridge. This event was first staged last year, and reports are, it was amazing. So if you?re in the East Metro this afternoon and can sneak out of work after lunch, come on down and see a legitimate use of your tax dollars in action. For those preferring to witness an illegitimate use of your tax collars, check out these photos of a certain confused and conflicted United States Senator hanging out with the 148th and doing his best impression of Tom Cruise in Top Gun. Unfortunately for him, he looks slightly less comfortable than Michael Dukakis riding a tank.
By The Shores Of Big Snake Lake...
I find it impossible read this story and not immediately think of Kamp Krusty: Three teenage counselors at a 4-H camp were charged Thursday with child abuse, disorderly conduct and assault for allegedly forcing young campers into bare-knuckle fights, then charging admission and allowing betting. Three counselors? Jimbo, Kearney, and Dolph. Gentlemen, to evil! Thursday, July 24, 2003
Please Take A Number & Queue Up To Renew Your License For Anti-Americanism
As heard on last night's Hugh Hewitt radio broadcast: "They're like the DMV of broadcasting." -Mark Steyn describing the type of person who works for the BBC
A Whole New Paradigm Of Synergy
John Hawkins at Right Wing News conducted a lengthy (but extremely interesting) interview with Hugh Hewitt which concluded with Hugh giving us a look at the future of talk radio: Hugh Hewitt: Yes, I want to say that I think talk radio is changing. The rising talk stars are Prager, Medved, myself, & Hannity. We're gaining market share really quickly. Rush already has market share, he can't get any bigger -- but who's advancing on him? Michael Savage has had some success, but I don't see that as long lasting. I see the success of Hannity, Prager, Medved, & myself as built upon the new information technology. The smarter the host, the better the show, the greater the audience. Knucklehead radio is going to go away and in its place...if I were a thirty year old like you, I'd find a radio show to match with my blog because the synergy is overwhelming. I agree with nearly everything the Commissioner says except his inclusion of Sean Hannity in the group of rising talk radio hosts. Hannity has enjoyed success in crossing over from television to talk radio so far but I don't think he has what it takes to last. He's a solidly conservative voice but he's just not all that entertaining or engaging. I regard him as a Rush Lite, lacking both Limbaugh's impeccable senses of humor and timing, which are critical components in Rush's long term success. Without them Hannity will not be able to break through to a wider audience as Rush has.
All Things Considered, I?d Prefer To Be Circled
"America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It's been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt, and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game, is a part of our past, Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good, and that could be again." ? W.P. Kinsella, Shoeless Joe This embarrassingly sappy ode to baseball tradition, operationalized yesterday by Bert Blyleven (as reported in today?s Pioneer Press): Doing his part to keep alive hallowed baseball tradition, Twins broadcaster Bert Blyleven mooned the entire Minnesota Twins baseball team Wednesday afternoon as it assembled for the annual team photo. The entire team is brought together for the official team photo, lined up, forced to face in the same direction for a sustained period of time, and some guy casually strolls behind the camera and drops trow, thus inspiring smiles slighlty more authentic than an appeal to say "cheese." Juvenile? Yes. Crass and taseteless. Certainly. But, funny? Unquestionably, and I think that's all that matters. Wednesday, July 23, 2003
The Fabric Of Society Is Very Complex
Today, I put an end to another workplace annoyance, one I call ?The Gifting?. (Some of you may recall how I temporarily won my battle with the office stereo system. This was way back when I was merely a ?long time reader? of Fraters). ?The Gifting? is what I call the wholly offensive practice of being asked to contribute money to buy a group gift for a co-worker, usually for such momentous occasions as an impending wedding or birth. I work in a firm with about 25 employees, 20 of whom are females. Of these 20, 15 are between the ages of 22 and 35 (before you start envying my position, consider for a moment these two words: synchronous menstruation). How likely is it that some of these women, if not all, will either get married and/or pregnant in the near future? Every other week it?s a baby shower for Sally or a wedding shower for Jane and every time I?m expected to cough up another ten spot or more to go towards another place setting or a set of teddy bear Onesies. And if that isn?t bad enough, I?m expected to sit through the work arranged shower (after working hours, I might add) to watch the gifts being opened. The only showers I enjoy are the five minute blasts of hot water every morning that complete the transition from sleep to consciousness. The latest shakedown occurred today as one of the girls, who just got married last year and is five months pregnant (that?s at least $20 out of my pocket if you?re keeping score) announced that she is leaving the firm. I was now being asked to contribute towards a going away gift. What could possibly be next? ?Mary just had a Botox injection. Let?s buy her a microwave!? I have been seething internally about this issue for about three showers now and today, I finally put the brakes on. When the office collection agent made her way to my desk and asked ?Are you contributing to Jenny?s going away gift?? I responded with a long sigh. She shot back with ?Well, you don?t have to.? I obviously knew this, but in a 25 person firm, it?s easy to become known as the office curmudgeon for not participating in the office ?fun? which is why I always gritted my teeth and played along. Not this time, though. I simply responded ?I know. Count me out.? With those words, the collector walked away to her next victim with the fresh news that I wasn?t a team player. I fully expect to feel the repercussions of my decision, but I took a stand that I felt had to be taken. I do, however, wonder if I will regret my choice someday. Perhaps I could have persuaded the collectors to roam the halls of the office with tin cups in hand saying ?Atomizer hasn?t had a flare up of The Gout in eight years. Let?s buy him a house.?
He Gets It
The confluence of talk radio and bloggers continues. Today I heard Charles Johnson from Little Green Footballs on the Dennis Prager show. It was quite entertaining to listen as Charles took calls from around the world (and Cleveland), many of them from fellow bloggers or fans of his site. When Dennis would announce the callers name and city Charles would usually already know who the caller was before they even began to speak. Prager's producer referred to Johnson as a "giant", a description that Prager seemed to endorse wholeheartedly. He also recognized that in addition to getting good show material from bloggers such as Johnson, they could also help spread awareness of his talk show and increase his listenership. Prager joins the ranks of talk show hosts like Michael Medved and Rush Limbaugh who have recently come to understand the value of bloggers. Of course the farsighted Hugh Hewitt was on to the blogsphere many moons ago and has wisely embraced the emerging media form with open arms.
A Bag Of Doritos
Eating a bag of Doritos Sipping upon a Big Gulp A woman walked by And I'm not terribly sure why But she bayed "Cool Ranch?" "They're so dull" Tuesday, July 22, 2003
Keep A Firm Hand On The Helm
Last night on O'Reilly Dick Morris spoke of the President's "plummeting" poll numbers and suggested that Hillary may decide to run in 2004 after all now that Bush appears so vulnerable. Morris is not alone in his doom and gloom assessment and Bush supporters who were brimming with confidence only two months ago are today bemoaning the recent turn of events and openly worrying about his reelection chances. Heck, even the usually rock solid guys over at Power Line seem to be getting nervous. It's time to take a deep breathe and relax. Yes the recent flap over the Niger uranium intelligence, the lack of WMD discoveries, and the continuing casualties in Iraq have combined to hurt the President's approval numbers. And the administration's reaction to events of late has been far from perfect. There's been too much confusion and finger pointing and not enough efforts to counter the mounting criticism. Hoping it will all just go away isn't going to work. But let's not overstate the damage. Recent polls indicate that the President's support has taken a hit and that is not welcome news. But how bad is it? According to a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll published yesterday Bush's approval rating is now at 59%. While that is down from the over 70% approval rating he enjoyed in immediate the aftermath of the war it ain't all that bad either. The assumption that the President's support will continue to decline at the same pace in the future is faulty. When the overall number of people supporting Bush shrinks, the base of his support actually becomes stronger. Hmmm? When you've got seventy some percent of the people supporting you it doesn't actually take much to knock that number down. I'd guess that anywhere between fifteen and twenty percent of people are easily influenced by events and their support swings back and forth depending on whether the news of the day is good or bad. After Baghdad fell they supported Bush. Now the news is not so positive and they bail. But those who still support Bush now are more steadfast and it will take a lot more than what we've seen in the last two weeks to get them to change their views. I don't know what the "bottom" level of Bush's support is but I guess we're not that far from it and it's solid. Dick Morris spoke of Hillary reconsidering if Bush's numbers get below fifty percent. Unless things get a whole lot worse that is not going to happen. All presidencies have rough patches, peaks and valleys in their approval ratings. If this July of '04 I'd be worried. But a lot can happen in the next year. The capture or death of Saddam ("It's nice and warm down here Dad") leading to a stabilization in Iraq, another terrorist attack on the United States, or even an unimaginably horrific war with North Korea and most of that 20% would be back in a heart beat. And just because Bush has lost support does not mean that Democrats have gained it. Right now it's easy for the potential Dem contenders to attack Bush without having to answer the tough questions about what they would have done to make the country safer. That won't be the case in 2004. And keep in mind that we're in the middle of summer. While the media and political classes are paying rapt attention to ongoing events many regular Americans are not all that interested. If you're going to have a "scandal" as some in the media have dubbed it, this is probably the best time of year for it. So while this is certainly not the high point of the Bush administration it is also not time to start writing its obituary. Conservatives especially should have enough sense and fortitude to avoid the rush to make sweeping predictions about the 2004 election based on recent events and to not succumb to the emotionally charged rhetoric that feeds the frenzy. Steady on boys. We need to weather the storm, not abandon the ship.
"Somethin' Nastier Than Hell"
The American conservative movement is nothing if not disparate. From the buttoned-down, middle-aged punditry by the likes of Will, Kondracke and Hindrocket to the fairly young and hot new crop of right-winged women Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin to black conservatives like Walter Williams and John McWhorter. It?s definitely a diverse group of folks. But I was not aware of exactly how diverse This Thing Of Ours was until I tuned in C-SPAN Deuce last night to see The Ultimate Warrior berating a group of students at the National Conservative Student Conference in DC yesterday. Yes, that is the same Ultimate Warrior (know to some as the Anabolic Warrior) who used to star in the WWF. Don?t even try to tell me you didn?t watch it at some point. His wrasslin? days behind him, it seems Warrior (his actual legal name..go here for his site) is now a conservative and apparently makes his living giving the kind of bizarre, long-winded speeches like the one I viewed last night. He?s not dumb, but he doesn?t quite know how to present his thoughts well. He seems to have a huge chip on his shoulder because people think he?s a dumb jock and he?s going to prove them wrong if he has to scream every word to do it. The speech was alternatively tediously pretentious (referencing every Barlett?s quote he could get his mitts on) and embarrassingly slackwitted (?...everything liberalism has touched has turned into somethin? nastier than hell?). This went on for more than an hour. At one point he began asking confusing rhetorical questions like ?Who doesn?t think that the founding fathers wouldn?t not want everyone to be free?? He then waited for the show of hands and when it wasn?t what he expected yelled ?And you call yourselves CONSERVATIVES!?? Okay, so I?m being a little hard on the guy, but he is fighting the good fight. The guy is intense and his success in ?sports entertainment? is remarkable. His aim now is to educate as many non-conservative youts as possible about the founding fathers and what they meant to this country. Or, in his words ?My goal is to inspire people to want to understand what the basic philosophy of America is. If they do, the respect for IT will follow -- as will the reverent following of IT. As a Conservative, I want to protect and conserve that.? So God bless him I say. Even if he has a mission statement and it goes like this: Mission statement: To think, act and believe through my own thoughts and actions in a manner, alone and while interacting with all others, that convinces any eyes and ears upon me that each human life is to be made important and taken serious, and that one should do in one's lifetime that which will live forever.
Complicated Fun
(Sorry Atomizer, this is not an ode to a local Twin Cities punk band that has somehow become something of a legend based on one song recorded twenty four years ago. And it's also not an ode to the Peter S. Scholtes music blog, although one is clearly overdue. Anyone with three Clash albums in his top 100 list must really know his stuff. ) Remember when you were a kid and your life, especially during the summer months, essentially consisted of play, interrupted on occasion by annoyances like breakfast, lunch, dinner, bed, and a forced bath every couple of days? I fondly recall summer days where we left our house after a quick breakfast (usually cereal with loads of sugar to get us jacked up for the long day ahead) returning only for lunch (if we remembered to eat) and dinner (this was mandatory) and then going out again aprčs dinner for what we called "night games"? Apparently life is much different for today's youth: No scores, no official jerseys, no regulation equipment, no trophies, no performance anxiety, no parents on the sidelines berating kids or officials. Hardly any competition and hardly any fees. "And the ultimate 'no' -- no stress," said Teri Dewey, organizer of Fun Summer Mondays. The program is a casual get-together of about 27 second-graders from the same school for an hour each Monday evening. Activities run from June 16 to Aug. 11. Fun Summer Mondays? Wow, one day a week to have fun. Not only one day a week ONE HOUR a week. I considered the entire summers of my childhood to be fun. Now kids get ONE HOUR a week? These are SECOND GRADERS we're talking about too. They're eight years old. One Monday, the kids and some chaperoning parents fished from the Lake Harriet dock. Another week they played soccer. Tonight it's lawn games -- croquet, kick-the-can and tug-of-war. Coming up: swimming at the Richfield pool, basketball at a school gym and miniature golf. Now doing stuff with your parents can be fun and all that but we did all of these things and more (much more) all by ourselves. We invented our games. We didn't need parents. That's part of the reason it was fun. Dewey started Fun Summer Mondays a year ago, when her son Sam was about to enter first grade at Christ the King/St. Thomas the Apostle Catholic School in Minneapolis. She thought he'd like to get to know some of his future classmates in an informal setting -- just learning and playing the games her generation loved. She was right. The kids were wild about an hour of loosely organized play. I don't doubt that these poor kids were quite wild about actually being to play for a change. A break from their regimented lives of sports practices, music lessons, and camps must seem like heaven. Dewey is a former middle-school teacher. She said the loosely structured play is sometimes more of a stretch for her than it is for the children. On "Wheels Night" last summer, for example, she was deciding how to lay out a bike course on a playground, which activity to do when, how to keep the fun flowing. Nope, said dad Brian Kelley. Let's just let them play. Let the kids decide. What a radical concept! Let the kids decide how to have fun? On Wheels Night this year, Beth Perro-Jarvis gathered the flock of kids for a short -- very short -- pep talk. Wear your helmets, she instructed. Wrist guards are a good idea for skateboarders. "A broken wrist can ruin the summer." Oh, one other thing. "Try not to crash into each other. Now go have fun on your wheels." Nag nag nag. Worry worry worry. Now go have fun? Crashing into each other on our bikes was probably one of the funnest things we could do. I remember my Mom's "pep talks" as we headed out the door, "Try to be home before dark and don't kill your brother". After about 40 minutes, Dewey thought the kids were getting tired and, perhaps, reckless on their wheels. She switched them to kickball. FORTY MINUTES? We rode our friggin? bikes ALL FRIGGIN? DAY! And we probably did get tired and we certainly were reckless (see fun concept of). But yet with no helmets, no parental supervision, and no structured playtime (an oxymoron if ever there was one) we managed to do just fine. We enjoyed our childhood. We had fun. Will today's kids be able to say the same when they're adults? Monday, July 21, 2003
Another One For The Shelf
The official Fraters Libertas staff librarians in their mandatory ankle length skirts (let's just say that the combination of short skirts, library ladders, and Saint Paul make our legal department a tad nervous) will soon be making room for a new addition to the already voluminous Fraters collection. The Road to Malpsychia: Humanistic Psychology and Our Discontents by Joyce Milton is the latest offering to be deemed worthy of admission. Milton analyzes the history of humanistic psychology and its influences on society from Franz Boas, Margaret Meade, and Ruth Benedict through Abraham Maslow (a name that should be familiar to anyone who's taken Management 101 and encountered Abe's hierarchy of needs), Carl Rogers, Timothy Leary, and Werner Erhard (EST) among many others and their quest for "Eupsychia", described by Maslow as a utopia of self actualized individuals. She traces the rise of humanistic psychology from the 20's onwards as it gains widespread academic acceptance in the 50's, is embraced by many elements of the counter culture in the 60's, and finally goes mainstream in the 70's. When you read books such as this and David Frum's How We Got Here: The 70's: The Decade That Brought You Modern Life--For Better or Worse the real story is not the damage inflicted upon our society by those seeking to cure it of its ills by destroying traditional values and remaking it in their view, rather it is that society has actually come through fairly well considering all the nonsense that proliferated in the 60's and 70's.
California I Thought I Should See
According to this study published in USA Today on how states have managed their money over the last five years the Golden State ain't so golden anymore. In fact California finished dead last overall among the fifty states based on spending restraint, bond rating, and the tax system. Minnesota in comparison was rated among the best, despite earning only two of a possible four stars under spending restraint. This will come as news to the chicken littles here in the North Star State who wish to believe that the state budget has been slashed to the bone (and then some) and our mystical quality of life has been forever lost. I'm sure there are many Californians who would gladly swap their state's fiscal situations with them.
Top 20 List
John Hawkins at Right Wing News conducted a survey of bloggers (including yours truly) to come up with the 20 Greatest Figures In American History. I had fifteen of the twenty on my list but was disappointed that none of the other voters chose to recognize the lasting impact of Billy Carter. Remember Billy Beer? Sunday, July 20, 2003
I?m Going To Praiseland!
I may be a bit behind the curve on this one (in that it was published in the August 2001 edition of Geology), but I get my science news from Scientific American, thank you very much. A feature article in this month?s SA (?Questioning the Delphic Oracle? August 2003) has revealed to me that the once discredited view of the mystery behind the oracle of Delphi has now been vindicated. For those of you that don?t recall the details, the temple of Apollo at Delphi was where ancient Grecians would go to hear the words of the god Apollo delivered through the Pythia, a chosen Delphic woman. This chosen one would answer questions, give advice and provide guidance on any number of topics, a function reserved in contemporary society for women like Carolyn Hax, Dionne Warwick and Carla Houle. The classical explanation for the Pythia?s trance-like state and seizure-like episodes during these ?readings? was geologic in nature. It was thought that there was a deep chasm in the earth beneath the temple through which gas vapors would rise resulting in somewhat odd behavior by those above who happened to be in position to inhale the fumes. Then along came the sneaky French type persons. In the early 1900?s, they declared the temple of Apollo free of any such phenomena and the theory was officially debunked. More than likely, the French bastards were probably only saying this to discourage any more exploration on the site so they could swoop in and bottle the stuff to be sold as an exotic replacement for absinthe. Well, it seems that the French were wrong. Fancy that. Recent explorations have found that there are, in fact, two fault lines running underneath the temple of Apollo and that they cross at the site of the oracle. When earthquakes cause movement along these faults, the resulting friction heats up the limestone below the surface and vaporizes certain petrochemicals deposited there by rising spring water. One of these petrochemicals is ethylene, which does spectacular things to the human body?s nervous system when inhaled and results in behavior such as oracle spouting while in a trance like state, which happened to be the Pythia?s specialty. My point to all of this is (there is one coming?wait for it) hinges on the following (quoted from Scientific American): To help interpret the possible effects of such gases on human subjects in a confined space?(Henry) Spiller, a toxicologist, became a member of the project. His work with "huffers"--teenage drug users who get high on the fumes from substances such as glue and paint thinner, most of which contain light hydrocarbon gases--had shown a number of parallels with the behavior reported for the trance state of the Pythia. So, the next time you need some guidance?when you have the phone in your hand ready to call up the Psychic Friends Network to help you through tomorrow?s big interview (I?m looking in your direction, Mitch)?forget all of that B.S. and head downtown where you?ll find plenty of young men on the street corner with Lysol cans at the ready just waiting to share their special gift with you. Just don?t step in the pools of vomit.
Fund For The Fallen
From yesterday's Minneapolis Star Tribune: A memorial fund has been established for the family of Sgt. First Class Dan Gabrielson, who was killed July 9 in Iraq. Gabrielson, 41, was an Army Reservist from Frederic, Wis. His convoy was hit by a rocket propelled grenade north of Baghdad. Donations may be sent to: Dan Gabrielson Fund Att: Glen Meir, Bremer Bank 109 Wisconsin Ave N. Frederic, WI 54837 Saturday, July 19, 2003
The Dream Is Over (Or Has it Just Begun?)
On Friday I received notice from the US Postal Service that that the lease term on the Fraters Libertas P.O. Box ends on July 31. After much discussion about keeping it open, perhaps as an historical attraction, we?ve made the painful decision to let it lapse. And with it we watch the lapsing of an era. It was rented months ago, in the dark, uncertain days before the war. A time when the country?s moral compass seemed to be trembling between the cardinal directions of living up to our responsibilities to make a safer, better world and that of preemptive surrender and appeasement of evil. For a while the forces of the Left seemed to be irresistibly pulling us toward the latter, with their nationalistic nihilism, their relentless impugning of our elected leaders? motives, and their grim predictions of certain disaster and doom. But that?s where we stepped in, with the ?Deserve Victory!? bumper sticker campaign. Shortly thereafter, the country united behind the just cause of intervention, our brave armed forces went in, and now millions of Iraqis are free and for the first time in their history, looking forward to a brighter future. Yes, it?s hard to say we turned the tide of public opinion. But to misquote Margaret Meade, ?never doubt that a few dozen people with Churchillian slogans on their rear bumpers can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that has.? (When asked for elaboration, it is reported Ms. Meade went on to say ?Sh*t happens!?). In total, several dozen stickers were sold (for tax purposes, the Elder requests I not divulge a specific amount). Another couple dozen were distributed gratis to key opinion leaders (like Mitch Berg, the Atomizer?s dad, my landlady, and Tyrel Ventura). The rest remain in reserve, ready to be unleashed as soon as Syria or Iran step out of line (or until someone agrees to purchase the rest, in conjunction with our new promotion called "a dime a dozen," targeting parakeet owners and those bathroom training new puppies). In the beginning the sticker sales were brisk, all via the PayPal account we established to handle the orders. It was exciting and the upward bounds of this enterprise seemed unlimited. In an attempt to tap into the legions of customers we knew were waiting to buy, but who were e-commerce averse, we made the decision to get a P.O. Box. I still remember that sunny morning I headed down to my local branch office, filled out the application, and boldly checked the ?yes? box when asked if merchandise was to be sold via this account. (My pride swelled as I realized this is how the inventors of Sea Monkeys and X-Ray Specs must have felt when they first started their commercial empires). Then the clerk asked me what size box I needed. I was caught by surprise, not realizing there were multiple sizes. After a quick check of the Fraters budget for this enterprise, I was forced to select the smallest size. But not until I loudly speculated that I?d probably need a bigger one. Maybe a lot bigger! And real, real soon! Among those in the post office lobby that day, heads turned, eyebrows arched, young women's hearts fluttered, and everyone wondered, ?who is this dashing young entrepreneur and what is he selling?? In retrospect, I should have peddled some product right then and there. Because after I made the investment ($32 for six months), the shameless promotion on Fraters commenced (here, here, here, and here), the P.O. Box was emphasized (here), and we sat back waiting for that old money to start rolling in. And we waited. And waited. And waited. And .... we?re still waiting. That?s right, throughout the entire promotional campaign, not a single bumper sticker order was received via the P.O. Box. My daily electric anticipation-filled trips into the post office dropped to optimistically hopeful bi-weekly trips. Then to anxiously desperate weekly trips. And finally to bitterly resigned, once-a-month funereal marches. In a final bit of divinely-inspired comedy, when checking the P.O. Box last Friday, along with the post office?s termination notice, there was also newsletter from the local hospital, entitled ?Depression: It can strike anyone, at any time. Know the warning signs.? Well Lord, thanks for thinking about me, but I?m doing fine. A little sad sure, but ultimately wiser and stronger for the effort. We entered the fray, fought the good fight, and we Deserved Victory! In a broader sense, that?s exactly what we got. (Plus all that hard core pornography. Gentlemen of Fraters, the clock is up in about a week. Please reroute your subscriptions accordingly).
Break On Through To The Other Side
All those nasty comments I've made about the Star Tribune editorial staff over the years? I take 'em back. At least for today. After all that unbiased group of bright guys and gals had the wisdom and foresight to publish this insightful, well written, and even witty piece on the trouble with trying to preempt terrorism in today's paper. The piece also bears a remarkable resemblance (word for word in fact) to a piece that I posted here at Fraters about a week ago. Quite an amazing coincidence. Hmmm.... Friday, July 18, 2003
Blogging From A Bar
Let's see, it's 7:20 on a Friday night and I've found a way to blog while out drinking at a fairly cool establishment in DT Minneapolis. I'm at the Rock Bottom Brewery and apparently they have free Internet connections for patrons. As I sip an Itasca Extra Pale Ale ("The brewers favorite!") I admit I'm checking out the waitstaff. I lean over to my drinking buddy and say "Checkout the backyard on that!" and he says "yeah, he must work out." In an generous act of noblesse oblidge, I've decided to leave this public terminal on Mitch's website as I see he has posted his resume for us to read this weekend. 15% is all I ask...
Thanks For The Memories
There's really nothing lower than a blogger who reads an interesting post at another site and then shamelessly piggy backs on it with needless and usually redundant commentary of his own. As a rule I try to avoid this practice at all costs. But after reading this piece on Grand Forks at Exiled on Blog Street I have decided to make a special exception. Bill writes about a recent trip back to GF to attend a high school reunion and mentions a couple of places he visited. I haven't been able to get up to see the new Engelstad Arena yet but after reading Bill's description it's trip that I must make: Classsssy. Omigod this place is gorgeous. I could have spent an afternoon wondering the hallways, as this place doubles as a Sioux hockey museum with mucho photos on the walls complete with portraits and bios of all the Sioux All-Americans. The rink looks much cozier than on TV, plus it has leather seats with cupholders. He also stopped off at what once was one of the coolest bars in America, Whitey's or Chez Whitey's as we used to refer to it: Whitey's: Not the same bar as the old days (the Flood of '97 took care of that), but pints of Premos were only $1.85 and the service was as always top-notch. Bill's right on about Whitey's service. I don't think I've ever been kicked out of a bar as professionally as I was at Whitey's (on more than one occasion if memory serves). I can't confirm this positively but I believe that we used to drink Schmidt Dark on tap there on Wednesdays for something like 85 cents a pint. Schmidt Dark? Finally he hit what is probably the most well known restaurant (I use the term loosely) in Grand Forks: The Red Pepper I hate myself. I walked into this place after a couple of beers at Whitey's knowing I should order a ham grinder with taco meat, just like my college days (except it would have been after about five or six Schmidt/City bottles at Whitey's.) But my 37-year old self stepped in and ordered a half grinder. Half what? It was tasty as hell but went by way too fast. Never ever order a half grinder again, EVER. Who knows when you'll be back in the Forks again? The fact the Pepper has a web site is a sign just how far the internet has crept into our everyday lives. It's not really a restaurant as much as an old house where some young guys decided to start dishing up food and as such has all the charm and ambience that you would expect from such a venture. And it hasn't changed for thirty years which is a point of pride among the owners. While attending school on in GF I lived directly across the street from the Red Pepper for two years in a abode that could be charitably described as a hell hole. We were close enough to shoot bottle rockets at customers trying to enter the establishment and we did just that on a couple of occasions. When we first moved in we ate nothing but grinders for three weeks. This led to the discovery that while they tasted damned good at 1:30 in the morning they were not a suitable staple item in your diet. I've been back to Grand Forks a few times since I graduated from college but have not been able to bring myself to head over to the Pepper and order up a grinder. When I make a trip next winter to catch a Sioux hockey game I think I will indulge myself. As Bill says, "Who knows when you'll be back in the Forks again?".
Games By James?
Last Friday I tuned in at 9 am for to hear Lileks do his thing on Ian Punnett's show on FM107. Ian nervously noted that they had not heard from him and did not know what was going on or where he was. Well, okay I guess. I had to listen to Ian for a half an hour just to garner this info, but surely James would be back next Friday right? So THIS morning I tune in again and no Lileks. In fact no mention of him or the "New Ears" bit they had been doing. Instead I was subjected to the "Polichicks" cliche-ridden ramblings about Gubanor Pawlenty's "scandal". So what happened? Did James have a tiff with Ian? Did he simply realize Ian is a lousy broadcaster and not want to be associated with him anymore? Afterall, following a segment that consists of Punnett's wife "The Redhead" describing what the family was going to be doing over the weekend couldn't have been easy. I had the sense during a few of the prior segments that James was getting PO'd at Ian for constantly stepping on his lines, repeating what he had just said and generally acting like a guy who was being completely upstaged and was going to do something about it. The other explanation is that Punnett explained that Lileks won't be doing the show anymore during the 8 o'clock hour and I just missed it. I kind of doubt that, but if anyone knows what happened let me know. Editor's Note When I googled Ian to get the correct spelling of his name, I came across this interesting little tidbit that may explain what happened to Punnett's dreams of syndication.
Here, There, and Everywhere
The fun thing about ferreting out instances of liberal bias at the Star Tribune is that you can find examples of it in nearly every nook and cranny of the paper. Take today's Arts & Entertainment Free Time section. (Please!) In all my many years of reading the paper I can't recall an instance where an art exhibit in town was really panned or its legitimacy questioned. Of course that was before the Minneapolis Institute of Arts dared to feature an exhibit on guns (gasp!): Should you be naive enough to imagine that the 65 guns now on view at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts are really just fancy-pants decorative art -- as the museum's promotional materials claim -- the gun sights will set you straight. That's right these guns are about more than art. They KILL. Lest you forget that for even a moment reviewer Mary Abbe is quick to offer reminders: Some of the early guns are indeed beautifully ornamented, with gold and silver inlays and fine carving typical of 17th-and 18th-century furniture -- not surprising, because the same artisans often made furniture and weapons. The bulk of the show, however, has no such aesthetic appeal, and quickly deteriorates into a gloomy display of killing tools. Now perhaps I'm just a sick right wing bastage but a gloomy display of killing tools actually sounds intriguing. But for Mary Abbe it's about more than guns. It's the people who owned the guns: The show is, in other words, impeccably grounded in cultural history and museum practice. Even so, it feels wrong in both time and place. Minnesota's recent gun-law changes make the museum look especially hypocritical. Like most cultural organizations, it bans guns and displays signs to that effect at each entrance. Yet the show celebrates and fetishizes certain types of guns: rich people's. Guns and rich people. Can it get any more evil? Of course it can: The institute's gun show, by contrast, is nothing more than celebratory propaganda hiding behind a thin veneer of historical gimcrackery. To take the most obvious example, it touts the talents of contemporary gunsmiths but says not a word about the Eurocentric classism inherent in a blood sport whose chief practitioners are rich white men. In Britain today, such traditional blood sports as fox hunting pit rural against urban voters and raise screaming newspaper headlines. No such brouhahas cloud the sunny days of happy shooting at the institute. Now Mary's got guns, rich white men, and Western Civilization itself in her crosshairs (no pun intended). But wait something's missing. I can't quite put my finger on it but I know it should be included: There are plenty of places where a historical gun show could be contextualized so it made more sense: Colonial Williamsburg; a Western Americana museum; a hunting museum. This show's heavy emphasis on contemporary guns catapults it into the current political debates and makes the Minneapolis museum appear to be a pawn in the gun lobby's maneuverings. Of course. The epitome of darkness. The gun lobby. The NRA. Mary hits for the cycle by knocking that one out of the park. Syl Jones is waiting at home plate to give her a high five. I have a hunch that had the art exhibit featured such works as say, a crucifix in piss, Mary would have been much more open minded about it. But we're not through with the Free Time section just yet. How about some snide political commentary mixed in with your music courtesy of one Jon Bream?: Norah Jones pulled at her long hair at Northrop Auditorium on Saturday and declared, "It's hot in here," echoing the refrain of a famous rapper. "I guess you don't have a.c. in Minn-e-sooo-tah," she said in her best "Fargo" accent. (A Northrop spokesman said a valve was inadvertently turned off due to an operator error.) The New York resident/Dallas native didn't realize that she was complaining directly to Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who was there as a fan, and not to receive a lecture about the inadequacies of University of Minnesota facilities. (Little did he know that this would be just the first time he'd be sweating in public over the next week.) Maybe now the guv will think twice about slashing the U budget. And maybe the U will send Jones to the Capitol to lobby, um, serenade the lawmakers. (J.B.) And there's this tidbit from Chris Riemenschneider, a decent music writer (as opposed to the aforementioned Jon Bream) who just can't pass up a chance to take a potshot at the POTUS: Folks in my former hometown of Austin, Texas, are all abuzz about Minneapolis this week after Austin native Bob Schneider's scheduled performance at the Basilica Block Party was canceled because of his sordid past with longtime side band the Scabs. The Texans think of us Minnesotans as a bunch of prudes. Vetoing a guy who sings a tune called "Vagina" seems less embarrassing to them than voting a guy named Bush into office three times (twice as governor). Doesn't the fact that we throw a beer bash for a church fundraiser prove we have flexible values? Maybe too flexible. I guess we can add Chris to the list of Texans (including Natalie Mains) now officially ashamed of their native state. Finally on a completely non bias related matter I have to throw this nugget from Riemenschneider's column out there for JB Doubtless to chew on: If you don't believe in rock 'n' roll fantasies anymore, then you probably haven't heard of local cult figure Michael Yonkers, whose fuzzed-out album "Microminiature Love" will be released Tuesday on Sub Pop Records after 35 years on the shelf. That's right, the Seattle label that discovered Nirvana and Soundgarden is interested in an obscure, experimental Twin Cities guitarist and singer who was a buzz act during the Johnson administration. "If this stuff had been heard, we think it would have influenced the Stooges, Velvet Underground and the acts we love," said Sub Pop's Andy Kotowicz, who signed Yonkers. Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Imagine the impact that Yonker's album might have had on one of JB's favs, The Clash? Thursday, July 17, 2003
Integration Now!
Last night I attended a work outing in downtown Minneapolis at GameWorks in Block E. Block E is a new entertainment complex which now includes among other businesses a hotel, a Hard Rock Cafe, Snyder's drug store, Starbucks, a Borders book store, and an Applebee's. Essentially the kind of places you could easily find in your average suburban shopping mall but it's DOWNTOWN and therefore special. Plenty has already been written about the ghastly architectural design of Block E by folks with far more insight on the matter but permit me one simple complaint about the utility of the design. If you approach the complex from the North, as I did last night, there is not a readily apparent entrance. Oh I'm sure there is some method for accessing Block E from that direction but I'll be damned if I could figure it out. I walked halfway 'round the block before finally finding an entrance on the East side. You have a building. You want people to come inside. Make it simple and obvious where you go in. Once inside I was once again left without direction. How do I get to GameWorks? I wandered up to the second level and came across my destination but it was purely by chance. Here's a novel suggestion: signs with arrows. Makes things so much easier. GameWorks itself was fairly impressive and cool. Two floors loaded with a variety of games, two bars, and a restaurant. While I waited for my work companions to arrive I hunkered down at one of the bars. I don't drink alone a lot but when I drink alone I drink a lot. By the time my compatriots showed up, about fifteen minutes later, I had already downed one gin and tonic and was two thirds of the way through my second. Had they been delayed any longer they likely would have found me doing my best Ted Kennedy impersonation and delivering a heavily slurred oration on what's wrong with our country to the four other customers in the bar. "Let me tells you a 'nother thing...." One of best things about Game Works is that you can pick up a beer from the bar and wander anywhere in the joint. This means you are often drinking in the midst of the little childrens running about. That's right DRINKING NEXT TO THE CHILDREN. While some folks probably find the idea abhorrent I thought it was wonderfully refreshing. In too many venues the alcohol serving areas have been cordoned off, those who wish to drink segregated and in some cases even branded (think wrist bands), and alcohol free zones established as if merely being in the vicinity of someone enjoying an alcoholic drink would somehow lead to your kids living under a bridge, sipping on a bottle of Mogen David for the rest of their lives. But aren't you encouraging drinking by exposing children to these environments? Yes it is encouraging drinking. Reasonable, moderate drinking. Daddy can have a couple of beers without checking in to Hazelden the next morning. Rather than hiding alcohol from kids, which serves to increase it's mystery and allure (the forbidden fruit and all that), why not teach and show them how to drink in moderation? Why not an example of the middle ground that exists for millions between the teetotaler and the drunk? Perhaps if children saw more examples of wise and moderate use of alcohol by adults they would not feel the need at fifteen to furtively down a twelve pack of 3.2 Old Mil (a Minnesota thing-if you don't know what 3.2 beer is consider yourself lucky) at the local park sitting in their friend's Pacer before throwing up all over the driveway at home. Right Atomizer?
Change Is Bad
Since it seems that the entirety of the blog world is heaping praise on James Lileks today (here, here and here), allow me to join in the love fest. James hit the nail squarely on the head in yesterday?s Bleat: ?nothing I make in the Mexican realm will equal the Chili Cheese Burrito at Taco Bell. (Gasps of horror from the audience.) True. It is perhaps the only menu item so fine it survived a merger and acquisition. The Chili Cheese Burrito was a specialty of the Zantigo chain, a far-superior purveyor of FauxMex food. The meat was finely granulated, stirred into a cheesish fluid imbued with peppers, and served in a thin burrito. Mm mm. When Taco Bell took over Zantigo they killed the Chilito dead, but the people rose up and demanded their rights, and in a rare act of corporate wisdom they brought it back, for good. You can still ask for a Chilito by name, and they?ll make it. Ten years after the death of Zantigo. Amazing. I was addicted to these things. When my friends and I were in high school, we used to bike 5 miles to the nearest Zantigo (the restaurant formerly known as Zapata) almost nightly to get our fix. When we heard the news that the restaurant chain was being converted to Taco Bell in1986 we went into full survival mode and scoured the Twin Cities area for any remaining franchise that was still operating to stock up. This panic easily surpassed the New Coke scare of 1985 (although I?m still convinced that the present day ?Classic Coke? just ain?t the same as the old stuff). All of this fond reminiscing got me thinking of some other changes that have traumatized my fragile existence: McDonalds? New Chicken McNuggets I like dark meat. It?s juicier than white meat and it just plain tastes better. I?ll take a deep fried chunk of chicken gristle with extra skin over a tasteless preformed mass of breast meat any day. If I cared about eating what is good for me I wouldn?t be going to McDonalds. Van Halen While I was not a huge fan of these guys, I can?t stand them since Diamond Dave departed. Consider this bit of lyrical genius shrieked by Sammy Hagar: ?Only time will tell if we stand the test of time.? Good one, Sammy. Yes This band?s lineup has changed more times than Michael Jackson?s nose, but the worst had to be Trevor Rabin and Geoff Downes replacing Jon Anderson and Rick Wakeman. Yes just didn?t sound right without the pretentiousness of Anderson?s vocals and Wakeman?s keyboards. 1988 Minnesota Twins Tom Brunansky traded to St. Louis for Tommy Herr? Who needed Bruno?s subsequent 105 home runs and 444 RBI. Herr, on the other hand, smashed out 9 homers and 139 RBI. Brilliant move. Heaven help me if the Bombay folks ever screw with the recipe for Sapphire. Update: Yes, I have erred. I meant to say that Trevor Horn and Geoff Downes replaced Jon Anderson and Rick Wakeman in Yes. Thanks to Mitch Berg for pointing this out. And, for the record, this "whippersnapper" was indeed quite alive when the event occurred (I have the black "Drama" concert t-shirt to prove it). I simply got my Trevors mixed up, both of whom did spend time as members of the band. Wednesday, July 16, 2003
A New Low
Has the guy who sends out the CNN ?Breaking News? emails lost his mind? If so, let me try to bring him back to reality. Yes, feel free to interrupt my work day when terrorists slam planes into skyscrapers. I want updates when there?s news breaking about the results of a Presidential election. (Which is why I initially subscribed ? for real time news on the county by county recounts in Florida). I want updates when the country goes to war. These are important events, affecting us all. We NEED to know about them. (Plus these types of events make for good conversation starters when I see the new blonde from legal affairs hanging around the water cooler. And yes, I NEED help there, as so far she?s been immune to my consultations ). NEED - that is the standard that should be applied before any ?Breaking News? emails are sent off. This I do not need: From: CNN Breaking News [BreakingNews@MAIL.CNN.COM] To: TEXTBREAKINGNEWS@CNNIMAIL.COM Sent: Wed 7/16/2003 5:13 PM Subject: CNN Breaking News Latin music icon Celia Cruz, the "Queen of Salsa," dies after battle with cancer, manager says. Watch CNN or log on to http://CNN.com (AOL Keyword: CNN) for the latest news. Outside of Ms. Cruz?s immediate family, and other members of the Salsa Royal Court, nobody needs to be interrupted at work to know this. Plus ever since September 11, 2001, I demonstrably pucker every time one of these Breaking News things pops on my screen. And this visual isn?t doing me any favors around the water cooler either.
Tax Cuts Are Fine If You Also Cut...
Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan is optimistic on the economy and now supports the Bush tax cuts: "The recently passed tax legislation will provide a considerable lift to disposable incomes of households in the second half of the year, even after accounting for some state and local offsets," he said. "Most mainstream economic models predict that such tax-induced increases in disposable income should produce a prompt and appreciable pickup in consumer spending," Greenspan said. And he isn't too concerned with the growing deficits with one caveat: And the deficit is not necessarily a problem, he said, unless it persists for many years, which he said could be prevented by spending cuts that match the reductions in taxes. "I have nothing against cutting taxes," Greenspan said. "I would just like to be sure that a constituency arises eventually for cutting spending as well, and that has not been the case." We're out here Alan. Hoping for the same thing you are. Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Just The Facts, Ma'am
It appears that Wayne Robins was on to Lynette Holloway's, shall we say "lazy", journalistic style way back in April. He writes: The news that one-time rock radio pioneer WNEW-FM was switching from its failed talk format to focus on "Free-Form Music" got big play in the Metro section of Thursday's New York Times. But the hope that the new format would in any way resemble the anything-goes, free-form format that made the station's reputation in the late 1960's was immediately dashed. And it raises questions of a reporter's gullibility. It seems that east coast music business reporter Lynette Holloway bought the hyperbole, and lacked the awareness or skepticism to question what "free-form" really meant. And where were the editors who should have been watching her back? Wayne also points out an amazing gaffe, considering that the woman spent a good amount of time writing about music: Holloway reports the station will sport new call letters: BLINK. That's very doubtful. Radio stations can nickname themselves whatever they want...it would be a violation of international radio treaties for the FCC, which has the sole authority to assign call letters, to name a station BLINK. Radio stations in the People's Republic of China are authorized to have a call letter beginning with "B" or "BL," but in the United States, broadcast stations get a prefix beginning with "W" east of the Mississippi River and "K" West of the Mississippi.... It's been that way since 1923. Lapses such as these may be expected for, say, the Peoria Weekly Shopper, but this is the New York Times for crying out loud. Check your facts.
The Female Jayson Blair?
By now you may have heard about the latest flap at the NYT regarding a piece by reporter Lynette Holloway on record executive Steve Gottlieb. The piece portrayed Gottlieb as a litigious, incompetent boob and managed to hose almost every bit of supporting detail. In yesterday?s edition the NYT was forced to run a 2100 word correction regarding the article. 2100 words! The original article itself was only 1400 words. What is fascinating is to think about how many other pieces have been written just like this one where the overall thesis is completely wrong AND almost every detail is somehow hosed too. But no one looked into it or took any objection seriously. The Times couldn?t make such simple mistakes, surely. I?m going to go out on a limb here to say that this could easily be Jayson Blair II. When you consider the amount of errors made and the types of errors made along with what we know about the Times decades-long goal of diversity in the newsroom, it would be hard to say that she hasn?t done this before. In fact, I?ll predict that as we speak the Times is going over her past work and coming up with loads of mistakes. Newly minted Editor Bill Keller will be have to deal with this issue, but at least he can say that it happened during Raines? tenure, not his. What do we know about Holloway? Well, my Bergian research has come up with a mention from Walter Williams: Jesse Jackson said, "This is a replay of Selma all over again." He yelled that "Holocaust survivors have been disenfranchised." Jackson spoke of the "blood of blacks and Jews." Not one mainstream news media outfit challenged Jackson to substantiate his claims either at the time of the Florida recount or since. In the midst of the Florida folderol, despite Jackson's ranting, New York Times correspondent Lynette Holloway wrote, "Mr. Jackson has been careful not to be inflammatory." We also know that she seems to write a lot about minority issues. Is she black? We don?t know, but I am inclined to think so. Does it matter? In light of what happened with Blair it has to.
Do Not Adjust Your Dials-We Control All Frequencies
If you happened to be listening to talk radio last night here in the Twin Cities at just the right time (5:10pm-5:35pm CST) you would thought the Northern Alliance had carried out our long planned coup and gained control of the local airwaves. (To any government officials reading this, please take my coup comments in the humorous manner in which they are intended. And disregard those rumors about a WMD cache in Mitch Berg's basement as well.) Only moments into his show Hugh Hewitt had already mentioned Lileks and Power Line. And this was before the weekly segment with Lileks had even begun. During his conversation with Lileks, Hugh was kind enough to throw a shout out to us in reference to the State Fair softball game. Now that MPR has refused to play the formidable squad that Hugh has assembled, he is looking to line up the Star Tribune editorial page writers as opponents. After the Lileks segment was complete Hugh came back generously plugged our efforts to raise money to help fight Multiple Sclerosis. (By the way you still can make a donation here.) When Hugh went to a commercial break I punched up the Jason Lewis show on AM 1500 KSTP and whose voice did I hear? None other than Mitch Berg from Shot In The Dark discussing the Mike Hatch-American bankers case which Mitch has written extensively on. The NA media saturation campaign is now officially underway. Coming soon to a market near you. Monday, July 14, 2003
You Ice People Just Don't Get It
For many years now I have become confused and bewildered reading the editorials in the Star Tribune penned by one Syl Jones. My typical reaction is what the hell is the point of this piece? It's gratifying to learn that I'm not the only one who feels this way about Syl's writing. Today Lileks delves into a column by Syl that appeared in yesterday's Strib and after several head scratching moments of incredulity is left posing the same query: Where is he going with this piece? Alas, that is a question that I don't believe can be answered by anyone not even Syl himself. Apparently his writing isn't about the destination, it's about the journey to get there. And in the case of Syl it feels like the journey is a trip across the Atlantic in a rubber raft with no oars. You'll drift directionless, become nauseous and disoriented, approach the brink of madness from the lack of recognizable landmarks, and be damned lucky if you actually arrive anywhere.
Picking 'Em Up & Putting 'Em Down For Seventy Five Miles
We completed the MS S.U.N. 75 inline skate from Hinckley to Duluth, Minnesota (with an overnight stay at the midway point in the booming metropolis of Barnum) this weekend. The event was a fundraiser with all proceeds going to the Minnesota Chapter of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. To all of you who have generously made pledges to our team we thank you mightily. To those of you who wish to donate you still have an opportunity. Simply hit the Pay Pal button on the left of the page or drop me an e-mail at rightwinger23@hotmail.com and I'll let you know where to submit your pledge. More information on pledging is available here. This is a shot of our team on Sunday morning. I'm the grinning jackass in the yellow domestic partner beater. The Atomizer is in the white Radio K shirt on my right.  The skate itself went about as well as it possibly could for our squad. The weather was gorgeous. We managed to maintain a decent pace throughout and the spills were kept to a minimum. The Atomizer was even able to overcome his training injury and put in a solid effort on the trail. On Saturday night we stayed at the Black Bear Hotel Casino & Hotel which proved adequate for our needs. It's been a few years since I've been at a casino here in Minnesota and I had forgotten what dismal places they can be. After only a few moments of watching the expressionless faces of people pumping money into the flashing, beeping, ringing, dinging machines I came to the conclusion that, after the 2002 election night DFL "victory" celebration this was probably the second most depressing scene I have witnessed in recent years. Usually when people are having fun or are being entertained they tend to smile and laugh. Not at the casino. Apparently losing money is a very serious business for these folks. On Sunday we were able to enjoy the scenery of northern Minnesota, particularly once the trail entered the Jay Cooke State Park. We even took a few minutes to stop and smell the flowers or take in the view from a bridge over the St. Louis River. After we rolled into Duluth and completed the trek we feasted on a lunch catered by Famous Dave's BBQ and the Atomizer celebrated in a manner befitting his idiom. For next year's MS75 we're looking to get the Commissioner up here to participate and help us raise some real money. Surfing is okay for some Hugh but real men skate. Sunday, July 13, 2003
Peace Through Strength
The Navy's newest aircraft carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan, was commissioned in an impressive ceremony on Saturday. As seen on CSPAN, it included fond remembrances of the great man himself (the ship?s namesake), low level fly overs from jets of the ship?s own air wing, and the still dignified and elegant Mrs. Reagan proudly announcing ?bring her alive!,? followed by all 5,500 sailors charging over the gangway and into position on the upper decks. The most impressive part of it all was the ship itself, rising 20 stories above the waterline. 1,092 feet long (including a 4-1/2 acre flight deck), 95,000 tons displacement, maximum speed of 30 knots, carrying 80 aircraft, and scheduled to serve in the fleet for 50 years. A modern leviathan of such overwhelming power that I find myself thankful I live in the only country in the world capable of producing such things. And much to the rest of the world?s great fortune, the only country capable of creating it is also the country most likely to use it responsibly. (No need to thank us world, excellence is its own reward). The full armada of Presidentially named carriers is now close to being completed, and with it, the real world manifestation of President?s Reagan's ?peace through strength? vision: USS George Washington USS Abraham Lincoln USS Theodore Roosevelt USS Harry S. Truman USS Dwight Eisenhower USS John F. Kennedy USS Ronald Reagan USS George H.W. Bush (scheduled to be commissioned in 2009) The George H.W. Bush is the last of the Nimitz class carriers schedule to be developed, meaning the few gaps we see in the modern Presidential line of succession aren?t likely to be filled in by new ships. This might be for the best. The USS Richard Nixon? Although he was a Navy veteran, I don?t see it as an aircraft carrier. Some sort of spy ship maybe, one nobody knows about preferably. The USS Gerald Ford? A man best known for sliding down the stairs of Air Force 1 on his face probably isn?t the best role model for a fighting ship. Plus the Navy probably couldn?t afford the insurance premiums. The USS Jimmy Carter? (I?ll pause now to allow you to wipe the laughter-ejected coffee spew off of your monitor). But before you laugh too hard, I need to inform you ..... it is in the works. The USS Jimmy Carter is scheduled to be commissioned in 2004. Not as an aircraft carrier. Rather, as a nuclear powered attack submarine. Clinton-era political appointees in the Defense Department saw fit to use the name of the ?peace through weakness? visionary in 1998 for the final submarine of the Seawolf class. It was a move that inspired some controversy among military professionals. From Norman Polmar of the United States Naval Institute (a private, professional organization for Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine veterans): ?Naming the SSN-23 for President Carter further proclaims the bankruptcy of the Navy in assigning names and designations to submarines. According to a leading Pentagon reporter, it also reveals "that Clinton-appointee Dalton is - at best - politically tone deaf. ...as president [Carter] disappointed many senior officers in the armed services, especially the Navy. His personnel policies helped fuel a mass exodus of senior enlisted personnel that at times was so critical that ship deployments were delayed. In 1979, President Carter vetoed the entire fiscal year 1980 defense budget because it contained an aircraft carrier. For many who served [in the Navy] then, Mr. Carter is at fault for having presided over the hollowing-out of the U.S. military," wrote a Pentagon reporter.? A stinging rebuke of the Carter years and the appropriateness of naming warships after those from this administration. Lest you feel the USNI has politically biased motivations in delivering these criticisms, I offer as supporting evidence the The Simpsons episode ?Bart vs. Australia.? At the end of the episode, The Simpson family was being evacuated from the roof of the US embassy (from the clutches of an Australian mob, driven to rage by Bart?s antics). Homer turned to the pilot of the rescuing helicopter and wondered how they would be getting back home. Homer: Hey, do we get to land on an aircraft carrier? Pilot: No, Sir, the closest vessel is the USS Walter Mondale. It's a laundry ship. They'll take you the rest of the way.
Pinch Me, I Must Be Dreaming
In a single weekend the Star Tribune not only publishes an editorial by Powerline's Hindrocket ripping Robert Scheer, they also print a counterpoint by Gary Larson on the tawdry tactics used against Bush as well as a piece by Minnesota House Republican Jeff Johnson calling for an investigation of Attorney General Mike Hatch? Is this the same Star Tribune that I've come to know and hate so well? Saturday, July 12, 2003
Back That Thing Up (And Into a Glorious Future)
Amid double digit tuition increases and constant wailing and gnashing of teeth about being underfunded by the state legislature, the University of Minnesota provides an update on how your tax dollars are being spent. The cover story in this month?s alumni magazine, entitled ?Body Language,? focuses on Ananya Chatterjea, an assistant professor of dance ?who uses her body to inspire social change.? Her mission: ?I do political theater, using dance to tell ordinary stories about ordinary people and to address violence. I'm interested in being someone who has something to say, to inspire social change, to invite people into political thought." I love that quote "I?m interested in being someone who has something to say.? I think that unintentionally nails the reason this generation of liberal arts professors got into the business of academia in the first place. Of course, it would be better for society if these people actually were people who had something to say, but we?ll have to take what we get. Along with her publicly subsidized salary to which I contribute, I send along my best wishes that Prof. Chatterjea attains her dreams of someday having something to say. Her motivation: ?In grad school, I met interesting people from all parts of the world and my politics became very radical. I also started working as a volunteer with Manavi, a shelter for battered women in New Jersey where I literally saw the global proliferation of patriarchy and violence against women. Everywhere I looked there was violence, especially against women. There is historic injustice against women across the world, and that moved me very deeply. Always I have been looking for ways to address contemporary issues, but I thought, "How do I jibe that with dance?" Interesting that a woman who grew up amid the third world squalor and medieval social norms of Calcutta didn?t ?literally see? the global proliferation of patriarchy and violence against women until coming to the United States. But then again, she was in New Jersey. Her solution: ?...writing a book that interprets the choreography of two women artists: Chandralekha, an Indian choreographer, and Jawole willa jo Zollar, a black choreographer. The book is called ?Butting Out,? because the linear spinal arrangement that is typical of Western dance is alien to many black and Asian cultures, where the curves of the spine are valued and the butt is held loose.? I guess I was wrong. It seems Professor Chatterjea does have something to say after all. Short of a draft movement for Jennifer Lopez as President, I?m not exactly sure how this topic is going to inspire social change. Nevertheless, expect me to be first in line at the book signing.
A Small (but important) Victory
Kudos to Hindrocket from Power Line for somehow penetrating the defenses and landing a piece in today's Star Tribune editorial page on the absurdities of Robert Scheer. He even manages to slip a mention of blogging (and a shot at the "major media") in for good measure: Of course, we don't expect columnists for the Los Angeles Times and the Star Tribune to be as scrupulous in their use of sources as a blogger would be. But Robert Scheer is beyond the pale. One must wonder what motivates any newspaper to print columns by a man with such a cavalier attitude toward truth. I raise my cup of coffee and salute his efforts. It's a bit early for the hard stuff and I've still got a long day of skating ahead of me. Cheers! Friday, July 11, 2003
The Truth About The "Lies"
Faithful reader Rick from California e-mails to clear the air on the SOTU "lies" controversy: What I've read being reported in the blogosphere is not quite accurate about the SOTU address where Bush has been accused of lying. The basic facts are not getting out, and someone needs to set the record straight. Even the RCP(Real Clear Politics) commentary today gets it wrong when they say, "Based on what we know so far, you can either believe that a mistake was made by allowing a claim based on questionable intelligence into Bush's State of the Union OR you can believe the President of the United States got up in front of the world and knowingly used information that had already been proved to be completely fraudulent to bolster the case for going to war. In my mind the more plausible answer is that the administration failed to properly coordinate and vet the intelligence used in the speech. A mistake was made. The administration has admitted such. Does the fact that it was the SOTU magnify the mistake? Yes. And does the fact that it was related to the issue of going to war magnify the error even more? Of course." Bush didn't lie. His direct quote , from the SOTU was,: "The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide." Note that Bush says "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sough significant quantities of uranium from Africa". If you read the RCP commentary, our spies say we need to nix any comment along these lines, but Tony Blair's spies tell us they have information we are not privy to. That is why Bush says this information comes from the British. Terry McAuliffe is a silly, little man and behind this foolish attempt to smear our president's good name. I honestly believe that our progeny is going to study our current political history and point to the Democratic party as an example of how not to act. If they lose the next election, what are they going to do then, run further to the left? Accusing a man of lying and then pleading with the public to demand that he comes clean when the facts can be so readily produced to the contrary is NOT political genius.
And I Thought Robert Byrd Was Old And Gassy
He's got nothing on this: Astronomers have discovered the oldest known planet, a primeval world 12.7 billion years old that will force them to reconsider how and when planets form. The discovery raises the prospect that life may have begun far sooner than most scientists ever imagined. A leading planet-formation expert not involved in the work called the discovery mind-boggling.
Reaching Its Nader
An editorial by Jason Salzmans in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune explained why he had supported Ralph Nader in 2000 and now wishes he hadn't. If he had to do it over again he would have voted for Gore to avoid the horrors of the Bush presidency. It's full of the standard boilerplate paranoia of the far left; Bush's tax cuts help the rich and hurt the poor, the Patriot Act is a repressive instrument to stifle dissent, the war with Iraq was unjustified, we live in a "climate of fear" etc, etc. There's no point in addressing all of his silly little points as they've already been effectively debunked many times over. But there is one quote that really stands out for me: The United Nations, which is our greatest hope for world peace and global prosperity, stands no chance of recovery as long as Bush is in power. The United Nations is our greatest hope for world peace and prosperity? Jason lives in a hopeless and rather frightening world if he actually believes that to be true. Would this be the same UN whose members include such beacons of freedom as Syria, Cuba, Somalia, Iran, North Korea, Myanmar, and Vietnam? The same UN that allowed Libya to chair its Commission on Human Rights? The same UN that did nothing to prevent the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans and Africa in the 90's and is proving powerless to prevent the massacres and civil wars in Africa taking place now? The same UN that would have preferred that the Iraqi people continue to live under the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein? Jason doesn't believe in the United States as a force for good in the world. He believes in the UN. But at least it appears that he's found the right party to support when 2004 rolls around: I've decided to support the Tweedledee most likely to defeat Bush in the next election. That Tweedledee will be a Democrat. I think Jason's found a new home
I?m proud to announce that I have just accepted a 20 minute contract with highly-esteemed and nationally praised local blog Fraters Libertas to write this piece.
We Don?t Know What We Don?t Know Layoffs. They?re still happening. It seems every time there is one bit of positive economic news there?s another story on it?s heels that contradicts it. Consumer confidence is up point-one percent, but unemployment claims are also up. Guys crying in their beers at Mainstreets in Hopkins is down 5%, but orders for Denny?s $1.99 Jobless Loser Omelet are up. My own layoff was a shot to the bread basket. Me? How could they lay ME off? You become Fredo: ?I?m smaht, I can do it? and your boss becomes Michael saying that?s the way Pop wanted it. The biggest thing I?ve learned from the entire ordeal is the simple fact that we don?t know what we don?t know. How are you perceived in the organization? What does your boss really think of your abilities? You may think you have an inkling of these things, and perhaps you are right on. But there?s also a damn good chance your take is tainted by a thousand variables (ego, friends who don?t want to say what they really think, forest for the trees and all that) that no one is smart enough to fully compute. The maddening thing is a layoff can happen right after a good job appraisal, as mine did, so I would guard against putting too much weight in that. What?s my point? My point is that if you want to make yourself more layoff proof (and btw ALL of you can be laid off) you have to try to find ways to discover what you don?t know. The thing that sucks about this endeavor is that just by discovering what you don?t know (and I?m talking about things like communication skills, negating skills, how power relationships work) that is just the first step. Then you actually have to begin to know the thing you discovered you didn?t know. I?ve been attempting this by going to Barnes and Noble, skipping over the history and politics sections (do I really need to read another book on WW2 or Why Liberals Are Wrong? will that help me get ahead?) diving into the business section and looking for the self-help type selections. Not long ago, I though books like these were stupid and beneath me and I Know All That and of course, there are tons of books that fall into this category. But after digesting useful titles like this and this and this, it turns out I just didn?t know what I didn?t know.
The Problems With Intelligence And Preemption
In the wake of the September 11th attacks the Bush administration came under quite a bit of fire for perceived intelligence failures. Critics implied that it would have been possible for the administration to use the intelligence available to prevent the attacks. There was indeed a great deal of intelligence before 9/11 that indicated that some sort of attack was imminent. And not all of it was from the most reliable of sources (information coming out of Afghanistan for instance was suspect). But that wasn't a concern for those who thought that the administration had failed in its intelligence duties. They faulted the administration for NOT considering ALL the intelligence available, tying together all these disparate strings to foresee the threat, and acting to prevent it. But isn't this exactly what the Bush administration did in the case of Iraq? Now critics are harping because ONE of the many threads of intelligence that the administration used to make the case for preemptive action against Iraq has turned out not to have been accurate. If the Niger uranium connection was the foundation that the case for war was built on then perhaps they would a point. But it wasn't. It was merely another plank in a very long bridge that was used to justify action. Should the whole structure be torn down because one plank was rotten? Back to 9/11 for a moment let us imagine that the administration had correctly interpreted the intelligence before 9/11and decided that a major attack was going to take place in the United States and decided to act to prevent it. None of the intelligence specifically spelled out the exact plans for the attacks or indicated the identity of the nineteen men who would take part. The only methods that I can see that would have prevented the attacks would have been a dramatic heightening of airport security and the mass detentions of thousands of Arab and Muslim men in the United States (imagine the outcry that would have resulted). Unless the administration was very lucky and happened to nab one or more of the nineteen potential hijackers with evidence of the detailed plans for the attacks no one could really even say for certain just what had been prevented. Before 9/11 it wasn't possible to imagine 9/11. The administration would have claimed credit for preventing a major terrorist attack and justified their actions to prevent it. But critics would have sniped that they had overreacted, that there wasn't solid proof of a threat, and if ANY of the intelligence they used to build the case for action turned out to be false the critics would be all over them just as they are today over the Iraq intelligence flap. That's the problem with intelligence and preemption. You are expected to utilize all available information to analyze threats and if necessary act upon them. But usually you can't prove beyond doubt that your actions prevented a specific attack from taking place and the intelligence that you used to arrive at your decision is going to be questioned by your opposition and if any flaws are found they're going to hammer you for it. If you act on intelligence that is possibly not 100% accurate you will be criticized. But if you don't act on intelligence that is possibly not 100% accurate you will be criticized as well. Back to Bart Simpson's paradox, "Damned if do. Damned if you don't." After 9/11 I'm much more willing to live with the former. Thursday, July 10, 2003
Yes, the reports are true. Your beloved Atomizer is badly wounded. I was coasting down a hill last Tuesday when I forgot the cardinal rune of in-line skating which is, and I cannot stress this enough folks, ALWAYS know where your feet are going. While this may appear to be a simple task to most of you, when the blades are strapped on and you?re heading downhill at 20 miles per, a simple misstep can be catastrophic.
I took a nasty spill and have been struggling to recover ever since. My left knee and calf are scraped up pretty bad and I have one hell of a bruise just below my left butt cheek. Try sitting on the commode with a six inch diameter contusion on your ass. You?d pay a hefty price for a package of Immodium in that instance, my friends, believe me. But (no pun intended) I believe that the worst is over and, after several applications of Bacitracin and Hydrocortisone, I think I am ready for this weekend?s 75 mile skate to raise money for Multiple Sclerosis. I sacrificed my body for the cause and am now joining the Elder in petitioning you folks for a monetary contribution. No amount is too small and, of course, no amount is too big. Help us out. Your donations are tax deductible and will go directly to the Minnesota chapter of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. The Minnesota chapter provides services and programs to approximately 7,600 people with MS and their families throughout Minnesota and western Wisconsin. If you don?t feel comfortable contributing to us but still want to support the cause, you can do so by calling toll free (800-582-5296) and deal directly with the M.S. Society. Thanks to all who contribute and, trust me, the gang at Fraters does not get a cut of your donations. We are compassionate conservatives here, despite the contributions of JB Doubtless. Labels: Good Works
More On Savage, More On Lambert
Earlier this week Powerline quoted Whittaker Chambers remarking on the danger of having an irrational, irresponsible person advocating your cause: In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that we live in terror that Senator McCarthy will one day make some irreparable blunder which will play directly into the hands of our common enemy and discredit the whole anti-Communist effort for a long while to come.' The same warning can be applied to Michael Savage. The substance and style of his remarks have the potential to discredit any conservative voices in the mainstream media. With his latest childish outburst, it seems Savage has played right into the hands of our common enemy. St. Paul Pioneer Press entertainment columnist, and liberal media bias denier, Brian Lambert gets out his broad brush to paint all of conservative media and its audience as follows: [Savage] was, after all, only repeating the same vile spew that has made him a hero to millions of radio listeners. Average Americans are hungry for characters who, as they describe it, "tell it like it is." (Translation: "Say the stuff we only say to our closest friends when we're angry and drunk.") ...the modern media marketplace is extraordinarily forgiving to bigots and inflammatory demagogues. Ratings show a substantial, lucrative audience that sees not hate but "passion" and, most ironically, moral clarity in acts like Savage's. A further irony is how little the FCC does to constrain this kind of rancid misanthropy. As is his slippery style, Lambert doesn?t specifically name any of the other broadcasters he identifies as bigots, inflammatory demagogues, and rancid misanthropes. Which is more than a little manipulative. And lazy. As any blogger knows, it?s easy to condemn by inference and loose association. But you?d hope a major newspaper (relatively speaking) would have higher editorial standards when it comes to publishing defamatory accusations. But, of course, they don?t. So now Rush, Jason Lewis, the A-list of Patriot personalities (Prager, Medved, Hewitt) and all their listeners now get rolled into a bundle with some raving lunatic. Just because we all happen to agree that the government should be more interested in preserving individual liberty rather than assuring an equality of societal outcomes. And if that?s not bad enough, Michael Savage has now given Brian Lambert a reason to be sanctimonious. Now that?s an irreparable blunder.
Get Off My Side Redux
Now that we?ve fully analyzed Ann Coulter?s bony body, I?d like to say a few things about another personality that I?d prefer to not have on my side, Michael Savage. I think he?s WAY hotter than Anne Coulter (just kidding, Michael?I ain?t one of them dirty sodomites!). I rarely listen to Savage?s radio show, but I have been tuning in lately to hear his response to being given the hook by MSNBC. Savage is claiming that the phone call that sparked his TV show ending tirade was ?a setup to destroy (him) in television orchestrated by unknown interests.? Oh, oh?.it looks like someone forgot to take his anti-paranoia medication. Give me a fargin? break. If someone really wanted Savage?s show pulled from the air, all they had to do was wait. He was bound to say something idiotic and offensive enough to get fired sometime. Throw in foaming at the mouth and spewing bile, you?ve got a complete listing of the man's talents. In fact, rather than being a left-wing saboteur, it turns out that the caller was actually a fan of the show. All that this guy wanted to do was put in a plug for ?Don and Mike?, his favorite radio show (no doubt chock full of fart jokes and prank phone calls). This revelation comes from a San Francisco Chronicle article that Savage actually links to on his web site, yet he?s sticking to the sabotage story. Apparently, the caller chose Savage because he knew he?d get a reaction, and boy was he right. Savage reacts to most callers with an intensity that?s just a notch below a grand mal seizure. Savage also claims to be a victim in this matter. Excuse me, Michael, but who was there with you that night forcing you to wish the caller dead from AIDS? Do you really have such little self control that a harmless crank caller causes you to involuntarily break into a vitriolic rant? He also claims that he wasn?t aware that his comments were actually on-air. Why he would assume this while talking to a caller on live TV is beyond me. It appears to me that Savage is looking for someone to blame for his stupidity?anyone but himself. The caller is responsible, or the sound technician?.no, wait, the left wing jackals have teamed up to destroy the man?s television career. Savage claims to be a conservative yet he is failing to adhere to one of its principles, that individuals must take personal responsibility for themselves and their actions. Rather than fessing up to his stupidity and bowing out gracefully, he gets on his radio show and tells the ?pig? that called him that ?this isn?t over yet? as if he?s going to hunt this guy down and exact his pound of flesh. Grow up and get over yourself, Michael. And get off my side.
We're Not Asking For A Handout Just A Hand
New wheels. New bearings. Pre-skate check in completed. I'm all set for this weekend's seventy five mile inline skate from Hinckley to Duluth to raise money for Multiple Sclerosis. I can't think of anything more that I could possibly need. Oh yeah. One more thing. MORE PLEDGES! NOW! Our team(which I proudly captain) has a goal to raise two grand and we ain't there quite yet. The good news is that there still is time, in fact we can actually accept and collect pledges up to a month after the event. The bad news is we still have a ways to go and need your help to get there. NOW! Click here to make a pledge using PayPal or if you don't feel comfortable with that method simply drop me a note at rightwinger23@hotmail.com and I'll let you know where to send a check. Without your continued support we won't be able to bring such fine programs as Masterpiece Theat.... Sorry, I got a little too into the PBS fundraising mode there. I was about to start describing the fabulous tote bags that we had available. But seriously this is a very good cause and it does require quite a bit of effort on our part. Inline skating is not without its perils as the Atomizer can well attest to. He lost the skin on roughly 20% of his body (and he doesn't have much to spare either) the other day as a result of a dust up while blading. Reports vary as to cause of the mishap but we believe we have narrowed it down to a couple of possibilities: 1. He noticed an inch worm in the path at the very last moment and being the lover of all creatures great and small that he is, attempted to swerve to avoid it and lost control. He gave the skin off his kneecaps so that the worm might live. 2. He fell short in a heroic attempt to jump Springfield Gorge. Witnesses report hearing the words "I'm gonna make it! I'm gonna make it! This is the greatest feeling in the world!" seconds before he plummeted to the earth. So when you're sitting around the apartment this weekend clad only in boxers, eating a block of cheese, drinking malt liquor, and watching C-Span II in the desperate hope that Michelle Malkin will be featured on a book symposium (yes I'm looking at you Saint Paul) take a moment and remember those of us who'll be out there on the trail laying it on the line. Make a pledge now and you'll feel a little less guilty about your guilty little pleasures this weekend. Wednesday, July 09, 2003
Fun, Fun, Fun
Peter Scholtes has made my day by offering four new versions of the Suicide Commandos "Complicated Fun" recorded by the briefly reuinited band with John Freeman of the Magnolias on vocals. As you may recall from this prior post, the song was recently re-recorded for a Target television ad. Now, we all may hear it without having to somehow mystically divine when it will appear on the box. Enjoy.
The Rise of the Coulter Culture
From the rash of e-mails I recently received I'd say that the Ann Coulter looks debate ain't over quite yet. Brad from Infinite Monkeys describes her appearance as "cadaverous". A view shared by James from Folsom, CA who says Coulter is "all skin and bones". Meanwhile Sean at The American Mind claims that Coulter is "hot in an anorexic kind of way". And finally Rick from Southern California adds, "Ann Coulter is a babe. No discussion on this."
Worthy Of A Roll
In response to Saint Paul's post earlier today I couldn't agree more with his assertion that Ann Coulter is sexy. But being sexy and being beautiful are not the same thing. You can stare into the eyes of truly beautiful women for hours on end. You look at the face of Ann Coulter, see that certain naughty girl gleam in her eyes, and want to commence with the physical grappling tout suite. Not that there's anything wrong with that. One final comment before we put the Coulter matter to bed (down Saint Paul, easy boy) needs to be made. Most of the prominent forces of the right (the WSJ editorial page, Andrew Sullivan, NRO, David Horowitz, Powerline, and us) have now publicly disavowed Coulter's latest work as well as the buffoonish rantings of Michael Savage. Even though they both claim to have a similar ideology as us, we were disturbed by their methods and rhetorical excesses and so have repudiated them. Has anyone on the left done the same in the case of Michael Moore, a man guilty of presenting distortions and outright lies in a much more egregious manner than either Coulter or Savage? The silence is deafening.
A Much More Civilizied, Less Savage Radio Alternative
Rick from California reports that Michael Savage is off the radio airwaves as well (at least temporarily): Michael Savage has been suspended from local radio station KRLA 870 due to his outburst on MSNBC. It's especially gratifying to us Hugh Hewitt listeners in Los Angeles as they split Hugh's show during the 2nd and 3rd hours and inserted Savage, playing Hugh's 3rd hour at 8 pm. As you know I've been listening to the HH show for a long, long time and this really bothered me as I have to make a drive every day equal to your worst Minneapolis nightmare. If I were still in my car at 5 pm, I'd quickly scramble for the smart buttons to turn the station. I wrote (and cc'd Hugh) the station a handful of times in the last few months urging them to dump this loudmouthed blowhard because I wasn't going to listen to him (and maybe I'd forget to turn it back on in the morning - sorry Mark Larson). Savage doesn't speak to me or for me, and plays to a stereotype which I seldom run into in conservancy. He's almost what a Mad Liberal Scientist would create to prove his theory on what a Conservative is. My formerly liberal, soon to register Republican valley-girl born and bred wife (bred in the valley not with child) is ecstatic. She's happy that Hugh's back, AND she gets to listen to Praeger twice a day now. Life couldn't be sweeter than when she's happy about being able to listen to well reasoned logic! Savage is not yet cancelled, but he is suspended. I don't have anymore details other than conjecture and rumors, but here's hoping!!!
Looking for a good movie to see this coming Spring? The City Pages' Matthew Wilder has a suggestion, as he provides a preview of an upcoming film series at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis:
.....in February, the Walker Art Center will present Text of Light, a series of [Stan] Brakhage screenings played to live musical accompaniment by alt-rock hipsters such as Sonic Youth's Lee Ranaldo. And in the meantime, there's a magnificent new DVD set from the Criterion Collection called By Brakhage, which is simply invaluable. Alt-rock hipsters and magnificent movies? That sounds pretty good. So get your popcorn ready and settle in to the following: Indeed, there has never been a movie that you "feel in your viscera" more than Brakhage's "The Act of Seeing with One's Own Eyes" (1971). Not content to make art at a remove, Brakhage goes for full-body contact with the viewer. In "The Act," he records the process of several autopsies conducted in a grim, old-timey Denver morgue. Like the morticians who lead him gently through the steps, the filmmaker starts small--with the shock of unseeing eyes on a gaunt-faced corpse. Then he works his way up: A beautiful blond woman is sheared and gutted; a human head is scalped, hot-drilled, and removed of its brain--a sad, gray, gloopy mass of unexceptional jelly. We're not meant to look at these insides, though we possess them ourselves; the biological impulse that says "Look away!" is planted deep. .... As a result, for many viewers, "The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes" is an almost surefire way to a panic attack. By the way, Wilder is recommending you go see this piece of art. In fact, he can't hardly wait: The deeper Brakhage delves into himself--into realms that are beyond depiction--the further we see ourselves reflected in his recesses. For all their amateurish bits and hippie longueurs, the films in By Brakhage finally achieve what was once called, without flinching, Great Poetry. Yes, great poetry, I'm sure. And the City Pages is a great newspaper. Labels: That's Entertainment
The James Dean of Africa?
As heard on the nationally syndicated Hugh Hewitt radio show last night on the topic of Bush's speech in Africa yesterday: Hugh: Becky from the Twin Cities go ahead. Becky: Hi Hugh. I take a particular interest in news from Africa since my husband is an African politician. Hugh(quizzically): Why? Becky: He's a leader from the Sudan. He's a rebel. Hugh: Cool. Beautiful. That's why we love the commissioner.
Ann Coulter - Get On My Side (Positions Now Available)
In his post below, the Elder makes a good point in questioning the qualifications of Andrew Sullivan in assessing the ?babehood? of Ann Coulter. And while the Elder does a workmanlike job of getting to the essence of the Coulter mystique, it appears we need a true connoisseur of women to weigh in on this burgeoning controversy. Someone whose commitment to ethnic diversity when it comes to affairs of the heart has caused at least one observer to note he has a ?sexual history that looks like America,? (with the iron clad exception of Hopkins, MN). A man for whom ?Knockin? Boots? is not only his favorite R&B/rap anthem of the early 90?s - it?s a way of life. But since Dave Thompson is no longer available for comment, I guess I?ll jump in on this one. Ann Coulter is not pretty. But she is sexy. She?s prevented from being pretty primarily by her the size of her beak. Plus she?s too thin, especially in her arms and legs, which have a wiry, Willem Dafoe quality to them. These characteristics will prevent her from ever appearing on the cover of Maxim (although a starring role in ?The Last Temptation of Christ II? is not out of the question). She does have a few assets that are pretty. Specifically, her long, golden tresses. Beautiful, silky blonde hair flowing down past her shoulders. It?s a trait no man can resist. In fact, it?s such a rare and prized genetic trait that most men can ignore the rest of her face to focus only on that (which is what I do during her televised appearances). Even better, I think it?s her natural color. If it?s not, that does lessen her stature, since I don?t t think I?d get the same thrill staring at Ms. Coulter?s monster schnoz and a bottle of bleach. But why exactly is Ann Coulter sexy? In response to this I?m tempted to quote US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart?s famous definition of pornography (?big beautiful balloons?). Upon further introspection into my desires ..... (How?s that for a scary sentence fragment? Don?t worry, I?ll keep it clean. And I?ll leave out the part about the duck.) ...... I?ve come to the conclusion: it?s her personality. Well, it?s not all about her personality. Because if she didn?t at least attain a minimum standard of physical beauty, this conversation wouldn?t be happening. But a lot of it is her personality. She?s fiery, combative, passionate. Seeing a woman articulately defend her core beliefs in this matter is sexy, even more so since she happens to have core beliefs worth defending. You get the sense that you could have a lifetime of intellectually stimulating, provocative conversations with her. However, this use of her passion in an official capacity isn?t the whole story of her appeal. Because at some subconscious level, while watching her mix it up with the wolves on cable news, you can?t help but think that her energy and fire and enthusiasm could be channeled into more, shall we say, ?productive? pursuits. Without getting too graphic, you get the sense she?s the kind of woman Monty Python-era Eric Idle would refer to as ?a bit of a goer? (wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean?). And that my friends, is sexy, no matter how huge her honker. (Plus after the lovin? think of the conversations you could have!) Tuesday, July 08, 2003
Get Off My Side
Ann Coulter. Sigh. Sorry but I had a lengthy spiel planned on how commentator and author Ann Coulter and, in particular, her most recent book Treason did far more harm than good for the conservative cause and that I would rather not have her and her ilk on my side of the ideological fence. That was before the explosion of similar commentary by folks far better equipped to explain the troubles with Ann. It just feels like so much redundant piling on at this point. The avalanche began with this piece at Spinsanity that detailed the factual errors and many misstatements made by Coulter in Treason . It was followed in short order by dissections of Coulter by Andrew Sullivan, Dorothy Rabinowitz at OpinionJournal, David Horowitz at FrontPage Magazine, and our Northern Alliance brethren at Power Line. Everything that needs to be said about Coulter and her silly book has been said. Even the Minneapolis Star Tribune reprinted the Spinsanity piece by Brendan Nyhan on the editorial page the other day (funny how they never saw fit to reprint Spinsanity's many articles exposing the gross distortions of Michael Moore). The only point that I would like to add is that despite popular perceptions when it comes to looks Ann Coulter ain't all that and a bag of peanuts. Sure among the pundit class she looks quite attractive especially when compared to, say, the likes of Molly Ivins but that isn't exactly a tall order. She's a decent looking gal. But she is not, as Andrew Sullivan described her, a "babe" by any means. Andrew might have a better appreciation of the subtle masculinity of George Will or the baby faced charm of Jonah Goldberg but I think he's out of his league when starts talking about how Ann Coulter looks amazing.
Work Makes One Free
There are loads of people out of work these days. Seems you can't open the paper without seeing another story about the lousy job market. People are getting desperate. One pathetic middle manager in Taunton, MA was reduced to standing on roadsides with a sign saying that he needed an insurance job, quick. Even within our own insular community of blogs we hear the travails of a man who has been on at minimum 600 interviews, with 590 of them going "great--I am one of the top three" but with no offers forthcoming. But, have these people considered "Performing Arts Careers" as the Strib termed the 550 section from Sunday's classifieds?: Auditions "Time Portal" Movie Trailer Looking for attractive Native American female, 20's to mid-30's, non-speaking role... Male, mid-50's with similar features to Adolph Hitler, German speaking a plus Let's see, Berg is German, right? No need to thank me, Mitch. Just remember me on Oscar night.
DC Comics Fan Revealed
At last we get a good look (click on the photos tab) at one of those elusive DC Comics fans. Thanks to Bill at Exiled for the tip. Monday, July 07, 2003
Agua de Culo
The current issue of Scientific American includes a column by noted skeptic Michael Shermer entitled ?Bottled Twaddle? (available on-line here) in which he gleefully explodes the myth that bottled water is somehow better for you than regular municipal tap water. In fact, there?s a good chance that the bottle of fancy water you buy at Starbuck?s is just that: ? the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)?tested more than 1,000 samples of 103 brands of bottled water, finding that "an estimated 25 percent or more of bottled water is really just tap water in a bottle--sometimes further treated, sometimes not." If the label says "from a municipal source" or "from a community water system," it's tap water. Hilarious. But not nearly as funny as the article?s closing paragraphs describing a taste test conducted by Penn and Teller: The hosts began with a blind comparison in which 75 percent of New Yorkers preferred city tap to bottled waters. They then went to the Left Coast and set up a hidden camera at a trendy southern California restaurant that featured a water sommelier who dispensed elegant water menus to the patrons. All bottles were filled out of the same hose in the back of the restaurant; nevertheless, Angelenos were willing to plunk down nearly $7 a bottle for L'eau Du Robinet (French for "faucet water"), Agua de Culo (Spanish for "ass water") and Amazone ("filtered through the Brazilian rain forest's natural filtration system"), declaring them all to be far superior to tap water. This all goes to show you that, despite popular claims to the contrary, both beer and water are better straight from the tap.
"Both of them have high opinions of themselves and think they are real smart"
When I first heard that the Star Tribune was going to run a front page story in Sunday's paper on two prominent local brothers, one a serious, well respected, responsible pillar of the community who also happens to be a very active Republican and the other an irreverent, gambling, smart assed, arrogant blowhard who spent a few tumultuous years in Boston I thought that finally JB Doubtless and myself would be getting the recognition that we so richly deserve. But when I cracked open yesterday's edition I was disappointed to see that said article concerned the Rosenbaum brothers, Jim the chief justice of federal courts in Minnesota and Ron a lawyer and horrendously bad talk radio host. I was not disappointed however to see Ron remain true to his daily radio form and serve up a hackneyed cliché right out of the chute: "He did everything conventionally while I was tilting at windmills," Ron said. And as is usually the case the older, wiser brother had a much better quote for posterity: Working in a housing project might seem an odd fit for a lifelong Republican such as Jim, who ran U.S. Sen. Rudy Boschwitz's winning 1978 campaign. But as Jim said before being named to the bench in 1985: "Being a Republican is not necessarily synonymous with asshole." On another fraternal front I am happy to report that intensive negotiations are underway to have Two Brothers Brewing Company of Warrenville, IL become an official sponsor of Fraters Libertas. Two Brothers produces only the finest quality hand crafted beers just as we here at Fraters Libertas only produce the finest quality hand crafted writing (in fact Atomizer's drafts are often scrawled in crayon-Burnt Sienna if I'm not mistaken). The only holdup at this point appears to be our demands for scads of free beer in exchange for a guaranteed seventeen advertising hits per month for Two Brothers. We'll keep you updated as developments warrant. Until then drink Two Brothers, read Fraters Libertas, and keep blood between brothers.
Licensed to Kill Gophers by the Government of the United Nations
The correction of the week from Howard Kurtz's Media Notes column: From the Roswell, N.M., Daily Record: 'The story regarding the Father's Day Invitational golf tournament on Page B1 contained an encounter with one 'Carl Spangler' whom the story reported had invented a new type of grass for golfing. . . . It came to the attention of management that the incident had not taken place and was in fact a scene from a movie. After discovering this, management immediately terminated the author.'
Welcome to the Big Leagues
Congratulations go out to former Minnesota Twins first baseman Kent Hrbek upon his induction into mainstream cultural significance. From yesterday?s nationally syndicated Tribune Media Services Sunday crossword: 112 Down: Hrbek or McCord Sure there are a lot of Minnesotans and a few obsessive baseball fans who remember Big Herbie?s career. He was an above average left handed hitter, with 293 career homers (highlighted by a Grand Slam in Game 6 of the 1987 Word Series). He was also an ace defensive first baseman despite his girth (he was rumored to be one of the few specimens capable of gaining weight during a baseball season). I?m sure a few remember him as a Hall of Fame character too, encompassing both the good (not so subtly wrestling Ron Gant off of first base in game 1 of the 1991 World Series to record a crucial out) and the bad (injuring himself for the season while attempting to body slam the team cook in the clubhouse after an early season game in the mid 1990?s), which the word ?character? implies. But I suspect the other Kent, Mr. McCord, probably carried the recognition load yesterday, for all those bookish shut-ins and crazed loners who spent a beautiful holiday weekend Sunday trying to knock out a crossword. Since the most recent Fraters readership survey indicated about a 50-50 split between obsessive baseball fans and crazed loners, I suppose I?ll have to explain to the first group that Kent McCord starred in the seminal 1970?s television cop show Adam-12, (as Officer Jim Reed). His distinguishing characteristic as an actor being a zombified glazed over expression, with eyes that attempted to bore directly into your soul, though only succeeded making the viewer really uncomfortable. To experience this sensation for yourself, check out his personal Web site. If you poke around enough, you?ll find Kent McCord even has a blog of sorts, although he hasn?t posted in over a month. Given his commitment to producing fresh material, I expect him to be added to the City Pages Babelogue shortly.
Just Win? Maybe...
Yesterday's Strib had an in depth story on the controversy surrounding the Duluth school district's decision to not renew the contract of Duluth East high school hockey coach Mike Randolph. Randolph developed Duluth East's hockey program into one of the best in the state: In Randolph's 15 years as head coach at Duluth East High School, his teams won more than 300 games, two state championships, the respect of rivals and the awe of hockey fans. However not everyone was enamored with his methods: But critics contend Randolph is an intense coach so consumed by winning that he was undone by his ambition to establish a high school hockey powerhouse. They point to fundraising that skirted school district policies, favored treatment of some players and humiliation of others. They see that as evidence that the culture of a program built on the skills and emotions of teenage boys had become unhealthy. Leaving aside the fundraising issue, examples of Randolph's mistreatment of players include: Andy Messer, a goaltender who left East and transferred to a neighboring school last winter, said that after a loss at Hastings a few years ago, Randolph kept players in the dressing room for more than an hour, criticizing many and reducing one to tears. And: Another goalie, Brent Mathison, said that Randolph told him before an early-season game last season that the game was a "must win" for Mathison if he hoped to stay on the varsity. East lost, and Mathison was later demoted. Finally: Kenny Beck, who played for Randolph in 1990-93 and went on to play small-college hockey, said those tactics took the fun out of the game. In hopes of recapturing it, Beck would sneak out of his house at night to shoot pucks at a nearby outdoor rink. "I cried a lot," Beck said, noting that he was shuffled to the junior varsity during his career without any explanation. "I've played hockey since I was 4 years old. I'd always been kind of a superstar. Then you go to this level, and you're not told whether you're playing good or bad. It was all mind games with this guy. I'm not going to say he's a bad coach. But I think what he did was say, 'We're out to win; it's not supposed to be fun anymore.' " I don't want to come off sounding like a cold hearted ogre but my response is, "Welcome to the world of competitive sports boys". And there's no crying in hockey. That's an important one to remember. It might not always be pretty and certainly is not fair but the reality is if you want to compete at the top level of sports these days, even at the high school level, you have to focus on winning. If you want to play hockey just to have fun then you probably don't want to be in an elite program like Duluth East. With open enrollment it's easy enough to attend a school that doesn't place such a strong emphasis on fielding a winning hockey team. Or maybe you can just join the cross country team. (I can almost feel the imminent avalanche of pro-cross country e-mails on the way) High school hockey in Minnesota is big time. Some of the luster has been taken off the state tournament since it went to two classes but it still draws large crowds (at least for Class AA) and is televised throughout the state. Top end players compete for lucrative Division One scholarships and a few even have a shot at playing professional hockey. It might still be a game but it has become a very important game, especially for the schools that seek to excel in it. I find it hard to blame Randolph for pushing his kids to win. While it might have been a heart warming, Disneyish gesture for him to tell the goalie, "It doesn't matter how you do. Just have fun.", if he had behaved in this manner he likely would have been relieved of his coaching duties long ago for failing to win. Duluth East's trips to the state tournament and two championships were important to the school, to the district, and to the city of Duluth for that matter. They all wanted him to win and relished his success when he did. If he had failed he likely would have been run out of town on a rail. Randolph appears to have fallen into the paradox best described by Bart Simpson as: Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.
Do You Love the Poor More Than You Hate the Rich?
Just about everybody and his brother have already linked to this piece (what are you waiting for Mitch?) but just in case you haven't read it yet check out Bill Whittle's examination of the three ingredients (capitalism, freedom, innovation) that make America great. There's a reason that so many have linked to it. It's a damn good read. Very long but well worth the time. Here's a sample: Where you stand on the political spectrum, what you think of rich and poor people, and what you think about rich and poor nations and how they should act in the world, comes down, in my mind, to one single issue, and one only: Can wealth be created, or can it only be redistributed? If you believe, as I do, that wealth can be manufactured out of thin air, then there is no limit to the amount of wealth you can amass. And since you are creating it out of thin air, there is no moral onus on making money ? you work hard to create it and have stolen from no one. There is an expression for this: you earned it. Indeed, since charity depends on excess wealth, excess capacity, the more you make for yourself the better off everyone else is. You can even throw charity out the window if you are so hard-hearted; the fact remains that you will spend that money to get the things you want, and the more you have the more you can spend. That money goes to other people. This interchange is called ?the economy,? and rich societies are rich because they understand in their bones the centerpiece of Capitalist thinking: Wealth can be created from thin air by human ingenuity and hard work. Now people on the left have, in their guts, a revulsion towards the rich and the wealthy, because when ever they see wealth they naturally assume that it was stolen from people without any ? the poor. That rich man in the private jet has taken the wealth from all the poor people and is therefore a criminal. Sunday, July 06, 2003
We Really Like Us
The local alternative weekly newspaper, the City Pages, has gotten into the blogging business in a big way. They sponsor 20 or so sites collectively known as the Babelogue. The blogs are written by staff members and other contributors to the print edition of the paper. On the whole, it seems to be a going concern, in that at least some of them commit to posting more than once a week (which is quite a record of accomplishment for a bunch of people who consider themselves to be professional writers). My favorite part of the Babelogue is the Babelogue Index, which is another blog run by City Pages. It's primarily devoted to linking to ..... other blogs in the Babelouge. It features the best of the material from those in their little circle that found the time to put something up that day (which granted, given their work habits, can be a challenge). Better yet, often times their links to themselves include shameless descriptions like ?one of the funniest blogs in the lower 48? (which appeared last week in reference to a blog devoted to country music whose content primarily consists of a guy making lists of his favorite songs and all the albums in his record collection). The Babelogue Index is kind of like Instapundit. That is, if Instapundit was limited to linking to only 20 blogs (whose editorial voices and writing styles are so similar, they?re virtually indistinguishable from one another). And if Instapundit was dedicated to linking to other blogs he had a commercial interest in promoting. And if Instapundit was really dull. Other than that, just like Instapundit. The shamelessly self-promoting blog on top of a blog is an interesting idea. So much so, I?d like to start trying it out on Fraters. Ladies and gentlemen, I?m proud to unveil the .... Fraters Sunday Index (dedicated to posts done today) The Elder, one of the most talented young humor writers in the country, drops another neutron bomb of hilarity in his continuing battle against ants. In his piece ?Continuing Antics,? he enlists the aid and comfort of the fine folks at Intergalactic Capitalist. Read it all, it?s f-ant-astic (heh). That scamp Saint Paul brilliantly sends up the City Pages attempts at blogging their own blogs, in an insightful, yet poignant piece called 'We Really Like Us.' (Pssst - Saint Paul, we REALLY do.)
The StarBanker from Intergalactic Capitalist was kind enough to drop an e-mail with some advice on battling ants using unconventional weapons:
Although I live in Fargo/Moorhead now, I lived in Ant Central (Naples, FL) for many years. The first thing, piss ants are those annoying flying ants or the equally annoying people who think they know EVERYTHING about ants, hereby designated as me or I. The typical house-invading ants are either "sugar" or "grease" ants (sugar and grease are terms for organic compounds found in gas tanks and garage floors, respectively). Getting rid of them both is difficult, insomuch as they invented Raid and deliberately mislabel the cans. However, in desperation following daily assaults by legions of both varieties, I discovered the only known chemical deterrent. First I painstakingly traced the route of entry by following the 600 foot line of ants to a crack in the door sill and another entry point around an electrical switchplate. I had no Raid ( At this point I wasn't aware of the corporate collusion between Raid Inc. and Ant Research and Development.) so I took a bottle of Tilex bathtub cleaner (which I never used because its warning label said, "Use only in well ventilated areas" and I sh## indoors) and sprayed the column plus the entry points. In the next year I had nary an ant sharing my hard earned sugar and grease. Labels: Nature Saturday, July 05, 2003
Fallen Hero
 First Minnesotan dies in Iraq sniper attack: "When the doorbell rang early Friday, Edward and Marcia Herrgott thought it was another relative coming to town to celebrate the July 4th weekend. But when Edward Herrgott opened the door of their home in Shakopee at 6:15 a.m. and saw two people in U.S. Army uniform, he knew something was wrong. They brought the news that Edward's only son, Pfc. Edward James (Jim) Herrgott, had been killed Thursday in Iraq by a sniper. Herrgott, who turned 20 last month, was shot in the neck while manning the gunner's hatch of a Bradley fighting vehicle outside the national museum in Baghdad. He is believed to be the first Minnesotan killed in the current conflict in Iraq, said Lt. Col. Denny Shields of the Minnesota National Guard." R.I.P.
The Befuddlement Goes On
The crew over at Power Line as well as our very own Saint Paul have done an admirable job of exposing the disjointed, baffling, and usually inarticulate statements that emanate from Minnesota Senator Mark Dayton on a regular basis and so I've usually shied away from commenting on the good Senator. But these most recent remarks of his were just too good to pass up: Returning from an official trip to Iraq, Sen. Mark Dayton criticized the search for weapons of mass destruction Thursday and said the efforts would be better spent rebuilding the country. "This hunt for weapons of mass destruction looks like the Hunt for Red October," the Minnesota Democrat said at a Capitol Hill news conference with other senators who visited Iraq. "It's a huge red herring that's distracting from the main mission of reconstruction." Dayton is referring of course to the Tom Clancy novel and film 'The Hunt for Red October' . There are two possible explanations that I can come up for Dayton's comparison: 1. He believes that the whole Iraqi WMD issue was a fabrication by the Bush administration. It was based not on reality but was purely fictional like Clancy's book. 2. Dayton has no idea what the book is about and but thought he was delivering a clever line. If you know anything about the plot of 'Red October' you would know that threat posed by the submarine in the story was very real to both sides that were searching for it. It was a state of the art Soviet sub armed with nuclear weapons. The captain decides to turn the sub over to the West. At first the Americans aren't sure of his intentions and fear that he is a rogue possibly intent on attacking the United States and since he has weapons capable of devastating American cities they take the threat quite seriously. The Soviets meanwhile don't want their latest technology compromised and so seek to destroy the sub before it reaches the West. The point is that in the book there were real WMD's on the sub and there were legitimate reasons for both sides to search for it. Dayton's comparison is ridiculous and baseless. I'm going with option #2 based on my past knowledge of Dayton's reasoning and analytical skills. And then there's this sanguine advice he offered up: "I think nonmilitary people over in Iraq looking for stashes should be out hauling trash, rebuilding schools, designing next year's education curriculum, delivering soccer balls, clearing away the playgrounds that children can play on this summer. That's what's important now," he said. In a country with millions of Iraqi men (many ex-soldiers) unemployed and looking for work Mark Dayton suggests that American technical personnel should be taking out the trash and passing out soccer balls instead of hunting for WMD's? That's what's important? November 2006 can't come soon enough.
Local blogger Cheek reports on some music enthusiasts enjoying a concert earlier this week at the newly opened punk rock venue, the Triple Rock Social Club in Minneapolis:
The mosh pit was simmering with gender politics. One slippery shirtless mohawk boy was repeatedly thrust out before sliding back in. And me, I was plucked out by an odd nose-ring quasi-dyke who thereupon explained to me that "she wants only her sisters" in the pit. Maggie, bravest of us all, was wearing sandals in the pit. Her toes were soaked in blood, and two of her toenails were black and purple. After it ended, she asked, "Are these shows always this short?". I was a wet slouching corpse; she strode forward confidently on hemorrhaged feet. We spasmed and collapsed upon our own electric pulses, the band just gave us an excuse. It was a different vibe: the crowd has taken control, and Beth gave it over to us. I don't know what to make of it, though it is good to see that we, the audience, are taking back the revolution. This was particularly evident as several dykes took off their shirts, put their arms in the air, and laughed at the empty stage when the final encore ended. Since there was no reports of compound fractures, synchronized on stage defecation, or audience members inspired to start clawing at the own faces with rage, I suspect this event was considered only a moderate artistic success by local scenester standards. Well kids, there's always next week. Break a leg. Labels: That's Entertainment Friday, July 04, 2003
Press Attacks on the President? Bring ?Em On!
Thursday?s print edition of the Wall Street Journal included excerpts of an interview with the elder George Bush, conducted by Texas Monthly magazine. (I?d link to it directly, but Texas Monthly doesn?t offer access to this article online. However, in a stroke of traffic generating genius, full access is provided to an article on seafood restaurants in Galveston. If you?re interested, please Google away - and stay there, you sick freaks.) This exchange with the former President proves that the old man is the block from which our current President was struck: Texas Monthly: What?s interesting, I think, is that the press takes your silence as an indication of differences between you and the President. The fact that you?re not speaking out supposedly says something. George Bush 1: When a friend of mine like Jimmy Baker or Brent Scowcroft says, ?Well, we ought to do more about the Middle East,? the press says, ?It looks to us like they?re reflecting what president number forty-one really feels but doesn?t want to say,? which is all bullsh*t, if you?ll excuse the expression. TM: We can edit that out. GB1: You can print it. At this stage in my life, I don?t care. Later Bush commented on reports that he?s giving policy advice to his son, taking time to zing a former nemesis along the way: GB1: We don?t need that. I don?t try to be this old, senior former president who?s giving a lot of free advice. I don?t have all the information to start with, and I don?t have the ?need to know? for that highly selective intelligence. And so if I don?t know, why the heck should I pop off? I?ll leave that to Newt Gingrich.? Happy Independence Day and may God Bless America. Thursday, July 03, 2003
While on vacation last week in Colorado I stayed at a palatial mountain home near Breckenridge. It was truly a magnificent abode with stunning views. My only complaint, other than the slothy dial up internet connection?
Ants. In the home. Not many but you could see signs that trouble was on the horizon. While reading on the deck one afternoon I had to fend off several of them who penetrated through the floor and were exploring for food (or my beer which I valiantly defended). You would also find them in the bathrooms, bedroom, or kitchen on a regular basis usually in small groups on one or two. But it was in the yard that the true extent of the threat could be observed. Formidable anthills surrounded the house on all sides. A mere footfall or poke with a stick on one of these redoubts would cause thousands to swarm out in seconds to seek out the source of the intrusion. I had the sense that the ants were tightening the noose around the house moving their hills inexorably closer by the day like the Viet Minh trenches slowly shrinking the perimeter and strangling the French defenders at Dien Bien Phu. It was not my house. It was not my fight. But just a few weeks ago it was. One Thursday morning as I prepared to depart for my 6:00am pre-work skate I was alerted to an ant incursion in my home. These were small ants (I believe piss ants is the proper scientific term), more of a nuisance than a real threat. But there were more than simply a few scouts. It was a reconnaissance in force. A long column stretched from the side door deep into the kitchen (the Promised Land for ants). After my initial surprise wore off I stepped into action laying down a chemical barrage at the rear (outside) to cut off the column and prevent retreat. Then I used more conventional means (my feet) to mop up the remaining forces. I continued to monitor the field of battle for some moments afterward to make sure that any stragglers were dealt with appropriately. I had won the battle but it was merely another small incident in a long war. There was a time in my youth when I actually was quite pro-ant. My Mom still reminds me that I once explained to her that "ants are my friends". Ah the innocence of children. As I grew with age and responsibility my opinion of ants began to change. My naive assumption that it was possible to win the hearts and minds of these aggressively expansive insects was soon shattered. Once I was old enough to mow my parent's lawn I was able to witness first hand the destruction that these creatures could sow. Anthills could spring up quickly and soon overtook patches of the lawn. They must be dealt with. I soon learned that merely smashing the hills and squashing a few ants was not the solution. Nor was the use of explosive devices. While fun to deliver, Black Cats inserted into the tunnel openings did little lasting damage. After having what appeared to be some initial success with hydrological warfare (a garden hose recreating the Great Flood-"Where's your Noah now?") I was disappointed to see the ants rebuild their colonies within a day or two. Finally after much experimentation I arrived at the Final Solution to the problem. First a thorough saturation of the ant hills with chemical agents (Raid, etc.) . Followed up with a devastating incendiary assault usually employing lawn mower gasoline and a ignition device such as a kitchen match. The results left the hills looking like Hiroshima in 1945, barren and completely devoid of life. I had found the ultimate weapon. Unfortunately my rain of chemical fire also destroyed any remaining grass in or near the hills and hence my Dad was not particularly fond of my methods and the collateral damage that resulted. I was therefore deprived of total victory by having my most effective weapons taken off the table. But I had learned many valuable lessons. And when one day I had a home of my own I came to regard ants the same way Reagan regarded Communists in Central America: 1. They must not be allowed to gain a foothold 2. And it was better to fight them in El Salvador (my yard) than in California (my house). When you go to war with ants it is total war and half measures are sure to fail. Other than boosting you own morale body counts are a poor indicator of success. You must take the fight to where the enemy lives. So these days I keep a constant vigil for ant activities around my home and on occasion will launch spoiling attacks to forestall future ant operations inside my compound. During certain periods of the year ants will conduct a reproductive swarm where winged males and females will emerge from the hills and scatter to attempt to form new colonies. It is an excellent time to conduct chemical operations against them as you rarely find such large numbers so exposed. I also enlist the aid of allies within my home during the summer months to limit ant incursions. To help interdict ant traffic I discretely allow spiders (for some reason my wife doesn't appreciate the need for my arachnid alliances) to set up shop along known ant routes. They can prove quite effective in their efforts and watching a spider wrap up one of the intruders to snack on later can really be quite enjoyable. Unfortunately, I have been forced to tolerate a major ant presence only a few yards from my front door for the last few years. Carpenter ants have established themselves in a rather large and old tree in my front yard. I refer to the stronghold as the Black Tower. Two years ago they launched a campaign to overrun my house through (and around) the front entryway and it was only through extreme vigilance and devastating responses that I was able to turn back the assault. Up to this point I have not elected to enlist mercenaries (an exterminator) with the means to eliminate the carpenter ant base but instead have opted for a policy of containment. MacArthur was never allowed to realize his plans to use nuclear devices to radiate the Yalu River and prevent Chinese troops and supplies from entering North Korea but I have embraced his strategy and have laid down a toxic belt of powdered ant poison around the tree (and have established a smaller secondary barrier around the front entry) to deny the carpenter ants access. For the most part this has proved to be an effective approach although the defensive system does require regular maintenance as rain tends to wash the powder away. Another minor victory in a long and never ending war. The ants will be back someday. Someday soon. But I'll be ready. I always am. Labels: Nature
"I really want to live in a country where the poor people are fat."
Very appropos for the coming holiday Dinesh D'Souza gives us his top ten list of the reasons why he loves the United States.
Brian Lambert ? A Cry For Help?
Brian Lambert is an entertainment columnist for the St. Paul Pioneer Press. His specific assignment is to cover television and radio, with an emphasis on news programming. He?s been on this beat for at least a decade, watching and listening to untold thousands of hours of broadcasts from every mainstream news outlet, thus qualifying him as something of an expert in the field. And .... Brian Lambert doesn?t believe there?s a liberal bias in the mainstream media. Dementia is not a pleasant experience, for those suffering from it or for those affected by their actions (as his readers in St. Paul will attest). A pattern of delusional behavior, if left untreated, can only lead to a steady, spiraling descent into utter madness, ultimately leaving the victim wholly incapacitated and unable to operate in society. Sadly, the case of Brian Lambert has been allowed to degenerate for years, without anyone intervening in an attempt to salvage the man?s mind. His employers, his readers, his colleagues in the media have all stood by and watched while Lambert not only denies reality, but also creates paranoid delusions to justify his fantasy world. Take this example, from a recent column, where he characterizes the identification and analysis of liberal media as: ?conservatives' masterfully choreographed accusations of bias? And he sets the context of these accusations with some classic examples of projection (or is it transference?): "With mainstream news organizations all getting tarred by the New York Times' ethical lapses, and commercial talk radio flagellating actual journalists as often as they hype their sponsors, there's no end of readers, viewers and listeners venting opinions on media inaccuracy, sloth and, of course, bias. Anyone in the business of journalism (as opposed to attitude, infotainment and "op-ed" TV) recognizes a certain parrot-like quality to most such accusations. Many voices simply repeat what they hear with no great infusion of individual thought." Lambert?s even been able to find other similarly delusional individuals to support his own beliefs. A quote from NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin (who I?ll assume does indeed exist, as Lambert has not shown acute symptoms of a multiple personalities disorder ? yet): ?... my own view is that NPR has been quite careful to present voices from both sides of issues. If anything," he says, "we may have put more conservatives on in recent months." "What [critics] really want is to hear their own opinions reflected back at them, and they really resent anyone who contradicts what they think." I am not a mental health professional. But since no one else has volunteered to attempt to salvage the mind of Brian Lambert, I guess it?s up to me. The first step in helping this man is getting him to admit there is a problem. To open a door into the dark, feverish dream world he has created and let the sunlight of reality shine in, just long enough for him to realize he needs some help (at which point a team of trained psychologists can take over). In order to do this I intend to present him with examples of liberal media bias. Examples of someone from the mainstream media, tasked with objectively reporting the news (particularly in a non-political realm), yet who consistently chooses to infuse their reporting with their political beliefs. And I see no better example of this than .... Brian Lambert. What better way to expose his delusion than to show his own actions as examples of that which he denies? What follows are a few examples from recent Lambert columns. And please remember, he?s an entertainment reporter, not a political columnist. Further, recall the point of this exercise. It?s not to prove his editorializing as factually incorrect (even though it is). Rather, it?s to show a liberal bias in the writing of news, which he denies exists. Read on and try to guess which team he?s playing for: From a recent column on the political prospects of those working in the entertainment industry. His characterization of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger: ?...a mostly monosyllabic ex-bodybuilder [who] can use Hollywood's celebrity hype machine to simultaneously launch another sequel about a killer robot and a gubernatorial campaign in California.? Now his characterization of Democrat Jerry Springer, a potential candidate for US Senate in Ohio: "the comparatively erudite host of a daily TV show" and "a disarmingly reasonable, moderate populist, as calculated as any other, most likely, but directly plugged into a huge, largely ignored and otherwise apathetic segment of the population." Bonus comment, his characterization of potential Republican voters: "the terrified family-values crowd" From another column, on CSPAN?s coverage of Iraq, here?s his characterization of the American motivations for the war and the prospects for postwar success: "America's nation-building adventure in Iraq has a long way to go before it turns a stable corner, and there's no convincing reason to be sanguine that that will happen." To most of us, that would be enough evidence to snap us back into reality. But Lambert?s been lost in this fog for some time, and I suspect this radical therapy will need to continue for a while. Therefore, as he continues to write his bias laden columns, I?ll continue to compassionately confront him with the evidence. (Note, if I never write on this subject again, assume I cured him. And in advance I have one more comment for Brian Lambert - you?re welcome.)
Coddling Hatch?
Mitch Berg has finally completed his opus, an in depth investigation of Minnesota Attorney General Mike Hatch's involvement in the American Bankers case. Mitch shows that the real issue is not any serious wrongdoing by Hatch (while his actions were not illegal they certainly pushed the ethical boundaries of his position) but rather the kid gloves treatment that he received from the local media, in particular the Star Tribune.
You Want Some Of This?
The latest example of why the Sally housecoats and Johnny lunchpails love GW's simple, straight forward rhetoric: Saying U.S. troops were capable of responding to ambush attacks in Iraq, President Bush maintained Wednesday such violence would not undercut his resolve to keep Americans there until stability was restored. ?My answer is: Bring them on,? he said of the hit-and-run attackers. ?We have the force necessary to deal with the situation.? "Bring them on?" Sounds more like Ranier Wolfcastle ("up and at them") than George Bush. I have a hunch his actual quote was more along the lines of "bring 'em on". Wednesday, July 02, 2003
It's A Dirty Job But...
To continue what seems to be today's theme about dedication to scientific pursuits I offer up this experiment by Stephen Pollard (courtesy of NRO's The Corner) to test the effectiveness of a purported "miracle" hangover cure: It may not have been intended as a hangover pill, but then Viagra wasn?t originally an impotence pill. It was developed to improve the blood supply to the heart of angina sufferers, and its rather useful side-effect was discovered accidentally. But the number of men who suffer from erectile dysfunction is minuscule compared with the number who get a hangover after drinking ? let alone after drinking the copious quantities that I intended to sink. And indeed he did pursue his quest with gusto. After consuming fourteen glasses of various wines during dinner he decided to "take it to another level" as a friend of mine likes to say: Years of experience have taught me that nothing guarantees an epic hangover better than port and cigars, so time for a Cuban Cohiba Esplendidos and Taylors 1977. This port is as good as it gets, and I made sure ? on your behalf, remember, to push forward the frontiers of knowledge ? to have as much as I could. I?m sorry, I?m sorry, I?m sorry; but by this stage I had lost track of the exact amount. I might not get a hangover in the morning, but I am only human. And drunk. Let?s say three glasses for the sake of argument. Just to be certain of a hangover I retired to the bar, and did the ultimate no-no: mixed wine and spirits, with a welcoming succession of single malts: Glenmorangie, Laphroaig and Bruichladdich. That's quite a bit of imbibing by anyone's standards. And it wasn't as if he drinking a case Milwaukee's Best either. He was hitting it hard but he was hitting the good stuff. His initial results were very positive: I woke on Saturday with a clear head and a sense of triumph. It had worked! Never again need days be lost to the after-effects of the night before. The pill was a work of genius, a wonder drug. The world was a better place. But alas, as so often happens in life his joy was fleeting: As if. Euripides knew what he was talking about: those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad. The worst hangovers are the slow burners ? the ones that creep up on you when you think you?ve left the danger behind. Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to the worst hangover suffered by mankind. The sweating, writhing, barely-conscious lump in coach 9, seat 25, on the 09:56 from Brussels to Waterloo was me. I was barely alive, as one could only reasonably expect after 11 glasses of wine and three each of dessert wine, port and whisky. Nootropil might work for some people ? indeed, my drinking companions all reported excellent results ? but it didn?t work for me. Benjamin Franklin wasn?t quite right when he said that ?nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes?. He forgot hangovers. And so ends yet another quest by man to conquer the damnedable hangover. It wasn't the first and most certainly will not be the last. The only sure cure that I've discovered over the years is the old age advice to simply: "Sleep It Off"
What Did You Do On Your Summer Vacation?
Reading the new book ?Krakatoa? by Simon Winchester, is proving to be a joy. The publicity on the book promised a comprehensive telling of the events surrounding the Krakatoa eruption on August 27, 1883 (still the largest volcanic eruption in recorded history). And that topic is fascinating enough on its own. But as a bonus, a particularly interesting story line in the history of science is presented, in all its unrestrained, lurching, and unpredictable glory. Understanding how the Krakatoa explosion happened depends on understanding plate tectonics, the theory of which resulted from observations made independently in the fields of biology, geology, paleontology, cartography, and meteorology. These many paths traveled over the last 150 years in order to reach the graceful, grand conclusion are concisely and fascinatingly told by Winchester. The key scientific discoveries occurred in the Victorian era, when men from the Western world (primarily the British Isles) studied at the great universities, then scattered across the globe making observations, conducting experiments, collecting samples, all the while suffering hardships, risking their reputations and fortunes, and quite often their lives. All for nothing more than the pursuit of knowledge. The ultimate benefit these men hoped for was traveling through London on a cold winter?s night, standing in front of their colleagues at the lecture room of the Linnean Society?s headquarters in Piccadilly Circus, delivering a paper with a name like ?On the General Geographical Distribution of the Members of the Class Aves, With A Particular Interest in the Islands Around New Guinea,? and receiving ..... approval. No wider fame and certainly no great fortune was realized or expected. All they desired was to reveal the truth and thus gain the the approval of this small, often jealous group of fellow scientists. And even if you had the advantage in being right in your thesis, approval was not guaranteed. German explorer and meteorologist Alfred Wegener first proposed the now accepted theory of continental drift in 1915. To which the majority of his colleagues responded with comments like, ?Anyone who valued his reputation for scientific sanity would never dare support such a theory? and ?Utter damn rot!? Wegener?s approval wouldn?t occur until long after his death, proof of his theories wasn?t achieved until the mid-1960s. However, shed no tears for Wegener. Yes, being recognized as a genius in your own time does have its advantages (ask the Atmoizer for how that feels). But the mere pursuit of truth in the physical sciences also provides its own rewards, including travel to exotic locations and physical adventure. As an example, take Simon Winchester, the author of "Krakatoa," who in 1965, during a summer break at Oxford, participated in gathering what is considered conclusive proof of continental drift. After seeing an ad on a bulletin board, he volunteered to serve with an expedition traveling to an unexplored part of east Greenland. Despite having no relevant experience or training, he was accepted. The team was sent to take basalt rock samples, which contained small crystals of iron-oxide compounds. When these basalt rocks were in their molten, plastic phase (30 million years ago), the iron oxide crystals acted as small compasses, perfectly aligning themselves with the magnetic poles of the Earth. Once the rock solidified, these micro-compasses were frozen in place. Fast forward 30 million years, a team of Englishmen arrive, drill into the ground, drag rock samples into the light and show that these magnetites are indeed not pointing at the magnetic poles. And there you have it - conclusive evidence of continental drift. Scientific conclusions like that are exciting stuff. But not half as exciting as the process of getting there. Read Winchester?s account below and think about how you probably spent the summer between your junior and senior years in college engaged in antics more suitable for a Girls Gone Wild video. .....our little red ship began bucking and cracking her hull through the thick and wind-scoured pack ice. From then on, as we went higher and higher above the Arctic Circle, every subsequent moment, every experience, became vivid, intense, unforgettable. We landed on a remote beach on the iron-bound coast of the immense, mysterious island. We climbed, in brilliant sunshine, the ice wall and then the crevassed length of a fast-moving, mile-wide glacier. We spent weeks camping high on the ice cap. We rappelled down sheer walls of black basalt. We skied scores of miles over snow none had ever been before. We learned to speak the Danish-Inuit linguistic blend called Greenlandic. We grew beards, we grew strong, we became bronzed by the perpetual midnight sun. And when the season was ending, and the dark and the cold crept in, we would thaw our boots out each morning over the Primus stove and watch as our hot washing water, when we tossed it into the air, fell back as a mist of perfect snowflakes. What happened in that glorious high Arctic summer still remains paramount as the purest of adventures, the dream of every schoolboy everywhere. Despite my having subsequently lived a life of fairly unremitting world wandering ... that two-month expedition to [Greenland] has never once been matched.
Biology Quiz
There?s something really disturbing about this story. I?m thinking about the following sentence in particular: ?it may even be technically possible one day to transplant a womb into a man, and use hormone injections to allow a pregnancy to succeed. Consider, for example, this scenario. Harold feels that he is a woman trapped in a man?s body so he has a sex change operation. I?m sorry, that?s insensitive. What I meant to say is that Harold elected to have ?male to female gender reassignment surgery?. Harold?s new name is Hazel. Now, out on the town one evening, Hazel/Harold becomes enamored with Rob. Rob used to be called Amy but recently had female to male gender reassignment surgery, specifically ?penile implantation for the neo-phallus patient?. Later that night, our two friends?um...reach the defining moment for a ?successful conclusion to (their) gender reassignment surgery?. This relationship continues for several months until Hazel/Harold, unable to control her maternal instincts, tells Rob/Amy that she needs something more from him. Hazel/Harold figures that a child ought to do the trick. This is, of course, impossible in the truly natural sense as both participants? plumbing is merely roughed in. This is where it gets interesting. Hazel/Harold approaches her mother, Carla, with a proposition. Carla would donate her womb to Hazel/Harold and, in return, she gets the grandchild that she always wanted but could never have, since all of her other children that are still living as their birth gender have vowed never to procreate and have taken the appropriate steps to insure this. Carla figures this isn?t such a bad deal since she really isn?t using her womb at this point in her life, with her husband Joe being impotent and all, and she agrees. Rob/Amy's working set of ovaries produce the necessary egg and Hazel/Harold contributes the needed fertilization, which he conveniently set aside before his transformation in case such a need should arise, and the equation is complete. Nine months later, Baby Forrest is born. Who is his mother? I?m waiting?.... Isn?t science wonderful? Tuesday, July 01, 2003
"You sir have the boorish manners of a Yalie"
A good ol? fashioned insult. Perhaps a lost art in these days of passive-agressive emails and blog attacks (see my collected work for evidence). It seems the days of the witty diss are behind us. So go here for a compendium of some of the better shots taken over the years. Enjoy. What other problems do you have besides being unemployed, a moron and a dork? - - - John McEnroe (to a spectator) Any political party that can?t cough up anything better than a treacherous brain-damaged old vulture like Hubert Humphrey deserves every beating it gets. They don?t hardly make ?em like Hubert any more - but just to be on the safe side, he should be castrated anyway. - - - Hunter S. Thompson (about Hubert Humphrey, 1973) I'm just sick and tired of presidents who jog. Remember, if Bill Clinton wins, we're going to have another four years of his white thighs flapping in the wind. - - - Arianna Huffington, 1995 How can they tell? - - - Dorothy Parker (hearing of Calvin Coolidge's death) Oh my God, look at you. Anyone else hurt in the accident? - - - Don Rickles (to Ernest Borgnine You will either die on the gallows or of a loathsome disease. - - - John Montague (to John Wilkes) . . . That depends on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress. - - - John Wilkes (in reply) He couldn't ad-lib a fart after a baked-bean dinner. - - - Johnny Carson (about Chevy Chase)
Takin' What They're Giving 'Cause I'm Blogging For A Livin'
Yesterday the Minneapolis Star Tribune had an article on a few local folks who are using blogs to help their businesses: Norman Butler immediately tells his customers what's going on at his two Northfield restaurants, the Contented Cow and Chapati. Chuck Olsen is trying to get financing for a documentary, "Blogumentary," from people all over the world. They do this without leaving their office chairs. Butler and Olsen keep weblogs or blogs, Internet journals that usually are updated daily or at least several times a week. They are stocked with a variety of content that includes text, photos and links to other Web sites. Links to other web sites you say? What a novel idea. Perhaps one day in the future the Strib's web site might even include such revolutionary concepts. I find it hard to believe that in an online story about blogs the Strib wouldn't think to include links to the blogs they were discussing. For those of you interested you can check out Chuck Olsen's blog here and the Blogumentary site here. Consultants have also appeared to help businesses run blogs: Griff Wigley, owner of Wigley & Associates of Northfield, has taught several Minnesota companies to run blogs. He said blogs enable people to see a human side to a company. "You have to be aware what's on your mind, what's interesting to you, and write from your heart about it in a cogent way," Wigley said. "It reinforces your own values and makes it typically interesting to read by other people because they know it's coming from you." And in fashion typical of consultants they seem to have managed to milk the opportunity for all it is worth: In his business, Wigley spends several weeks teaching company owners the basics, which include writing entries, changing text style and adding links and pictures. Several weeks? Pardon my skepticism but what exactly is it about blogging that requires SEVERAL WEEKS of training? Is it the pointing or the clicking that eats up most of time at these training sessions? Perhaps my cynicism stems from the fact that here at Fraters Libertas our new employee blogging training consists of a tersely worded e-mail with a link that essentially says: Go here. Follow instructions. If you have questions don't bother us. If you can't figure it out on your own you must have the brain power of retarded squirrel and would not be a good fit for our organization. Good day.
|
TALK O' THE TOWN 
Listen to the Northern Alliance Radio Network on Saturdays from 11am 'til 3pm on AM 1280-The Patriot:
|
![[Powered by Blogger]](bloggerbutton1.gif){kind=small}
