The Food Nazis

One of the things about which it can be certain when it comes to life on Planet Earth is that nobody gets out of it alive. As Harry Reasoner once said, in an aphorism I return to frequently because of its essential truth:

The idea of trying to outguess life, to avoid everything that might conceivably injure your life, is a peculiarly dangerous one. Pretty soon you are existing in a morass of fear. A man makes a sort of deal with life, he gives up things because they are undignified or immoral; if life asks him to cringe in front of all reasonable indulgence, he may at the end say life is not worth it. Because for the cringing he may get one day extra or none; he never gets eternity.

With all due respect to John Greenleaf Whittier, the saddest words of tongue and are not those which read "it might have been," but "we know what's best for you." The phenomenon of the Food Nazi has always been with us, although it was raised to an art form by the actions of our previous First Lady, and the decrees by New York's Mayor "Nanny Bloomberg." It's true, as our beloved Captain Kirk once said, that too much of anything isn't necessarily a good thing, and the same goes for food. The elites often use diet as a way of judging people, of mocking those that they think belong to a lower class, but in doing so they often display their own inhumanity. It's as if they're the spiritual heirs of the Puritans, the proto-fascists who wanted to take all the fun out of everything. The demonization of food, which unsurprisingly has slipped from the government into corporate culture, overlooks the fact that food is not simply a utilitarian item - it's one of the most human things we have, one that speaks most directly to the human condition of man as a social creature.

For example, at my job in Texas, my last boss was one of those Food Nazis. He was a health freak, and one of his first actions when he moved into his office was to get rid of the candy bowl that sat on the counter in front of my desk in the outer office. Chocolate, he opined, was not a good sign to send if you wanted to promote a healthy lifestyle. And if visitors to the office had spent their time grazing at the bowl, or hoarding pieces of candy as if they were planning to use it instead of having to buy Halloween candy each year.

What the Food Nazis often fail to recognize is the power of food as a means of communication if not friendship, an invitation by the bearer to engage in a form of fellowship. The candy acted not so much as a calorie additive, but as a means of human interaction. People would stop in for a bite-size Snickers, but they wouldn't leave without having exchanged a pleasantry or two, or to catch up on the latest news in our respective lives. In this sense, food serves as an opportunity to strengthen a bond that frequently goes wanting in the man-made hustle of the workday. When the candy bowl was abolished - surprise! The level of drop-in visitors to the office diminished to near non-existence. The boss wondered why people weren't more sociable.

His next step was to skip lunch altogether in favor of a power workout, presumably at which people could stop to admire the sweat glistening from his bald pate. Well, perhaps that comment was unfair, but the point is that soon his associates became extremely self-conscious about their own eating when attending lunch meetings with him (meetings that, by his command, no longer included cookies or other sweet snacks). Should they, like him, be abstaining from lunch? Were they being judged on what they did eat when they were in his presence? More than one confided to me that lunch in the president's office became something of an ordeal, that they were indeed being watched to see what they ate.

I can't imagine what a holiday like Thanksgiving was like in his household. I joked to a friend once that I was tempted to take a picture of our dinner table on Thanksgiving, replete with turkey, mashed potatoes and gravy, green bean casserole, corn casserole, cranberries, and crescent rolls, and text it to him. From one turkey to another, you know. I came to think of him as "The pipsqueak," because although he was not a terribly small man in size, when it came to intellect and feeling for others, he was a small man indeed.

The problem here is that the Food Nazis view food merely as a form of sustenance, a utilitarian means of gathering calories. If one can obtain those necessary calories through foods that supposedly promote a healthier lifestyle, so be it. The problem with this thought is that it misses how food serves as a basic element of the human condition. It provides a level of comfort, of happiness, of an improved quality of life - and since the Food Nazis associate quality of life with number of years lived, they fail to understand how something that objectively may not be healthy is still, in fact, good for you.

Look at the various ways in which food defines our level of humanity. Think of the community social, the "share a plate" mentality that enables people not merely to provide a meal, but to give of themselves. Think of the urge to bake something for the family that has just had a new baby, or to bring to the door a dinner for a family that has just lost a loved one. I can promise you that none of these people paused to read HEPA food standards while they were standing in the kitchen. For these people, food is more than something to consume - it's a way of one person sharing themselves with another. And the act of communal eating is another way in which we are brought together. It's why food is a part of going to the ballpark, or watching a movie. It's why people take their mates to dinner on a date. It's why we wish happy birthday to someone with a cake.

Rockwell's famous painting "Freedom from Want," seen at right, captures the quintessential American moment: the Thanksgiving dinner. Note one of the three words in that title: Freedom. It's something that Americans have always cherished, and while we must always be on guard to ensure that freedom doesn't translate to license, to avarice and greed, we also have to realize that life is made up of simple pleasures - one of which is food - and that someday we're likely to discover that the simple pleasures are the only ones that really matter.

At that first Thanksgiving, the pilgrims understood the ability of food to help form a community, to act as a goodwill gesture. So with the latest edition of Thanksgiving just around the corner, don't be afraid to loosen your belt, to take that nap after the big midday meal - you're in good company. And don't worry about how many years it might take off of your life: none other than Rush Limbaugh reminds us that 100% of those who eat carrots will, someday, die.

Your tuition dollars at work

You have to love this quote from Mark Steyn at SteynOnline:

It is a testament to the wholesale moronization of our culture that there are gazillions of apparently sane people willing to take out six figures of debt they'll be paying off for decades for the privilege of being "taught" by the likes of Professor Bray. 

The Professor Bray to which he refers is Professor Mark Bray of the Gender Research Institute at Dartmouth University, a man whom Steyn says is part of "what passes for the intellectual wing of Antifa." He's one of those guys who thinks that if we just outlaw "hate speech," i.e. speech that he happens to disagree with, then we'll be able to prevent "hate crimes." Says Bray, "We don't look back at the Weimar Republic today and celebrate them for allowing Nazis to have their free-speech rights. We look back and say, Why didn't they do something?"

But as Steyn points out, that isn't exactly how it works:

But the problem with it is that the Weimar Republic—Germany for the 12 years before the Nazi party came to power—had its own version of Section 13 and equivalent laws. It was very much a kind of proto-Canada in its hate speech laws. The Nazi party had 200 prosecutions brought against it for anti-Semitic speech. At one point the state of Bavaria issued an order banning Hitler from giving public speeches.

And a fat lot of good it all did.

If these college professors aren't intelligent enough to know this - especially if they teach, say, history - then they oughtn’t be teaching your children in the first place. And if they do know, then not only are they intellectually dishonest, they're lying in order to prove an ideological plot, and in that case you have no business shelling out your (presumably) hard-earned dollars, while these cheats pollute what Rush Limbaugh refers to as the "young skulls full of mush." The ones who populate groups like Antifa while they spread their own fascist ideas to stamp out freedom of speech on college campuses - and they'll soon be coming to a neighborhood near you.

Either way, this speaks as yet another example of how higher education is destroying the fabric of this nation - while they laugh all the way to your bank.

Roy Halladay, R.I.P.

I flashed back to this earlier in the year, but it seems appropriate to return to it now, as the year comes to a close. This week former baseball star Roy Halladay was killed in a plane crash. SI.com said it well when it referred to him as the "beloved hurler" - not only accurate, but a most appropriate use of retro baseball lingo for a man who by all accounts epitomized the grittiness of the old-time ballplayer.

This post originally ran in 2010, when Halladay became the only the second pitcher to ever throw a no-hitter in the post-season. Read and remember the good times for which Roy Halladay was responsible.

Opera Wednesday

Heard this on the radio this morning, and thought it was worth sharing. It's one of the more interesting scenes in opera, the prologue to Pagliacci, which generally takes place in front of a curtain prior to the start of Act 1, directly addressing the audience. His theme, which is the moral of the story we are about to see, is that "actors have feelings, too." When it's done well it's a real show-stopper, and the applause it garners can be greater even than that for the opera's most famous aria, Vesti la giubba.

Here's the great Sherrill Milnes in a concert performance.

A repeat of 500 years ago? Francis 2017 and Leo X 1517

Our blog primarily started in Catholicism, and although we have many Protestants and Catholics that both read this blog for its numerous other issues, we have to reflect on the corruption of the Catholic Church under Pope Francis and our articles we've posted regarding his corruption of the Church itself.

Damon Linker noted the current Pope wants to liberalise church doctrine on the sanctity of marriage and the family, lacking support and institutional power, so he attempts to sow seeds of change by undermining doctrinal enforcement.  The way the Pope is attempting to do so is reminiscent of the 19th century Anglicans in the United States, as Anglican Church in North America minister Frank Larisey has referenced when liberal professors were teaching in Episcopal Church seminaries.  What Rev. Larisey noted could be a repeat of what we'll see in Catholic schools to bring such liberal seminaries, hiring more liberal professors, and develop the faith and also the mind of future clergy.

The Catholic Church's splintering now could be a repeat of the exact circumstances that led to a Theology professor at the University of Wittenberg to release a statement which its quincentennial is being observed October 31, after a series of incidents with Pope Leo X, including sales of indulgences to pay for the construction of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.   You could pay money for forgiveness of sin, and that infuriated Mr. Luther, who noted people were no longer worried about sin since they could pay for forgiveness instead as part of this fund-raising scheme.  That, of course, led to a major schism in the Catholic Church 500 years ago.  Could the actions of the Pope create a repeat of this legendary document at Wittenberg's All Saints Church sent to Archbishop Albert of Brandenburg?

And what is the document that angered Catholics 500 years ago, but the hatred has somewhat softened in recent years?  Furthermore, Luther's anger at Leo X could be similar now to many Catholics' anger with Francis.  Let's observe this all important document from a half millennium ago.

Throwback Thursday: Man and Superman?

I was never a fan of Mike Tyson, back when I used to follow boxing, although I'll admit that the idea of Tyson playing himself as an animated character in Mike Tyson Mysteries is just short of very, very cool.  What Tyson was good at was being a villain, and having a villain around always makes drama, whether of the sporting kind or not, more compelling.

I've never been a fan of Tiger Woods either, not once I came to know more about it.  His first major victory, at the Masters, was awesome, at least in the sporting sense (and that's not a word I use lightly), and while there were other golfers I preferred, I could at least appreciate his talent. However, the more I got to know about him, the less I thought of him.  While I don't rejoice in his current tribulations, I do often think that what goes around comes around.

And that's the most I would have thought of either Mike Tyson or Tiger Woods, but in this column Joe Posnanski draws some real parallels between the careers of the two men, and in the process takes a look at how we regard greatness; I think it tells us a lot about how we look at our own mortality as well.  The punch line:

Call it Tysonography, our refusal to believe that even the most extraordinary talents fade quicker than we expect. There are a lot of “What’s wrong with Tiger Woods” stories out there right now, and some of them are interesting, but I still suspect they miss the point. Nothing’s wrong with Tiger Woods except that he’s human and he’s fading and it’s the most obvious thing in the world but, like with Mike Tyson, we willfully refuse to accept it.

Very true.  Some people just refuse to believe that Woods can't win it all again.  Hey, maybe they're right.  But if they are, it's not because they have the odds in their favor.

But doesn't this speak to our views on our own mortality as well?  I don't mean the "invincible" stage that teens go through when they think there isn't anything in the world that can hurt them, although that certainly is a part of it.  No, I think it's the way we look at life in general - unable to believe that we aren't the people that we used to be.  That's why we buy Viagra, and color our hair to get the grey out (or buy new hair, which is even better).  It's why we gravitate towards fast cars and trophy spouses, why we dress and talk and act like we're decades younger than we really are.  A perpetual adolescence, some call it, an unwillingness to accept the responsibilities of adulthood.  And that's true, but I think it's also our unwillingness to accept mortality, to think about what happens on judgment day.  There's a lot of whistling past the graveyard going on nowadays, but as Harry Reasoner once said, no matter what man does, no matter what he gives up or avoids, "he may get one day extra or none; he never gets eternity."  Not on this earth, at least.

Anyway, read Poz's column.  It's really good, and not nearly as heavy as I make it out to be.

Originally published February 20, 2015

Opera Wednesday

A friend challenged us with this Tom and Jerry cartoon the other day. He'd seen it on TV while he was surfing around, and immediately thought of us. What, he wondered, was the piece that the orchestra was playing to Tom and Jerry's conducting? Did we know?

It sounded familiar, that was for sure.  I listened to it for a minute, but Judie was the one who came up with it. "That's the overture from Fledermaus!" And so it is. From Johann Strauss' famed operetta Die Fledermaus (which, by the way, has nothing to do with mice!), here's the overture - Tom and Jerry style.

A golf trophy that resembles

The trophy from last week's The CJ Cup at Nine Bridges in the Republic of Korea had me looking at a 1970's (and also 1989) CBS game show which used Quincy Jones' "Chump Change" as its theme song because of the way the trophy was arranged.

According to the PGA TOUR, the trophy consists of movable type that was used in 13th century Korea, which the oldest surviving work is a Buddhist text.  Such classic movable type that is in Hangul.  When the tournament ended, one piece of the text was highlighted in gold, which gives it a feel similar to the Goodson-Todman Now You See It that I referenced above.  I've noted the section that was turned into gold by the engraver following Saturday night's tournament.

The trophy for the restricted invitational tournament consisted of the bridge on the 18th hole and a plaque consisting of the Korean printing press type.  On the trophy, as newsman Chuck Henry can see (he hosted the 1989 version of "Now You See It"), are the names of all 70 players who participated in the tournament.  It becomes a giant game of "Now You See It," and fans could virtually play the game by finding the names of their favourite golfers in the tournament on the press (though it is in reverse image because it is being printed on a piece of paper as a printing press).

As for the tournament winner?  저스틴 토마스, Column 20, circle vertically rows 1-6.  Now You See It . . . and a trophy that will change based on who plays every year.

Throwback Thursday: Y.A. Title, R.I.P.

Yelberton Abraham Title Jr., better known to one and all as Y.A., one of the great quarterbacks in the storied history of professional football, died last week at the age of 90. Our own Hadleyblogger Steve had occasion in the past to use Title's legendary as a source for his "This Just In" news bulletins. You can read those pieces here and here, and remember that it takes a true giant (or Giant, if you prefer) to inspire such lunacy. Enjoy!

Opera Wedneday

I have to admit being skeptical when the Metropolitan Opera announced plans back in 2012 for an HD broadcast of Philip Glass’ opera Satyagraha, based on the life and influence of Mahatma Gandhi. However, having already been surprised once by John Adams’ strangely affecting Nixon in China, we figured there was nothing to lose by checking Satyagraha out in the theater, and it proved to be the right decision.

Satyagraha is an unexpectedly compelling opera, one which is at once both minimal and lush, for although Glass's music is contemporary, it is never atonal, and the notes have the ability to strike at some inner chord. Combined with the effective staging by Phelim McDermott and Julian Crouch, it proves to be, at times, a very moving presentation.

The opera is in three acts, named after people who influenced or were influenced by Gandhi: Leo Tolstoy, Rabindranath Tagore, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Here, from that HD broadcast, is the opera's final aria, the absorbing “Evening Song" (from Act 3; "King"), Gandhi is portrayed by Richard Croft; Dante Anzolini conducts the Metropolitan Opera orchestra.

Postmodern philosophy shown in Hollywood deaths

There seems to be a postmodern philosophy seen with many in the current generation that history of the past (such as that before they were born, or even their parents in some cases) does not exist.  Such was the case of contrasting Twitter feeds following two recent Hollywood deaths of two television programmes when their developers died within the past two weeks.

When CBS was informed Monty Hall had died, the social media pages for Let's Make a Deal posted a tribute to the 96-year old who developed the show as a tribute to him on social media.  Since the show was taping its Halloween 2017 episode and had two more episodes to tape when word came of Mr. Hall's death, CBS turned the last taping of the day into a Monty Hall Tribute episode, complete with Wayne Brady in an empty set to remember Monty Hall, in a manner similar to that of the pitch film pilot that Mr. Hall used in introducing the show to NBC executives (and it was sold, leading to the legendary franchise).

When MTV learned of the death of Hip Hop Squares creator Merrill Heatter recently, their VH1 channel's Twitter page for the show made no reference to his death.  There was no note referencing the death of the show's 91-year old creator.  It was Wink Martindale, no less, on his Twitter, who referenced the death of Mr. Heatter on Sunday morning.

MTV won't even reference the passing of the show's creator when CBS did with their classic game show's own creator.

Jimmy Carter joins the Curses

The Curse of Jimmy Carter is alive and well following the US Failure to qualify for the World Cup last night.  Talk about so many things happening:

Curse of Jimmy Carter.  Jimmy Carter didn't want Americans marching on Luzinski Stadium in 1980.  Thirty-eight years later, an American Outlaws group will not be marching in the stadium.  It is now officially a curse on American teams at what was Lenin Stadium in 1980, and now Luzinski Stadium now.

For further information on the Curse of Jimmy Carter, this document is now officially part of the curse.

Harvey Weinstein Scandal.  Much of Mr. Weinstein's library is now owned by Al Jazeera through its entertainment brand.  The colossal failure of the United States aired on Al Jazeera, no less.

Worse Than NFL Ratings Disaster for Fox.  This isn't as bad as the price Fox will pay for the US failure to qualify for the World Cup.  It's a double whammy now since it makes all of what they've sold for the World Cup pennies on the dollar.  In effect, Fox is now declaring "bankruptcy" on their FIFA contract since the have to return billions in advertising sold for the games since the US failed to make it.  The colossal failure, which aired on Al Jazeera last night (now note Al Jazeera owns much of the Harvey Weinstein Library through Miramax) since Trinidad & Tobago's football federation has home game rights in the US sold to Al Jazeera, means Fox has a "white elephant" in World Cup rights for Russia.

The NFL ratings flop is not as bad as what Fox will endure all 2018 with the Curse of Jimmy Carter.  They may not make it up in the next FIFA cycle.

Throwback Thursday: On telling the truth

When I think of postmodernism I think of people who want to deny truth: There is no such thing as absolute truth. There’s relative truth, subjective truth … or like my friend Werner Herzog would call it, ‘ecstatic truth.’ … I have my own way of describing ‘ecstatic truth.’ I call it ‘lying.’”

Errol Morris, 2010 (H/T Grantland)

Originally published March 3, 2015

Opera Wednesday

And now for something completely different, not to mention lighthearted. (And don't we need that about now?) The United Kingdom Ukuele Orchestra, which is actually based in Germany but is made up of British musicians, with a charming rendition of the William Tell Overture. Enjoy!

The final "Big Deal"

We know Monty Hall from Let's Make a Deal most probable for the Winnipeg, MB native, who died Saturday at 96.  But there are some other well-known clips we've found of the great Monte Halaprin (as he was known) from other television shows besides the show that he is best known (and a statement was posted by the current version).  An ethnic quota ended his dream of medical school despite hard work during the Great Depression and World War II, but he turned to radio and became wanted in the United States.

One of Mr. Hall's first known shows that made him prominent was Video Village, a Heatter-Quigley game show where he was the third, and longest-lasting host, of the CBS Daytime and even Saturday morning (children's version).



Monty and business partner Stefan Hatos developed Split Second, a quiz show that aired from 1972-75 with James Narz (aka Tom Kennedy) and again in 1986-87 with Hall at the helm.


In this 2013 Daytime Emmy Awards ceremony where Mr. Hall was presented with a Lifetime Achievement Award, he was presented his award by Wayne Brady, the current host of the show he made famous.  Beware of the Zonks!



An ad for Glen Campbell:


An ad for General Motors with son Richard, now himself a well-known television producer.  Your humble writer owned that generation Cutlass Supreme that was his daily driver in college, and it was part of a series of "next-generation" commercials by the Rocket brand with many offspring of legends (Peter Graves and Mel Blanc were among the others in the campaign).


One of current Let's Make a Deal model Tiffany Coyne's favourite moments was when she and Carol Merrill appeared together to celebrate the show's 50th anniversary in 2013, which now was Monty's last appearance on the show.

.@TiffanyCoyne will never forget the time she shared the stage with Carol Merrill, the original Let's Make A Deal model! #LMAD #memories pic.twitter.com/YZKUD0NRKZ

— Let's Make a Deal (@letsmakeadeal) August 18, 2017

But CBS put Monty as a "hostage" in a 2014-15 season ruse that resulted in a wild crossover between the network's two daytime game shows that allowed Bob Barker to host The Price Is Right as the storyline was Drew Carey had been kidnapped.  The Twitter war between the two game shows was Carey and the Plinko board had been kidnapped by Wayne Brady's crew, so George Gray and The Price Is Right crew responded by kidnapping Hall.

Mr. Hall will be missed.

Hugh Hefner, R.I.P.

We are admonished not to speak ill of the dead, and yet sometimes the historical record makes an honest appraisal otherwise. It’s hard to know exactly how much responsibility Hugh Hefner bears for the decline of Western Civilization. Chances are if he hadn’t done it, someone else would have (nobody forced us at gunpoint, last time I looked). His legacy, such as it is – the imprint that he leaves behind as he shuffles off these mortal coils, bound for parts undetermined – is that of the bunny’s head, one of the most familiar corporate symbols in the world.

I don’t know, but I suppose Playboy is passé nowadays, considering the nudity in it is probably tepid compared to that which anyone can find online. But the bill of indictment, as it were, is a long one, for Playboy was but one step on a long downhill road that lead to the mainstreaming of soft-core pornography, the acceptance of female nudity for the purpose of titillation, the creation of an “ideal” body type that most women could never hope to attain without the benefit of airbrushing, the commodification of body parts in the form of breast enhancements and other kinds of plastic surgery, the ideal that the “modern man” could partake in sex with as little concern over the consequences as if he were drinking fine wine and sampling hors d’oeuvres while dressed in his tux and listening to cool jazz at the club. With all this going against it, it’s a wonder that the nuclear family has survived as long as it has.

The idea that Playboy was somehow unable to compete with what was available for free led the magazine to try eliminating nudity, an experiment that lasted only about a year before it became apparent that nudity, tame though it may be, was just about the only reason left to buy Playboy. And it’s true that, setting aside the lithe, tanned bodies that jumped from the pages (if one can), the magazine was known for a literary style, often introducing young writers whose works would become far better known, as well as established authors who’d mastered the short story. There were the provocative interviews, a type of long-form journalism that’s hard to find anywhere anymore, as well as lifestyle pieces that on occasion didn’t have anything to do with sex. Hefner himself was a champion of jazz, and a generous contributor to film preservation efforts, which are good things. But other, better, magazines had once contained the same kind of content only to disappear from the shifting cultural landscape. There was no reason for Playboy to be any different, so the nudity returned. At least it’s something, you might have imagined them saying in the boardroom, with a resigned shrug.

One can’t blame Hef for all the evil in the world today, of course, convenient though it might be. Larry Flynt took the stylish sophistication of Playboy to the next logical step, introducing graphic, hard-core porn to mainstream magazine stands. Helen Gurley Brown morphed Cosmopolitan, a grand old magazine, into a sex club for women. Stag films had been around long before Playboy, but there was still a sense of shame attached to it, the idea that it wasn’t something respectable men could afford to be associated with in public. Since the entire notion of shame was something that the modern man no longer need to be concerned with, though, the consequences of living the Playboy Philosophy in public were far more diminished, if not gone altogether.

Yet it remains true that the legacy of Hugh Hefner will mostly be that he made soft-core pornography mainstream, even respectable, and in doing so he lowered the bar for acceptable public behavior. The very existence of Playboy was another step down the slippery slope; its success in making porn fashionable accelerated the decline even more.

By the end Hugh Hefner was, I think, something of a joke. The Playboy Philosophy does not wear so well on a man in his 90s, and the site of his withered, wrinkled body next to the smooth, surgically inflated contours of his latest paramours, was not just painful, it was grotesque. One’s tempted here to insert a comment about Dorian Gray, but even that might be lending the scene an excessive dignity.

We can’t know the final disposition of Hugh Hefner – that’s way above our paygrade. We can only look at the visible: what he accomplished with his life, whether or not he did justice to the many talents with which he obviously had been born. Put it this way – I’ve lived far from a perfect life, but I wouldn’t want to have his record. In the end, he didn’t have to be Satan Incarnate to wreck havoc on the world; being one of his lesser, more insignificant minions was sufficient enough.

The Grand Guignol that Hugh Hefner left behind speaks for itself and will do so for eternity. May God have mercy on his soul.

Throwback Thursday:

Fox News's John Stossel recently had some interesting things to say about how the police have handled the violence in Ferguson. I think Bobby's right about the irresponsibility of the young man killed by police, but Stossel sounds a cautionary note that the police are hardly blameless, either, suggesting that the increasing militarization of police forces everywhere tells us something about what's happening in American, and that ain't good:

[The Cato Institute’s Walter Olson] notes that a man identifying himself as a veteran from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division reacted to video of police in Ferguson by tweeting, “We rolled lighter than that in an actual war zone.”

If authorities arm cops like soldiers, they may begin to think like soldiers -- and see the public as the enemy. That makes violent confrontations more likely.

Again, this doesn't excuse the violence of that segment of protestor who's looking for trouble (cough-cough-Al Sharpton-cough), and Stossel makes clear that lawlessness is never acceptable.  But this whole issue with the police is incredibly troubling, something that should have been addressed quite some time ago; but better now than later.  It's further evidence of why the Founders thought we needed a Second Amendment, and proof of their wisdom in understanding that the government, no matter who's in charge of it, should never be completely trusted.  As Benjamin Franklin once wrote, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."  We know that this quote has been misappropriated many times, for many different reasons, but there's still something to it, don't you think?

Where do we stand on that today?

Originally published August 26, 2014

Opera Wednesday

No matter what it is that's bothering you, an overture written by Mozart can usually cure it, or at least make you feel a lot better. Case in point is this charmer, the overture to Die Entführung aus dem Serail (The Abduction from the Seraglio), first performed in 1782.* It's hard to imagine it not being just as sprightly to audiences at its premiere as it is to us today.

*The role of the benevolent Pasha, a non-singing part, was often played by Werner Klemperer, our beloved Colonel Klink.

This performance is by the Vienna Symphony, under the baton of Metropolitan Opera principal conductor Fabio Luisi, in a 2006 appearance in Japan. Enjoy.

Wish I'd written that: On idiots and knees and the Anthem

Idiots say idiotic things. It’s like apple trees produce apples…. The most charitable thing that one can say about her book is that it is complete stupidity, because if one didn’t accuse it of being stupid, one would have to say that it was a deliberate fraud.

- Belgian author Simon Leys, speaking in 1983 about Chinese Communist apologist Maria-Antonietta Macchiocchi, who had written a book in praise of the Cultural Revolution.

The thought had occurred to me to write something similar about the athletes using the National Anthem as a form of protest; most of them are, in fact, either dupes, because they believe the lies that are being fed them regarding some of the "injustices" being inflicted by the police, or idiots, because they willingly work to perpetuate those falsehoods, knowing them to be such. Whenever they open their mouths to speak, they simply confirm one or the other. As someone wrote the other day, if an athlete were to take a knee to protest legalized abortion in the United States, would he be so feted by the press and his teammates? I think you know the answer to that one.

There are, in fact, a lot of things wrong with law enforcement in America, things I've written about before (here, for example), and one would be stupid indeed to overlook it. There are a lot of things wrong with race relations in America; the idea of slavery as America's "original sin" is a profound one, and one we still haven't overcome. Still, the idea of multimillionaires who've clearly thrived in America getting down on one knee to protest "injustice" is laughable - no, idiotic.

Most professional sports teams are located in major metropolitan areas: have all the members of, say, the Cleveland Indians, Cavaliers, and Browns pitched in a million dollars or so* to go toward training police officers in hopes that this injustice will be dealt with, at least as far as law enforcement is concerned? I haven't heard anything about it. Does that mean that such an effort would be useless, that racism is so endemic to America that no amount of education short of reeducation will address it? If that is in fact the case, then what good do social protests to, since they'd have even less effect?

*I know that there are some players who truly can't afford a million dollars, those who are at minimum salary (which is still more than I'm likely to see in my lifetime), but I suspect LeBron James can make up that difference by himself.

The same goes for boycotting White House appearances.* I laugh at how shagreened the Golden State Warriors were when they were disinvited to the White House -an invitation that some of them had indicated they wouldn't accept in the first place. The team protested that this would eliminate the opportunity for dialogue on the burning social issues of the day (I can just imagine the quality of that discussion), but those like Stephen Curry, who'd already said he wouldn't go, apparently had already determined that a show of political defiance was worth more than the chance for dialogue. Look at it - these people can't even sing from the same page!

*Which I think are overdone to begin with. Why should the President be considered the nation's number one sports fan? Why should sports be that important? I'd like to see the institutional cult of personality that surrounds the presidency be eliminated for that reason, but it's another topic for another day.

In the end, the most damning thing one can say about the United States is that we as a people put so much stock in the opinions of celebrities and athletes in the first place. Haven't we heard them complain, usually after having been arrested or called out on some other kind of misbehavior, that they didn't ask to be role models in the first place? And yet now they decide they want to be social advocates? It is to laugh. Perhaps if we're that shallow, then we won't be capable of elevating our national IQ to the point that we can have a serious discussion on race, sex, politics, or anything else. Instead we'll just sit around trading opinions on the cover stories in People, Rolling Stone, Cosmo, Us, and Sports Illustrated (yes, it's come to that). We'll find out not only who's taking a knee, we'll also address such burning issues as whether or not Kylie's pregnancy will change things, if Jen's marriage will survive, the truth behind the breakup of Brad and Angelia, how to drive your man wild in bed, and other screaming headlines. They're all equally important.

Leys is right. They are, for the most part, idiots, so we should expect nothing less from them. Because, to paraphrase his words, in doing so we're being charitable. The alternative is that they're out-and-out frauds, and that wouldn't be a nice thing to say, would it?

Reaping what we've sown

In comparing textbooks used in religious schools and humanist schools, the books used by humanist schools promote liberal propaganda endlessly.  One of the most notable examples was glorifying the single American legislator who objected to sending the troops to battle days after Pearl Harbor was attacked by the merciless Tojo's forces representing Japan.  Others have been creating new liberal heroes such as Milk and Obergefell, and even Barbara Lee (the Congressman who refused to send us to battle after we learned Saddam Hussein was a terrorist, especially when he funded families of homicide bombers with cash for performing the terrorist actions;  Fox News' Neil Cavuto said those who paid families of homicide bombers who killed as many Jews as possible were just as much terrorists as the bombers.  As we've seen with the initial starts of protests against the American flag as a symbol of slavery, it references what Jason Whitlock calls "San Francisco Values" advanced by these textbooks of propaganda, and denouncing American historical events such as the American Revolution, War of 1812, and the Civil War.

In a recent commentary marking the 20th anniversary of Rich Mullins' death (see "The Cruelest Irony" on this blog for a reference to "My Redeemer" winning the GMA Dove Award for Song of the Year, since he was thrown from his Jeep without seat belt when he and song co-write Mitch McVicker were thrown from a Jeep on their way to a concert; the presenter was a triple MENCS champion), a columnist noted how the latest top-40 hits from the entertainment giants quickly replaced all songs of the past.  In the same manner as that in many churches, we are seeing that with those who disregard American history.  They remove all references to US history of the past and replace it with their "new narrative" of new left-wing heroes as we've mentioned in order to teach new generations only their new narrative.  As the Young America's Foundation noted, "Many on the Left have tried to turn (Patriot Day) into a 'day of national service' or a celebration of tolerance, instead of remembering that radical jihad attacked this nation because of our western values. "  Both of these go hand-in-hand with the shameful erasing of the past (see Deconfederatisation) and advancing the new heroes.

As such, look at the attacks on Francis Scott Key and Fort McHenry even in Baltimore, and the entire change in the "new narrative" they want us to advance.  Has a generation taught the Left's new narrative given us this fiasco?



 WORKS CITED:

 Ian Kissell, "How Rich Mullins Changed the Way We Worship," Relevant Magazine, 19 September 2017.

Dr. Laura's point is being proven again

A video from the University of New Hampshire's Alpha Phi sorority is proving Dr. Laura Schlessinger correct regarding the cultural use of the N-bomb.

 In a moment that turned out to be the 72-year old Dr. Schlessinger's Waterloo on broadcast radio, she referenced the double standard with questionable language in an infamous 2010 incident.

Schlessinger:  Not everything that somebody says -- we had friends over the other day, we got about 35 people here -- the guys were going to start playing basketball. I was going to go out and play basketball. And my bodyguard and my dear friend, he's a black man. And I said, "White men can't jump, I want you on my team." That was racists? That was funny.  ("White Men Can't Jump" is a reference to a Woody Harrelson movie.)

Caller: How about the N-word? So, the N-word's been thrown around --

Schlessinger: Black guys use it all the time, turn on HBO, listen to a black comic and all you hear is November, November, November.  I don't get it. If anybody -- if anybody without enough melanin says it is a horrible thing, but when black people say it, it's affectionate. It's very confusing.

The video in question that reminds us of the Schlessinger incident was the sorority singing along with Kanye West's "Gold Digger" as it is playing on a jukebox.  The lyric in question they were singing was the chorus of the song, which goes, "Now I ain't saying she a gold digger, But she ain't messing wit no broke November, Get down girl go head get down".  That lyric is repeated often in the song, and the song also contains a few 25-point penalties for inappropriate language.

So the question is asked again -- why is the sorority being punished for singing along and playing a nasty song from Kanye West, but if certain groups play it, there is no problem.  Note too how many school choirs now sing the obscene ditty from one Cee-Lo Green known as "Foxtrot You" in their performances.

Is there a double standard in society?  This likewise is the same with certain groups.  How is it sexual perversion lobbyists have a right to write the laws, but everyone else is not allowed to play in the same sandbox?  As Antonin Scalia warned, how is it conservative Evangelical Christians are not permitted a seat at the legislative table when sexual perverts are?  The same goes with this incident at the University of New Hampshire.  How is it using the N bomb is acceptable for some groups, but not others?

A return to a classic

The two Republican candidates in the runoff election for United States Senator from Alabama, Roy Moore and incumbent Luther Strange, decided, after the former chief justice for the state's judiciary (removed following bogus charges filed by the Southern Poverty Law Centre that he refused to enforce the invented "law" on marriage in Alabama that was actually the feelings of a few in cities far away from Montgomery and rejected by the entire state 4:1), uncovered conflicts of interest with Mr. Strange's campaign by the "moderator" in the "debate," to participate in the classical debate format that led to the career of Abraham Lincoln, the classic debates between Mr. Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, better known as a Lincoln-Douglas Debate format.

This is a refreshing moment as Americans, angered by the arrogance of the Far Left in events such as court cases and popular culture that is out of touch with the entire country, have decided to call for the classic format that is a pure one-on-one debate format.  Those who debated in school will appreciate this format and a turn away from what the late Tony Snow called "glorified press conferences" that can easily be tilted.

You can read more about last night's debate here.

Throwback Thursday: Where's spellchkr when you need it?

TThe big news in sports today is that, according to CNN, there's apparently a new NBA team we weren't aware of, and in the Big Apple, to boot.

It's a team called the New York Nicks (short, one presumes, for Nickerbockers). Is this team owned by Nickelodeon, perhaps? Or maybe, because the team isn't very good, it's their way of saying they aren't worth a plugged nickel.

This obvious typo in the headline has been changed since the initial posting, but thanks to the miracles of technology, we were able to capture the original screenshot:



It probably didn't long for the editors to find this, although I'm somewhat at a loss as to why they didn't catch it in the first place. But, harking back to what Steve wrote about a couple of weeks ago (the "debarked" dog), it really gives you confidence in our media, doesn't it?

Originally published October 2, 2007

Throwback Thursday: The rot inside

In every man's past there's some dirt. It can be dirt that belongs to the past and not to the present. But it can be dirty enough to use to smear a person, smear him so good that he'll have to retreat from the public gaze. You aren't tied up in politics like I am so you haven't got any idea how really rotten it is. Everybody is out for himself and to hell with the public. Oh, sure, the public has its big heroes, but they do things just to make the people think of them as heroes. Just look what happens whenever Congress or some other organization uncovers some of the filthy tactics behind government . . . the next day or two the boys upstairs release some big news item they've been keeping in reserve and it sweeps the dirt right off the front page and out of your mind."

- Mickey Spillane, One Lonely Night

Originally published November 1, 2007

Opera Wednesday

There is an opera point to this, if you can wait long enough. At first, however, it might seem as if the only opera we're talking about here is a soap opera, such is the feeling one gets when thinking about the stories we've been reading about for years about the "epidemic" (I think that's the word they used) of student-teacher sex affairs. Of particular interest to many was the number of female teachers who had become involved with young male students, many of them in their early teens. Some call these teenage boys "abused," others consider them "lucky." Whatever, clearly the answer to ending this scandal is to allow teachers to marry - wait a minute, my mistake; it's allowing priests to marry that's supposed to end sexual abuse of teenage boys.

Clearly, if we learn anything from this whole mess, it's that the theory that allowing priests to marry will eliminate the pedophile scandal is nothing but a red herring. First of all, it's not pedophilia but pederasty that drove the Church's scandal - that and a rejection by the priests involved of Catholic teaching.

This, however, is a matter for another day. What interests so many about this teacher abuse study is a fundamental question of human curiousity: what do these grown women see in teenage boys? There's something almost nauseating about the whole thing. What I find interesting about it is how this behavior contrasts so dramatically with how women used to behave, or at least how they were portrayed in popular culture. Forget for a minute whether or not that pop culture portrayal was an accurate one; what mattered, in order for the portrayal to be a successful one, was that it was plausible.

Nowhere is that more evident than in pulp detective fiction, especially that from one of the genre's masters, Mickey Spillane, and his greatest creation, Mike Hammer. Hammer is, to put it mildly, a chick magnet (as well as a magnet for bullets, fists, Commies, Mafia, and all sorts of other unsavory characters). And we're not talking about ordinary women here - just beautiful ones. Breathtakingly beautiful ones. Hammer, at first blush, would seem to be the most unlikely object of desire.

He is, by his own admission, not a handsome man. It’s true that women often meet him after he’s been beaten virtually to a pulp by some nefarious perp, who invariably winds up dead, either right away – in the “you should see the other guy” school – or later on, when Hammer fulfills his mission of revenge. It’s clear, though, that Hammer harbors no illusions about his own appearance, even in the best of times.

And yet women literally throw themselves at him. Within minutes of the initial meeting, they’re tossing off suggestions and bon mots at him that would make a sailor blush. To these invitations Hammer often reacts lewdly, taking advantage of some, distaining others. It must be nice to pick and choose that way.

Hammer is by no means unique in the world of detective fiction. Philip Marlow, for one, has the same, shall we say, problem (especially when he’s played by Humphrey Bogart), and easy sex with loose women is a staple of both pulp and mainstream mysteries. Even Nick Charles, he of the Thin Man series, is one of those men who women want and men want to be like. Nick is considerably smoother and more handsome than most of them, however, plus he has Myrna Loy to come home to, and so he remains above those kinds of temptation.

Nevertheless, what is it about these characters that causes beautiful women – far more beautiful than the men are handsome – to throw themselves at them with a speed worthy of a Puccini opera? The reason for this animal magnetism, implicit in the Hammer books, is a simple one: manliness. Hammer is a real man, not a fake – a man who knows what he wants, knows how to get it, and, most important, isn’t afraid to take it.

And this is what brings us back around to the central question asked at the beginning – why the epidemic of female teacher-male student affairs? What is it that these older women – some barely older, some much older – could possibly find of interest in these boys? One theory that I find plausible is that implicit in these actions is a rejection of modern malehood – the lack of manliness so prevalent in men today. As the metrosexual (if that term isn’t already passé) becomes a dominant archetype of the modern man, more and more women yearn for that old-style masculinity found in the likes of Hammer and others. Enough with men who seek to be in touch with their “feminine side.” To many women, this breeds doubt, uncertainty, an unwillingness to take the initiative – hardly qualities that make a man truly attractive. Hugh Grant may be the ideal man for those tissue-drenching chick flicks that Lifetime and Hallmark live on, but it’s not hard to imagine that a real relationship based on that Hugh Grant character would lead to frustration and exasperation before too long.

So, confronted with the lack of “real men” out there, and dismayed by the alternative - young men wrapped up in rude, crude and boorish Maxim-like behavior, women reject the choices presented to them by conventional society and instead turn to the raw material, the stuff that their dreams can truly be made of. In the handsome, virile boy in their classroom they find a boy eager to learn, eager to please, with much to offer in the physical sense; but also one not yet corrupted by sensitivity training. Perhaps he’s a rugged jock, or a boy who exhibits all the hesitant masculine boisterousness that teenage boys usually have. Or he’s untapped ground, one who can be shaped not by the demands of society to emasculate himself, but by the desires of a woman who thinks (however misguided) she can teach him how to be a real man.

This kind of thing is really nothing new however, as is shown by Richard Strauss’ comic opera masterpiece Der Rosenkavalier. The subject matter in this story, written in 1911 but set in 1740s Vienna, was the source of some controversy as well. In it, we have the Marshallin, a charming but aging noblewoman, who is involved with Octavian, described as “a handsome young man with an eye for beautiful women.” Through a series of impossibly convoluted twists and turns, Octavian loses his heart to the beautiful young Sophie, who herself is engaged to the inept and repulsive Baron von Lerchenau.

Although the Marschallin is captivated by her affair with Octavian and falls in love with him, she knows that eventually he will leave her for a younger woman - one more his age. Eventually, this happens, and in the heart-wrenching trio "Hab' mir's gelobt" she releases Octavian to follow his heart and go to Sophie, saying she loves him so much she only wants happiness for him, even if it is with another woman.

With this ending, Strauss hints at the natural law of things, that eventually people - especially young ones - gravitate toward those of their own kind, their own age. And I think that what people most strongly object to in these teacher-student affairs is the idea that the young are being robbed of their future, of their natural maturing into the world beyond their youth, in essence being trapped into a lifestyle (and the consequences) long before they're ready to accept - or even understand - that life. Thus, they are not victims of sexual abuse per se, but of the same kind of abuse that we see in advertising campaigns, in peer pressure, in a hundred different ways - the abuse of forcing children to become adults before they're ready. Some would say that the unfortunate, if not ironic, aspect of this is that in the teacher-student case this is often being done by women who refuse to grow up, who yearn instead for their own childhood, free of responsibility.

As I say, I’m no sociologist, so I don’t pretend that this is anything other than a theory that I find compelling. It also suggests, but doesn’t necessarily deal with, the immaturity that these women themselves exhibit, their own failure to grow up and act responsibly. It does, however, answer a great many questions. And undoubtedly it says a lot about the present state of masculinity – or the lack thereof – in the modern male. I don’t know if we should be more worried about this epidemic of schoolhouse abuse, or the cultural forces that may be playing a part in it.

Whatever the case, this whole phenomenon should cause us to look closely at what our culture has become - how we view childhood, what it means to be a "real man" (and how through our culture so many of the natural aspects of manhood are being stripped away), and how for so many nowadays, adulthood is something to be put off as long as possible.

What the Hill is going on?

ESPN's efforts to convince the public that the network has no liberal bias probably took another hit today, after this Twitter exchange in which SportsCenter host Jemele Hill (above, right) called the President a "white supremacist." Now, I don't know about your situation, but where I work, there's something called a "code of conduct" when it comes to social media, which includes bringing my employer into disrepute. For someone like Hill, whose public identity as an on-air talent for ESPN is considerable, I would suspect that the code of conduct would be a lot more stringent than it is for someone like me working at an ordinary place of employment.

Or is it? As the story indicates, ESPN disassociated itself with Hill's comments, but not with Hill herself. I don't know that anyone seriously believes that if the tables were turned, if Hill were a conservative white anchor who'd said something similarly disparaging about Barack Obama, that she'd still be an employee at the network. At the very least she'd be on suspension (or "administrative leave," as it's called most places) while the network attempted to measure the fallout.

The likely scenario here is a forced apology which may or may not be sincere, in which Hill regrets the embarrassment that she caused her employer, and allows as to how, in these highly emotional times, she let hers get the better of her, something which won't happen again., To which I would reply, echoing the words of one of our local radio talk show hosts, B as in B., S as in S. When ESPN can fire an announcer for using the word "guerrilla" to describe the tactics of one of the Williams sisters (because, you know, it's too close to the word "gorilla," which we all know is racially charged), then for something like this, the network should have no choice. Ask Curt Schilling if ESPN was as understanding when it came to his political commentary.

Hill's days at ESPN should be over, and it's almost embarrassing to have to point this out. If that happens, then I'll gladly apologize to ESPN for doubting them - until then, ESPN's claims that it does not have a liberal bias will rank right up there with the Tooth Fairy and the Man in the Moon for fairy tales that have the power to amuse little children.

9/11, still

Flashback Friday: Just how old is your granddaddy, anyway?

All together now, for the thousandth time: Words Mean Things.  Case in  point is this article, posted on si.com yesterday.  In fairness to its author, Ryan McGee, writers don't generally do their own headlines, so he can't be to blame for the following:

We've all heard that old saying - "this ain't your father's..." or "this ain't your grandfather's..." and we know what it's supposed to mean - this isn't the way it was back in the old days. The point of this article is to suggest that the times are a changin', that things aren't the way they used to be.  Well, seeing this headline, I knew right away there was something wrong; I just had to do the math to make sure.

Now, let's say you're 25 years old, a good age to be a football fan.  Le'ts further say your father was 25 when you were born, and his father was 25 when he was born.  That would make your grandfather 75.  Assuming he was a football fan when he was 25, that would make it 1965, 50 years ago.  So, just for the hell of it, let's take a look at college football's top ten for the end of the 1965 football season:

Well, Michigan State certainly was in the top 5.  And in case you're thinking I'm nitpicking about this, let's go a little deeper: Michigan State was #2 the following year, 1966 (the year they lost the title by tying Notre Dame in the Game of the Century).  Just a fluke, you're thinking?  Very well; let's suppose your grandfather's top 5 started in 1960, when he was 20.  Sorry - Michigan State was ranked that year as well.  In fact, they were ranked #11, in 1960, #9 in 1961, #10 in 1963, and #20 in 1964.  In other words, although they were in the top 5 only twice (1965, 1966), they were ranked in the top 20 six times in the seven years that your grandfather might have been looking at.  And in case you think granddad's top 5 might have come when he was older, say in his mid-30s, that doesn't really hold up either: the Spartans were ranked #9 in 1950, #2 in 1951, #1 in 1952, #3 in 1953, #2 in 1955, #10 in 1956, #3 in 1957 and #16 in 1959.

In other words, Michigan State was pretty much a college football power throughout the '50s and into the mid-'60s; it wasn't until Southern schools started integrating, destroying the pipline that Northern schools such as State had built up in the South, that Michigan State dropped from the power rankings. Let's call that the '70s and '80s, which wouldn't be your grandfather's time as much as it was your father's.

Do you think I'm nitpicking too much?  All right, let's look at Mississippi then.  You'll note that in that 1965 poll, Mississippi ranked #17, the eighth year in the decade of the '60s in which Mississippi was ranked in the top 20.  Matter of fact, Ole Miss was pretty good in the early part of the decade, when your hypothetical granddaddy was in his early 20s, finishing #3 in 1960, #5 in 1961, #4 in 1962 and #7 in 1963.  Playing the devil's advocate and going back to the 1950s (as we did with Michigan State), we see that Mississippi was #7 in 1952, #6 in 1954, #9 in 1955, #8 in 1957, #12 in 1958 and #2 in 1959.  As was the case with Michigan State (though for different reasons), Mississippi's decline came much later on, in the '70s, '80s and '90s.

Which brings me back to the beginning question: just how the hell old is grandfather supposed to be?  I know there's always a tendency to look back in the past and think it's father back than it actually is; 50 years sounds like a long time ago, but it was actually 1965.  Taken in the most generous sense, a grandfather usually isn't going to be much younger than 40 when the first grandchild is born, and unless you're about seven years old (and if you are, you shouldn't be reading SI.com, especially when the swimsuit issue is out), you're going to have a hard time proving your grandfather didn't know a time when Michigan State and Ole Miss were in the top 5.

You could have avoided so much of this confusion simply by saying that this year's rankings "aren't your father's top 5."  Is this a case when the headline writer gets so caught up in the story (one-legendary programs making a big comeback, which itself is problematic considering Michigan State finished last year ranked #5 and the year before #3, meaning they aren't all that unfamiliar with the top 5 lately) that they write the headline to fit a preconceived notion?  Is it that the headline writer doesn't know much about football history or is so young that they can't remember the last time these teams were ranked so high?  Or is it that the writer was too lazy to spend five minutes Googling College Football Polls (as I did) to write an accurate headline?

Take your pick, but I wish these headline writers would do their homework.  I'm old enough to remember when Michigan State and Mississippi were highly-ranked programs, and I don't have any grandchildren (yet).  Please, I don't need to feel any older than I already do.

Originally published September 22, 2015

Opera Wednesday

And now for something different - the great opera star Birgit Nilsson as the victim of a practical joke on the Swedish version of Candid Camera. You'll be able to understand most of it, but even when you don't know the words, you'll probably still get the jokes!