|
Saturday, January 22, 2005Music, When Soft Voices DiePercy Bysshe Shelley Music, when soft voices die, Vibrates in the memory - Odours, when sweet violets sicken, Live within the sense they quicken. Rose leaves, when the rose is dead, Are heap'd for the beloved's bed; And so thy thoughts, when thou art gone, Love itself shall slumber on. 
posted by gbarto at 11:35 PM Friday, January 21, 2005from Il PenserosoJohn Milton Come, but keep thy wonted state, With even step, and musing gait, And looks commercing with the skies, Thy rapt soul sitting in thine eyes: There held in holy passion still, Forget thyself to marble, till With a sad leaden downward cast Thou fix them on the earth as fast. And join with thee calm Peace, and Quiet, Spare Fast, that oft with gods doth diet, And hears the Muses in a ring Aye round about Jove's altar sing.
posted by gbarto at 10:47 PM Thursday, January 20, 2005Most of the sites I frequent have been pretty upbeat about the Inaugural Address, but I expected Marcus at least to have doubts. He did, but also some nice comments on where Bush was reading things rightly. Interesting selection of what to like and not like if you're against the war but for moral values. Have a read.
posted by gbarto at 11:27 PM I did not see the Inaugural Address, but have read it. A very nice piece of rhetoric. If he manages to govern by it, he'll have one helluva second term. What pleases me most is that we are once again talking about freedom, and God given freedom at that. Not freedom granted by the state, nor agreed upon by society. Freedom that governments and societies can only protect but which innately exists. As a good libertarian, I get goosebumps whenever it's suggested that freedom doesn't come from governments, and that governments quashing it are not only in the wrong but on the wrong side of history. Cynics, I know, will yap about freedoms or rights they want and charge hypocrisy, but bottom line, this speech was a good thing, paving the way - if we can just stick to it - for something even better than a second American century: The Freedom Century. Loved the bit about the inability to carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry. Bush has set high standards for himself and us, and while we'll surely fall a little short, being human and all, he's set a good and righteous course to which we ought aspire.
posted by gbarto at 6:34 PM from The Little Girl Lost William Blake In futurity I prophetic see That the earth from sleep (Grave the sentence deep) Shall arise and seek For her maker meek; And the desart wild Become a garden mild
posted by gbarto at 1:20 AM Wednesday, January 19, 2005Say Not the Struggle Nought AvailethArthur Hugh Clough Say not the struggle nought availeth The labour and the wounds are vain, The enemy faints not, nor faileth, And as things have been, things remain. If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars; It may be, in yon smoke concealed, Your comrades chase e'en now the fliers, And, but for you, possess the field. For while the tired waves, vainly breaking, Seem here no painful inch to gain, Far back through creeks and inlets making Comes silent, flooding in, the main. And not by eastern windows only, When daylight comes, comes in the light, In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly, But westward, look, the land is bright.
posted by gbarto at 10:31 PM Instapundit picks up a Kevin Drum post about teaching evolution vs. intelligent design. According to Drum: Darwinism, however, is simply science. School districts are free to stop teaching science if they want, but if they do teach it, they have to teach Darwinism just as much as they have to teach Newtonian mechanics, Boyle's law, and the theory of relativity.There's a peculiar liberal tendency: They want to teach evolution in the schools, but should a species be on the edge of extinction, they want a task force on the ground to make sure that half of the evolutionary process - the dying out of inefficient species, freeing up resources for other species - is stopped. The second bit that I'd note is that Newtonian mechanics and Boyle's Law have something up on evolution: Predictive power. Using Newton's laws or Boyle's Law, you can actually assert what is going to happen within a closed system (sort of, but I really don't want to get in the areas at the margins where quantum mechanics starts giving Newtonian mechanics a tizzy). On the other hand, Darwinism (and the Theory of Relativity) are only theories. They seem to explain the limited data we have, but they aren't the only possibilities. Indeed, some fairly sharp types are starting to question aspects of the Theory of Relativity, too, which would have tickled Einstein pink. However, no one is to question Darwin, because he's sacrally scientific: Einstein just made the world go topsy-turvy; Darwin gave non-believers the feeling of having a leg up on believers. And in a way the average person could understand. That's because Darwin, himself, wasn't that spectacular. His journals and other writings show a moderately perceptive guy who was able to synthesize a lot of the things that were being said about science and society in his day and condense it into key phrases. I'm not saying that Darwinism is wrong. Though I don't "believe in it," I do see it as perhaps the most plausible theory out there. But I do think a lot of liberals take it overly seriously because their real concern isn't a plausible explanation for the multitude of species but a chance to stick their thumb in the eye of Christian conservatives. It's a bit odd, this canonization of a Victorian churchman. It's also a bit odd how the American liberal perceives Darwinism as working. Somehow, it takes place among, but not within species. At least not where humans are concerned. The same liberals who hail Darwin and insist upon evolutionary theory are loath to pass out handouts, say, of what Darwin thought of the "savages" in the Tierra del Fuego or about why Tahitians didn't need to be advanced because, hey, who needs industry when your breakfast falls out of the trees every morning. I don't really want to pick any fights here. As I said, I think Darwin's theory is plausible. But I'm not a Darwinist, anymore than I'm an Einsteinist. (Actually, I think evolution happens but that it might have been set in motion by an intelligent design - sort of a divine DNA perfection routine.) Evolution, at present, is a theory, and those who act as though "It's science - it's truth" show themselves to be, at bottom, part of another sort of cult which worships the an-sacral as unthinkingly as Catholics are purported to murmur their rosaries. Tomorrow, we could get evidence supporting the idea of intelligent design. We could get more info supporting the idea of natural selection. If you are a Darwinist, you will automatically hail the second and dismiss the first. But if you're a responsible science teacher, you'll cut out the article and talk with your class about what the data do and don't support. So long as evolution is just a theory, Darwinism as truth is just a cult. Kevin Drum and most of the MSM belong to that cult. But anybody who cares more about science than sticking it to the hicks takes evolution as it is - a theory that has not yet been proved or disproved, not holy writ. ID, for it's part, is at least a hypothesis: there's a core idea that can be disproved. Given this, I'd be teaching evolution as our best guess and mentioning ID as a second possibility with evidentiary problems (how do you prove intelligent design if you can't directly access the intelligence?). But writing off ID while trumpeting Darwinism as "the truth" isn't science, it's politics.
posted by gbarto at 5:11 PM via the TurkeySis: Man eats underwear to beat breathalyzer The link notes: This article supposedly ran late in 1998 in the Advocate in Red Deer, Canada. While there apparently is such a newspaper in Red Deer, Canada, (Red Deer Advocate, 2950 BremnerAv Red Deer T4R-1P7 (403)343-2400), I really haven't checked any further than that and don't even know whether there is a Stettler, Canada.... but the story is too good to ruin by checking the facts.Also seemingly in newsprint, but never confirmed to have run: 
posted by gbarto at 4:57 PM CBS Planning Evening News 'Revolution' Network May Bail on Single-Anchor Format TurkeyBlog suggests new concept: Reporter-Commentator format Among ideas floating around for CBS News: John Stewart and Katie Couric for anchors. Has anyone else noticed how much funnier the media has found "The Daily Show" with Stewart trashing Bush instead of Killbourn trashing Clinton? In my own humble opinion, Killbourn was sharper and funnier, but maybe that's because I'm part of the "anti-media". I fail to see what makes a "multi-anchor" format revolutionary. Local television has been using it for decades and with very mixed results. Come to think of it, CNN's flagship newscasts have been multi-anchor from the beginning too. Or is CBS talking about a different anchor every night? I think having multiple anchors could have some benefit. The right co-anchor could have looked at Gunga-Dan on day two of the memo story and said, "And now, here's Captain Ahab in his continuing pursuit of the big one" and taken a lot of air out of the story while reassuring the country that at least some CBS reporters were sane. Then again, why didn't a producer or, say, head of the news division, say exactly this in a preproduction meeting? You really get the feeling Heyward wanted Dan gone at any cost. CBS' problem, though, isn't just good old Dan. The problem is that when a producer like Mary Mapes works with a "reporter" like Dan Rather you don't stand much chance of getting contrary viewpoints, not even offered as a way to cover your rear. Here's my solution for CBS News:
posted by gbarto at 8:56 AM Tuesday, January 18, 2005Dean for DNC Chairfrom a letter to the Chron supporting Dean for DNC Chair: Dean's detractors say that the New Englander is the wrong chairman to improve the party's image in the South, the Mountain West and other conservative parts of the country. You're never going to change these close-minded and jaded souls. Forget them and get on with it: Revitalize the party. Look forward to the future. Rove operative Ron Lowe is from Nevada City and is looking forward to a permanent Republican majority just as soon as he convinces Democrats that narrow-minded Ohioans, too, aren't worth fighting for.
posted by gbarto at 10:36 PM Hooray, hooray! According to E.J. Dionne, "the president has an opportunity on Thursday for a kind of redemption." One wonders, though. If E.J. is so hot to see Bush "redeemed," one would think he would have used his WaPo column to help the President win re-election as a uniter, not a divider. Instead, he used that platform to push Kerry and denounce Bush as a tyrannical dunce. It may, in fact, be Dionne who needs redemption. Bush has his flaws and foes, but it's Dionne's candidate and Dionne's prescriptions for our country that came up short in November. While Dionne's speech might go a little ways with those who can't forgive Bush for winning, it probably wouldn't play with those who stuck by him in his reelection fight. But it's gratifying to see E.J. trying to bring America together. If anyone has it handy, please forward the similarly themed column E.J. penned in '96 about Clinton needing to reach out to Republicans with his second term secured.
posted by gbarto at 10:27 PM from Sappho’s Song Leticia Elizabeth Landon Farewell, my lute, and would that I Had never waked thy burning chords! Poison has been upon thy sigh, And fever has breathed in thy words. Yet wherefore, wherefore should I blame Thy power, thy spell, my gentlest lute? I should have been the wretch I am Had every chord of thine been mute. It was my evil star above, Not my sweet lute that wrought me wrong; It was not song that taught me love, But it was love that taught me song.
posted by gbarto at 10:23 PM Monday, January 17, 2005A Psalm of Life – second section (of two)Henry Wadsworth Longfellow Art is long, and Time is fleeting, And our hearts, though stout and brave, Still, like muffled drums, are beating Funeral marches to the grave. In the World’s broad field of battle, In the bivouac of Life, Be not like dumb, driven cattle! Be a hero in the strife! Trust no Future, howe’er pleasant! Let the dead Past bury its dead! Act, – act in the living Present! Heart within, and God o’erhead! Lives of great men all remind us We can make our lives sublime, And, departing, leave behind us Footprints on the sands of Time.
posted by gbarto at 5:01 PM Titan Images If you haven't, be sure to check out the Titat images at SaturnToday.com and anthony.liekens.net. Must-see! (via Instapundit) They've got everything in the world, including one for 3-D glasses!
posted by gbarto at 4:45 PM Racing from behind the curve... The TurkeyBlog would like to join the chorus of voices that thinks banning Nazi symbols in response to Prince Harry's latest antics is stupid. It's just a matter of time before the Holocaust deniers get their most fervent wish: all useful reminders of Germany's Nazi past pushed into dark corners where only "hysterical Jews" notice them at all. If history is any suggestion, we're somewhere between 20 and 50 years to the next serious pogrom. At which point the young will respond to a handful of cries of "Never again!" with their response to almost everything: "Never what again?" If the word "pogrom" isn't familiar to you, you can chalk yourself as one of many successes for Germany's "move on" program. Bottom line: Nazi paraphernalia should be widely seen, circulated, demonized and - as happened with a fair share of delightful and not so delightful films in the not so distant past - ridiculed. In this vein, Prince Harry performed a valuable public service in making an ass of himself. If only the tastelessness of European policymakers were so transparent. Wilde said: The nineteenth century dislike of realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.Somewhere in there lies the psychological foundations for a twenty-first century Europe that cannot tolerate Prince Harry's uniform, but which overlooks the French diplomat who denounced Israel as "a shitty little country." But the whole enterprise has by now turned into a psychic mishmash too foul and disordered even to achieve the coherence of paradox.
posted by gbarto at 3:47 PM Sunday, January 16, 2005A Psalm of Life – first section (of two)Henry Wadsworth Longfellow Tell me not, in mournful numbers, "Life is but an empty dream!" For the soul is not dead that slumbers, And things are not what they seem. Life is real! Life is earnest! And the grave is not its goal; "Dust thou art, to dust returnest," Was not spoken of the soul. Not enjoyment, and not sorrow, Is our destined end or way; But to act, that each to-morrow Finds us farther than to-day.
posted by gbarto at 1:22 PM Why they hate usInstapundit links a story on how some Americans are "fighting back" against offshoring. They're finding out which Multi-Nationals use out-of-country customer support then making abusive calls: "I have inside knowledge of call centres, having worked in several. It's crucial that the agents be efficient. Barraging them with 60-second calls will ruin their stats and also lower their morale. Eventually, they'll start thinking 'another damn rude American a******' every time a call comes up. All of this will have a cumulative effect. If 100 people across the US would commit to spending 10 minutes a day, we could cripple them, and bring those jobs back to the US.""Why do they hate us?" the liberals asked after 9/11. Maybe it's because every American liberal regards it as his birthright to work in a good American job at a good American wage and to hell with anybody else in the rest of this world. From the farmers to the steelworkers and autoworkers to the techies, there is the agreed upon notion that American products should be sold the world over to make them prosperous and happy, while U.S. markets should be carefully controlled lest these mighty workers have to compete with Asians, Mexicans or even, God help us, the French! (I was living in France when Clinton put tariffs on French steel.) We've heard a lot about cultural sensitivity. We already know that neither the president nor anyone on the right has any. So let's look at what cultural sensitivity is, as practiced by those who celebrate it most loudly. We can do this by looking at just one issue, the treatment of foreigners. Good foreigners 1) An unemployed Mexican in Guadalajara is a fellow human who needs foreign aid. 2) An unemployed Mexican in California is a fellow human who needs welfare. 3) A Mexican cleaning toilets in California is a fellow human who needs state assistance and a driver's license regardless of his immigration status. 4) An employed Cambodian making sneakers for ten cents an hour is a fellow human being who needs to be removed from that demeaning job and given foreign aid. Bad foreigners 1) A Mexican making a living wage building cars in a Mexican auto factory is stealing an American job. He should get back to selling rugs to UAW workers on vacation in Mexico. 2) A Chinese worker in Silicon Valley is stealing an American job. He should go back to China and maybe work on a silk farm so that American-born tech workers can get nice shirts cheaply. 3) An Indian earning a (barely) living wage in a call center in India is stealing an American job. He should put on an orange sarong and earn his living begging for rice from American tourists exploring Buddhism. More succinctly put, a bad foreigner is one who has achieved self-sufficiency by successfully competing in an international market economy. A good foreigner is reliant upon the generosity of liberals who prove they care by passing out money while perpetuating socio-economic structures that assure that they (the liberals) will always be the ones with money to pass out and the foreigners will always be the ones who need it. The people abusing call-center operators ought to be ashamed of themselves. Not only because they're rude and abusive to fellow human beings, but because of what they tacitly admit by this tactic: On a level playing field, they can't compete with Indian call-center operators. They must rely upon sabotage. While we're on the subject, let's try out on more angle on this: Assume: 1) French autoworkers feel like the sale of American cars in France threatens their jobs. 2) They start popping the hoods of American cars and loosening wires or bolts or fussing with gaskets when no one is looking. 3) They (almost) alone know why American cars are suddenly always parked by the roadside in France. 4) Ford and GM, sick of dealing with questions about shoddy workmanship, stop shipping to France and close two plants a piece. In this situation, a) The American liberal celebrates the return of French jobs to France. b) The American liberal says American corporations are stupid, poorly managed and should do something to fix the problem without putting American jobs at risk (without considering the implications for French workers). How many of you guessed "b"? Good. You have passed the reality check. And now you know why they hate us.
posted by gbarto at 10:58 AM |
Archives
|
Day By Day© by Chris Muir.Old TurkeyBlog here.
