While reading a bit about the more recent Roger Ebert kerfuffle, I came across this brief essay on a recently uncovered E.E. Cummings poem. At the time it was being suggested that the use in the poem of one of the coarsest words in the English language would naturally result in the undoing of E.E. Cummings' reputation as an important writer and poet.
I had more than a passing fascination with the re
mind bending acts of linguistic
ɯsıuoıʇɹoʇuoɔ that were the hallmarks
of E.E. Cummings.
While Mr. Ebert's thoughts have ceased to be relevant to me, I was pleasantly surprised to find him an aficionado of Mr. Cummings' work. His thoughtful defense of the "troublesome" poem in question was marred only by the repetition of the assertion that poems are not supposed to have meaning; they are simply supposed to exist.
Regardless, I find that I share an enthusiasm with Mr. Ebert. And perhaps it is better to focus more on that which we share in common with one another than to focus on our disagreements.
At least from time
In some parts of the world, a lack of water is a serious problem. In others, the reverse is true.
"One of the biggest problems we'll experience with this is that it is far and above and beyond any previous experience as far as cfs," remarked Schlag. "Rating curves just don't apply anymore. A person is left to their own devices to come up with numbers."
Why you should never, ever, ever, ever trust the government.
This operation could not have taken place without the cooperation of the Department of Homeland Security — DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano should bear responsibility for her agency’s actions. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has apparently lied to Congress about when he knew of Gunwalker, and considering the scope of the operation it is implausible that he was not involved in its implementation.
“The proposition that the government is always right is manifested either in corruption or benefits to ‘preferred’ companies,” he said. “My choice is different. The… economy ought to be dominated by private businesses and private investors. The government must protect the choice and property of those who willingly risk their money and reputation.”The only way this news could be better is if it were Mr. Obama speaking...instead of it being the President of Russia.
[He] said that the country must begin to attack the problem immediately to avoid “the point of no return from the (economic) models that are moving the country backwards.”
“Corruption, hostility to investment, excessive government role in the economy and the excessive centralization of power are the taxes on the future that we must and will scrap,” he said.
War? Infidels? Beating up women for driving cars?
This time the news, via the WaPo's Jennifer Rubin, is of a proposal from the King of Morocco that his country adopt a new constitution. One that would grant far greater authority to elected officeholders, create a judiciary, enshrine rights for women and minorities, and establish the King of Morocco as the guarantor of the right of people of all faiths to worship freely.
On Friday Bashar al-Assad was slaughtering his own people. Iran continued to hold two Americans in prison. Moammar Gaddafi remained in power while the House of Representatives and President Obama bickered about the War Powers Act. And in Morocco a new “landmark” constitution guaranteeing equality for women, empowering an elected parliament and chief executive, and mandating an independent judiciary was rolled out. It’s a measure of just how much the squeaky wheel dominates the media and the U.S. government that there was virtually no U.S. coverage of the historic event, and that as of Sunday night the State Department had not issued a statement.Why our nation's leaders have not seen fit to recognize this historic proposal is a mystery.
The constitution and the speech explode several myths: diversity isn’t possible in a Muslim country; tribal and ethnic divisions make a nation state problematic if not ungovernable; Islam and the secular rule of law are incompatible; and human rights will inevitably be sacrificed if democratic reforms expand in a Muslim country.
Why is an excess of government a bad idea? Because it fosters failure and stifles progress.
That would be the lesson learned by the leader of the Tea Party while he visited Poland.
Read the whole thing.
James Taranto makes the the point in a recent "Best of the Web" column that the media does us a grave disservice when they hide facts from the public that do not fit the media's narrative.
The case in point is the story of the US Marine Corps reservist that was found near Arlington Cemetery with a backpack carrying explosive components. It doesn't appear that he had a finished device, but he did have a laptop that contained words that were at the least suggestive of his mal-intent.
This particular Marine was born in Ethiopia and apparently is muslim.
The problem with the reporting is that only one media outlet deemed this Marine's faith to be worthy of reporting. All of the other media sources either didn't know, or didn't think it was relevant.
The media source that revealed his faith? FoxNews.
Those that didn't? Everyone else.
The obvious harm is that by withholding certain types of information, the media encourages speculation regarding other crimes where that information is irrelevant. One example would be the mass shooting in Orlando a while back. People were speculating that the killer was muslim when in fact the killer was a disgruntled former employee. His faith had nothing to do with motivating his crimes.
Everything relevant to a crime must be reported. A black kid beats up a white kid while shouting racist epithets? Then the race and the epithets had better be reported. Reverse the races? The same information needs to be reported.
In failing to do their job, the media harms us all.