Thursday, March 10, 2005

Most of what can be said about Dan Rather's departure has been said already. Now, I've actually never watched the TV news, but this one line, courtesy of the MRC, struck me. Apparently, Rather was "approaching tears" right after Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, and signed out with this:
I'd like to leave you with the words of that popular, secular, patriotic hymn:
"Long may our land be bright with freedom's holy light."
Now, right when I saw this, something struck me as odd. Like, Rather is such a liberal that he specifically had to choose a "secular" hymn, and point that fact out to us. What makes it even funnier, of course, is how that very same stanza runs:
Our fathers' God, to Thee,
Author of liberty,
To Thee we sing.
Long may our land be bright
With freedom's holy light;
Protect us by Thy might,
Great God, our King!
It is, in fact, the most religious stanza in the song.

So, Dan, once again you got the facts wrong in your pursuit of your liberal fantasies. But do not fear! Courage, Dan, courage!

Speaking of PC-cliches, you've gotta love how the cliche at the end of the letter here is what drove the victim of some campus political correctness to retaliate. Go, brother!

And, as long as we're on the Times, there's an article about Wil Wheaton (and his "Web log, or blog," as Times usage still goes). The article gave me more of a sad vibe than anything else. Read it and see if you feel the same way. But a couple of points: First, Wil, if you don't want to be seen as a "jerk," it would help not to be quoted insulting River Phoenix in the very next paragraph. Also, check out the last photo. It's worth a thousand words in summing up the nature of Wesley Crusher, the first season of TNG, "Gene's vision," what a "Mary Sue" is, and much, much more. Bleah.

Speaking of jerks, I could have used one of these on the subway this morning. I don't have to hear your music, idiot. On the other hand, I will get one of these.

In shul today, a woman bentched gomel, and for the first time, I realized that no siddur prints the feminine response. Can anyone better at dikduk than I formulate one?

Speaking of Jews, I wonder how hard it would be to pull a Slifkin on Cross-Currents. Just wondering.

Finally, on the way back from a delighful lunch, we passed a huge pro-Tibet march. Well, anything to get the Commies' goat (yak?). Free Tibet!

Tuesday, March 08, 2005

I'll tell you the truth: This blogger is wrong in so many ways, and clearly, reacting to a bad upbringing (on my terms), has swung to the opposite direction while still, oddly, keeping all the old methods (that is, accepting modern theories blindly in the same way s/he was told to accept religion). But this smackdown...well, it's like a stopped clock. (Sorry, Gil, but the [wo]man has some good points.)

Ah, nuts. It's getting easier and easier to ignore that paper. (Notice a pattern, by the way? The Home section, not to mention much of the rest of the paper, is already...that way, and now...)

"Ah, nuts" again. Of course, it's the old government's own damn fault, but see what happens when every culture is treated equally? The really valuable ones disappear.

Finally, go Jonah!


Remember what I said about Dawn Eden yesterday? For further confirmation, check Kudlow today. Oh, I agree with every word. But just check out the list he presents. And don't think of yourself as Catholic or Lutheran. That takes in a lot of ground, which Kudlow doesn't seem to realize (or, worse, doesn't want to acknowledge).

Monday, March 07, 2005

Well, I avoided Central Park for as long as "The Gates" were up. They were supposed to come down last Sunday, so, walking into the Park yesterday, I thought, "Hmm. Construction." Nope, it was the Gates. My God, they're horrid. Even my previously-enthusiastic companion was underwhelmed, to say the least. Take 'em down already!

Over at Hirhurim, there's a bit of a debate on abortion, to which I've contributed. If I come off as being on the pro-life side there, well, it's because I am- but I have to say that the absolutism of Kathryn Lopez on National Review is really starting to unsettle me. A few weeks ago, she was all rah-rah about a woman who died rather than risk her fetus. And now, it's...well, see for yourself. Her buddy Dawn Eden is even worse (follow the link two posts up- you can see how Ms. Lopez obsesses). Much worse. In the former's case, it's clearly that die-hard Catholicism which not even her fellows share (K-Lo, for example, follows the party line in opposing capital punishment); in the latter's, it's clearly the old and tragic story of the Jewish convert to Christianity becoming frummer than the Pope.

Speaking of NRO, TKS brings up a disgusting remark from W. J. Clinton. All I have to add is this: Note how the ex-prez assumes that "progressive" in any context, even Iran, equals "Democrat." Ha. These people are fighting for things a world removed from partial-birth abortion.

As long as we're on the news, let's bring up this Italian bird, as Austin Powers would say. Let's just say the wrong person died in this tragedy- and if you know me, you won't be surprised by my saying that if we don't have a policy targeting Communists for extermination, we certainly should. (And if you're offended by that, well, look at this and tell me your reaction. Personally, I think it's distasteful, to say the least. Is yours any different?)

Seriously, of course she wasn't targeted or anything. I sense a bit of attempted rehabilitation of Eason Jordan here- "See, they do target journalists! (Erm, not that he said that...)"

The Times today runs a doozy on some blogger (oh, just a nobody, until you get to his family history and personal resume at the end) and his quest to make hay from the woefully underreported (HA!) Guckert thing. Once again glossed over is that it's the press themselves who make these decisions, not the White House. Me, I wouldn't put it past them to have granted this guy the pass just to make his point. And he's so surprised the MSM stood up for him!

Speaking of the Times, this looks like a nice move from YU. And considering what we used to go through with these things, this was a nice touch from Mr. Joel. (Also, check out the "typical YU family" here. Heh.)

Tuesday, March 01, 2005


Troubling post on Chakira. As Dr. Bevan used to teach us, "politics abhors a vacuum." (One may wonder, of course, the purpose of a siyum of this nature in the first place, and whether its very existence proves that point.)

Apart from my comment there (scroll down a bit), I don't have much to add but a support for each respective point I made. One is this event at Gracie Mansion. The other is that Wall Street rally from a few years back.

That, and I wonder if Daniel Bomberg will be thanked. OK, I'll admit that's probably a bit much. But I've got other plans.

UPDATE: I've heard that some of my concerns were addressed, however obliquely. Well, it's a start.