Friday, February 28, 2003
The Big Snow Phallus Controversy
I've been engaged in a discussion over at Critical Mass regarding a controversy up at Harvard about a nine-foot penis of snow and the sculpture's rapid destruction. Brian Carney, with whom I agree, says:
Was this destruction a shocking attempt to stifle artistic expression? A callous act of censorship? No, it was the right thing to do. A one-story-tall snow phallus, whether prank or "art," is intolerable in a public place like Harvard Yard. More to the point, it is obscene, in the old-fashioned sense of the word--something that, at a minimum, should be kept out of sight.
Harvard, unnaturally prolonged adolescence for the low low price of more than a hundred thousand dollars. Andrew Sullivan's got a link to a picture of the thing if you really want to see it.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 05:19 PM EST
Too Much Reality
You know the fad has gone too far when celebrity reality-show camera crews start bumping into each other at the mall:
A camera crew following Roseanne as she shopped at the Barney's New York store in Beverly Hills this week ran into another camera crew shooting Ozzy Osbourne as he -- you guessed it -- also shopped. ...
"It was the ultimate reality moment," said ABC alternative series and specials executive Andrea Wong. "The only thing that would have made it better is if Anna Nicole Smith had shown up."
And then they could have run through an obstacle course to decide who would go on a date with Anna Nicole.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 04:13 PM EST
Annoyingly Incorrect Pop Song Lyrics File
It's a failing, I know, but sometimes poor grammar in pop songs just distracts me from the entire effort, particularly when a proper grammatical solution would have been possible within the meter of the song. Here are the first words of "Run for Your Life" by the Beatles (it's on Rubber Soul and is by John):
I'd rather see you dead, little girl
Than to be with another man.I think she'd be the one to rather see him dead!
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:43 PM EST
Lileks on the War
James Lileks bleats some thoughts on certain of those who oppose "Bush's war."
I get this feeling, over and over again: it is better that the right thing never come to pass than let the wrong men make it happen.
But why are they wrong, exactly? Many are worried simply because they have faith in the cause. Joe Klein wrote a piece in which he expressed alarm at the administration's lack of public equivocation, its constant protestation of its beliefs. It echoes the poet's warning: the worst are filled with a terrible certainty. Over the years we've forgotten the "terrible" part and come to think of certainty itself as a warning flag - the fact that a mind is made up must surely mean that mind is closed. Ambivalence, doubt, hesitation, conspicuously paraded for everyone to admire - these are the marks of a leader. We should shrink from certainty as a dog shrinks from fire. "Resolution" is fine - if it's followed by numbers and voted upon by a council of ministers. Resolution in the heart of a man is a thing to be feared, regardless of what the man resolves.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:56 PM EST
This Year's Redwood Review
I thought I'd let you know that I'm currently putting together the Summer 2003 edition of The Redwood Review, and it's looking to be bigger and better than the first.
If you'd like to contribute toward our publishing costs, you can do so here. A donation of at least $5.00 will get you a copy of the 2002 issue. For a donation of $10.00 or more, we'll send you both books (when the second one is available). Contribute $25.00, and I'll get all of the writers to sign your copy of the 2003 issue.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:52 PM EST
The Redwood Review Fiction of the Week
The Redwood Review fiction piece of the week is "from The Toonijuk," by Bill Goetzinger.
Bill's imagination and style make for engrossing reading. I highly recommend reading this entire excerpt. Of course, if you'd rather have it on the written page, copies of the 2002 Redwood Review are available for the price of a meager contribution.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:45 PM EST
Disemboweling an Argument
Instapundit links to Charles Murtaugh's "righteous fisking" of an anti-cloning column by Senator Sam Brownback (R, Kansas). Murtaugh's central complaint has to do with a postulated dishonesty among anti-cloners, specifically Senator Brownback. Mr. Murtaugh seems more amenable to pro-life/anti-cloning arguments than many who take his side, so I'm hesitant to rebut with too thorough a fisking of his argument, but taking a close look at that argument, I think he's directing his particular accusations in the wrong direction.
He engages in one of the pro-cloners' bigger instances of dishonesty right in his first sentence:
The House is poised to pass a total ban on human cloning, both reproductive and therapeutic, or to use the terms I prefer, both baby cloning and embryo cloning.
I suppose I owe Mr. Murtaugh a bit of gratitude for more explicity pointing to the issue in the problematic "therapeutic" terminology. "Baby cloning" must refer to a technology with which I am unaware whereby a scientist places some biological material in an upturned top hat, waves a wand, and pulls out a baby. A magician would be showing contempt for his audience if he suggested public moral policy based on the reality of his "magic" without reference to the underlying stages of the trick. Yet, pro-cloners would simply like to move the point of procedural comparison beyond the stages at which the morality gets sticky. As we learn in the next paragraph, Murtaugh is sympathetic to pro-life arguments if they are restricted to the stages of development after the first trimester. The question, thereafter, moves to "personhood," that magical moment whereby the development of a pancreas (or whatever) bestows a soul (even defining "soul" in humanistic terms). In an older post, Murtaugh admits, "If it ain't human, it ain't much good for therapeutic purposes."
Pro-cloners would also like to obscure the question of public policy in other ways:
If anything, the brouhaha over the Raelian cloning claim (almost certainly fraudulent, like that of Italian fertility doctor Severino Antinori) proves a point I've been making all along, that while embryo cloning could be done in secret, it would be impossible to conceal an ongoing baby cloning effort given the appallingly high failure rate predicted by animal studies.
Why is the potential for concealment of an activity at all related to whether that activity ought to be acceptable or legal? If a large company's accounting firm develops a strategy to pilfer funds without detection, does that mean the method ought not be illegal? We aren't going to be able to stop the experiments of mad scientists who are determined to carry them through, nor can we prevent them from going elsewhere to pursue their ends. With a ban, however, legitimate scientists with substantial resources will not be able to devote those resources to an illegal activity. This may be pro-cloners' objection to the ban, but it is manifestly not a reason for that objection.
From this dubious beginning, Murtaugh expresses his specific problem with Brownback's essay, which, as I've noted, is its dishonesty, an attribute around which it "falls flat on its face."
It's a bit incoherent, for instance invoking the Raelians' effort at baby cloning as a reason to ban embryo cloning, which is objectionable because it results in the destruction of human life: so is cloning bad because it creates life, or because it destroys it?
Murtaugh's question points to the irony of the entire cloning debate. Reproductive cloning is the more difficult procedure to oppose in purely secular terms because it does create, rather than destroy, life. Luckily, those who oppose cloning don't have to argue the point as often or as vehemently as they condemn the other form of cloning, because opposition is so broad. And the breadth of this opposition is a good indication that extra-secular reasons are not irrelevant to the public policy debate. But for the purposes of addressing Murtaugh's point, I need only enlist the assistance of Murtaugh, himself, further down the page: "Repeat after me: animal studies suggest that for every successfully-born human clone there would be twenty abortions, miscarriages or stillbirths." As he explains, a major reason that mainstream scientists won't engage in "baby cloning" is that it is currently too destructive.
But this is not the specific dishonesty of Brownback's column that gets Murtaugh's "panties in a bunch." For that, we have to turn, predictably or ironically (depending on your perspective), to the aspect of Murtaugh's post in which he engages in the most sleight of hand, himself: polling statistics:
First, [Brownback] refers to "the vast majority of Americans" siding with him and Bush in opposing "creat[ing] human life just to destroy it." Well, let's go to the videotape: every poll that draws a distinction between embryo cloning and baby cloning has found that at least a third, and as many as half of all respondents oppose a ban on the former. The most recent poll found that a full 54% of respondents don't want any cloning ban, and when broken down by party this worked out to 40% of Republicans! Some "vast majority."
Perhaps Murtaugh has drawn his hard figures from a source other than the one to which he links. Going to Murtaugh's "videotape," the only instance of 54% of anything is found in CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll data from November 2001 and represents approval of cloning "designed to aid medical research that might find treatments for certain diseases." The most recent poll shown in Murtaugh's link (LA Times, Jan/Feb 2003) does break down opinions by party affiliation, but Republicans opposed to "any" ban made up only 6% of their party's population. To get 40%, Murtaugh must have added in the 34% who would support research cloning.
Certainly, it is questionable whether the 58% of Republicans who support a ban on all cloning represent a vast majority over that 40%, but Murtaugh's complaint here is about honesty — that Brownback is being deceptive with his "vast majority" characterization. In my opinion, to justify his complaint, Murtaugh engages in at least the same degree of distortion. To be fair, Murtaugh only expands upon the distortion inherent in many of the polls, which is relevant to his analysis of "every poll that draws a distinction between embryo cloning and baby cloning." Consider the question that generated the 54% mentioned in the previous paragraph:
"Thinking for a moment about cloning: Do you approve or disapprove of cloning that is not designed to specifically result in the birth of a human being, but is designed to aid medical research that might find treatments for certain diseases?"
Now watch what happens when an ABC News/Beliefnet poll from August 2001 (only three months previous to the CNN poll) elaborates on the "distinction between embryo cloning and baby cloning," essentially pulling back the magician's curtain:
"Some scientists want to use human cloning for medical treatments only. They would produce a fertilized egg, or human embryo, that's an exact genetic copy of a person, and then take cells from this embryo to provide medical treatments for that person. Supporters say this could lead to medical breakthroughs. Opponents say it could lead to the creation of a cloned person, because someone could take an embryo that was cloned for medical treatments and use it to produce a child. Do you think human cloning for medical treatments should be legal or illegal in the United States?"
Legal: 33%. Illegal: 63%. Is this a "vast majority"? I guess it's still a matter of opinion, but it is hardly an instance of dishonesty to make the call in either direction. What's your call?
The next instance of Brownback's "dishonesty" has to do with terminology.
Second, in disparaging the "therapeutic cloning" terminology (with which I'm not entirely happy either), Brownback writes, "it is certainly not therapeutic for the clone who has been created and then disemboweled for the purported benefit of its adult twin." [My emphasis] Almost a year ago, Virginia Postrel criticized Charles Krauthammer for describing the dissection of blastocyst-stage embryos, to make embryonic stem cells, as "dismemberment."
So is this a dishonest bowdlerization of the English language? Well, Merriam-Webster gives "disembowel" a second definition of "to remove the substance of." That seems to apply to the removal of an embryo's genetic components. As for "dismember," even the source to which Murtaugh links for a definition gives the word a second definition of "To divide into pieces." Is it dishonest to use a word in any sense other than that denoted by the first definition in a dictionary? If so, then I was dishonest to use the term "bowdlerize," the first definition of which is "to expurgate (as a book) by omitting or modifying parts considered vulgar." In fact, my usage of the word "denote" is the fourth listing for that word in Merriam-Webster.
I'll cede Murtaugh's third point, that Brownback ought to have offered examples of "credible scientists" who are currently working toward producing cloned babies, or he should have posed the statement as a possibility, either current or future. Still, there are scientists working toward the same end, although I can't make any claims about how "credible" they are. But even giving this one to Murtaugh, in the context of the rest of his complaint, this point hardly justifies the accusation of "mendacity."
4 comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:25 PM EST
Iraqi Military Preparations
A couple of Iraqi military leaders have, apparently, given some useful intelligence information regarding the Iraqi preparations for war:
Morale is low in the Iraqi army and many soldiers are preparing white flags of surrender, we are told by someone in northern Iraq who recently interviewed two defectors from Saddam Hussein's army. ...
The captain told our informant that the heavy division was only 35 percent combat-effective. The captain said morale was so low that younger soldiers are speaking openly about surrendering — before the first shot has been fired. ...
"[A second soldier] said [his] whole division was at about 25 percent effectiveness and most soldiers were hiding their white flags," said our source, who spoke recently to both defectors.
I wonder if Saddam is wishing that he hadn't been quite so brutal for all those years...
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 08:57 AM EST
Thursday, February 27, 2003
The Redwood Review Nonfiction of the Week
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 02:46 PM EST
Hey, I Like Being a Computer Teacher
I just purchased Macromedia Studio so that I can finally begin a redesign to get my Web site beyond its late-90s look and access additional functionality as I design my school's Web site and begin teaching the older kids how to design them. The thing about being a computer teacher: I got the program for less than one-quarter its regular price!
The computer teacher catalog is dangerous when it arrives in my school mailbox each month (or so). It's been instructive, however, to watch the folks at Quark deal with the new reality of the market. Quark went several years between versions 4.0 and 5.0, and in that time, many alternatives have become available. When it first came out, the education edition of QuarkXPress offered only a $50 discount on the near-$1,000 product. Every month for the past few, the company has lopped another $100 off the price. Ah, the loss of a monopoly.
1 Comment (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:46 PM EST
Those Evil Soldiers Are Somebody's Parent and Child
The Washington Times has picked up the story that I noted the other day about teachers badmouthing military parents to their children. Let's see if any other major national papers find the story newsworthy, or whether they believe that it will create a "hostile environment" ripe for "backlash" against teachers.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 09:15 AM EST
Mister Rogers, RIP
Mister Rogers has moved on to a nicer neighborhood than ours. Watching episodes of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, recently, with my daughter, I was a bit ashamed at how shocking I found his kindness and thoughtfulness. In one case, after soothing his feet in a shallow pool with a black policeman, he helped his friend to dry his feet. Many have seen such kindnesses as prima facie evidence that something was not right with Mister Rogers. But surely there is something wrong with a society that would be alarmed by such a man.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 09:12 AM EST
Questions to Questions
Amy Welborn picks up and meanders with the questions that surround war and Catholicism. She makes a fair and deliberate attempt, but the bottom line — my bottom line, at least — with her analysis is that she misunderstands the motivation of Catholics who disagree vehemently with the Vatican even more than she seems to explain away the real problems that the United States currently faces.
I'm a neophyte at Catholicism, so it is entirely possible that my answers with respect to my religion are wrong — perhaps even that my questions are inappropriate. But then, perhaps it affords me a broader view. I look at these men who are charged with guiding the Church that perpetuates my religion, and I ask, is this my faith? Is this my faith, whose leaders make of themselves propaganda pieces for Arafat and for Hussein? Am I a follower of a religion that cannot muster the moral strength to turn its back on monsters — monsters! — while correctly cautioning those who openly and honestly seek counsel before battling those monsters and praying that somehow war can be avoided?
I don't want the Pope's "rubber stamp," as Amy characterizes the position held by people with whom I share a conclusion. I want clarity. I want the perspective and "the Long View of the oldest continually existing institution in the world," and surely that Long View would see the folly in urging compromise at all costs when it is obvious that only one side discusses and negotiates in good faith. Amy asks what I want from the Pope, if not a "go get 'em." The answer is simple: I want a statement that does not thrust my religion in among the haters and the anarchists and the communists who are protesting the war. I do not want him to express total support for violent force. But I would prefer that he not put his position, the position of the Church that I follow, so in line with the suicidal ideologies that fester in the Western world. Amy does me and those with whom I agree injustice by imagining that we have not considered the Pope's stand. I submit that we are so pained because we have.
We are so incredulous because we want guidance from our Church, which rightfully presumes to offer it in so many practical matters in our lives. We look to the Pope for some inkling of this guidance, and we get the opinion that, as a practical matter, as a matter of action, it is not the time for war. But we ask what else can be tried, and to that question, we get vague answers — pray, trust in God. Well, of course, we should put our faith in God, but what do we do. If I catch a deadly but curable disease, no Catholic would tell me that medicine is not the answer. Our Church does not declare that we must only pray and trust in God to end abortion. Our religion calls on us to act, not just to pray. So what do we do?
Amy complains that we defenders of the war are "starting to sound a little robotic — and strained — as well." For my part, that is because for all of our logic and our practical considerations and suggestions and defenses, we have received only more ruminations, more rambling admissions of confusion that conclude that anybody who has a solution must be wrong. We get more questions:
Why Hussein? Why now?
Because the allowable time for attempting peaceable solutions with Hussein has passed. Now. We who feel thus cannot conclude otherwise than that the wonderers and questioners, whose objections never change, even as they concede opposing arguments, are merely seeking to delay because they do not want it to be now. They do not want it to be the case that it has long been Hussein and that Hussein is the most blatantly unruly of the children, to whom the others look to discern their own boundaries. They do not want it to be the case that September 11 was mainly significant because it woke us up to the reality that we had taken our eyes off the sands slipping through the glass and because it drew Saddam's deadline in bold letters of flames: Now!
Furthermore, having disconnected their arguments from practical concerns, they are free to suggest that, to be moral and consistent, the United States would have to declare war on all tyrants of the world simultaneously. Is this the wisdom of the Long View of the Church that I feel to be the focal point of Truth in this world? It cannot be that the lesson learned from watching "nations and empires rise and fall" is that issues as profound as those around war are such that the problem of one dictator cannot be said to be only resolvable through war until all other dictators are declared in that state, as well. Here, the argument becomes that we cannot possibly have exhausted all peaceful means with Hussein while there are other regimes for which those possibilities are not exhausted.
Amy asks:
Why not pray for peace? Why not pray for a peaceful and just resolution? Why not pray for …I dunno…God’s will be done, maybe?
This is either dishonest or uncharitable. I have not heard anybody declare that they will not pray for peace, only that they will not pray for peace on the Pope's terms. In those terms, there is no such thing as peace through war. The other possibilities are never exhausted. In the Vatican's presentation of peace, God's will is declared as already known, and the United States is acting against it. The much-touted Just War Theory is but so many scribblings on parchment, and the beleaguered man cannot defend himself. The Pope's peace, at least as he has allowed it to be presented, does not really leave the question of a "just resolution" open. Because, as the Pope has cast peace, particularly by not negating more-extreme phrasings, the defense of the United States is excluded. The lives of the people of Iraq are excluded. The simmering war of cultures is left to simmer even longer in the hope that the pot will not crack. The only solution is supernatural. And so I ask again, is this Catholicism? Do we not act? Do we not take upon ourselves the responsibility for evil that we, ourselves, have brought into the world?
Amy ends with a question: "What is it that we really care about?"
In the practical, material matters of my life, I care about the safety of my family and all of those to whom I extend my love. That includes my countrymen. It also includes the rest of my human family, those who live behind a wall of terror that only the United States, by some method or other, can break. And I care that it sometimes seems as if our immediate families must be threatened for our society to care about families elsewhere.
In the spiritual matters of my life, I care about finding Truth and understanding how it is that I should live and live to find my way to God. And when those who lead the institution that is the keeper of the Long View to God seem to manifest — whether through abuse, craven self-concern, or moral vagueness — those things that I find inconsistent with my sense of faith, I ask through an almost unbearable pain: Is this my religion?
ADDENDUM:
Patrick Sweeney has posted the measured, factual rebuttal that I can no longer muster (perhaps for fear of being "robotic" and "strained").ADDENDUM II:
Lane Core makes some good points about taking a side in the debate in view of individual conscience. We have to trust one side or the other in this high-stakes game, and if we, as Americans, listen to our President and it turns out that we were deceived, our consciences will be clear. This is not so if we mistakenly trust the Butcher of Baghdad.8 comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:09 AM EST
Wednesday, February 26, 2003
Some Hard Workers Have All the Luck
Right Wing News (which printed a great joke today) links to a Neal Boortz column about the claim that people are only rich out of luck:
This "lucky vs. the unlucky" is a constant theme with liberals. How many times have you read or heard the phrase "the less fortunate"? It's the same message. "Fortunate" means "deriving good from an unexpected source." Just what is unexpected about deriving good from hard work, frugality and good decision making?
I would modify Boortz's analysis in one respect. Every career has some degree of "luck" in it, and there is certainly a significant bit of good fortune behind tremendous fortunes. The irony, however, is that it seems as if the degree of luck corresponds to the degree of liberalism. I once heard Rush suggest that rich liberals believe as they do because they don't think that anybody ought to do be able to get what they, themselves, have gotten. So, it's a bit of a guilt thing — conveniently, it's also got the side effect of diminishing competition.
3 comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:44 PM EST
Just Thinking: Volume I
Just Thinking: Volume I, 10/29/01–10/21/02, a collection of one year of my Just Thinking columns and the latest release from Timshel Literature is now available. To be completely honest, I'll be thrilled if I can break even on this venture; given the readership of this blog, alone, that ought to be possible. If you are considering, have considered, or may someday consider ordering your autographed copy, please do.
$12.00 (includes shipping)
Buy Just Thinking: Volume I and
get A Whispering Through the Branches for half price!$19.00 (includes shipping)
$25.50(includes shipping)No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 01:05 PM EST
Erased from the History of Vlogging
Well, for a brief period I was a vlog innovator, mentioned around the world and on major Web sites. Granted, I've let it slide a bit based on time constraints and a bit of hesitancy regarding a cost/benefit analysis. But still, it doesn't encourage me to push through my lagging that I'm the only vlogger of the December–January flurry to not be named in Glenn Reynolds's TCS column today:
Already Jeff Jarvis has put up opinion pieces (video-weblogging, or "vlogging") that are as good as most of what we see on TV. And Jarvis's efforts have produced humorous responses, such as this "Plog" (don't ask; just watch it) and this piece by Don McArthur, that can only be called "vlog noir."
Smart networks will be watching the Internet to spot rising talent first. Smart - or just motivated - people will use the Internet to get noticed. And smart stars of today, like Bill Maher, will keep one eye on the competition. Because there's about to be a lot more of it.
Well, not being listed among such a small group of vloggers by Glenn Reynolds doesn't likely bode well for my being "rising talent." Maybe I'll put it up for a vote, reality TV style: should Justin just give up and go back to the commercial fishing docks? Tune in next month.
1 Comment (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:33 AM EST
Scratching Arizona State University and Indiana University Off My List
Yes, eighteen-year-olds are adults. On the other hand, their parents still have significant responsibility for them and are still expected by our culture to do what they can to help them. I don't know the percentages, but I imagine the great majority of college students are parent-funded to some extent, and presumably, parents would be less inclined to send their kids to universities at which they might be targeted for recruitment into porn movies:
Cox and crew have visited Arizona State University, Indiana University and plan to visit a California university in the very near future. "We just showed up at ASU and hoped for the best. Since then, we plan everything out ahead of time. We help host parties off campus. We do campus radio interviews. We don't ask university permission," said Cox.
However, some students are receiving punishment and ridicule from their universities because of their decisions to participate in the festivities.
The ridicule is obviously appropriate. Perhaps allowing such filth to prey on kids is a sacrifice to be made for freedom, but only as long as the culture itself encourages restraint. The punishment, on the other hand, will receive less support. In my opinion, attending a university is voluntary, so the university is free to impose rules that students must follow, particularly when the behavior in question might affect the image of the school.
I know porn is popular among the libertarians who seem to dominate the Web (particularly the blogosphere), but I cannot see these pornographers as anything other than predators taking advantage of kids (albeit adult kids) in a turbulent, vulnerable time of their lives.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:14 AM EST
Hey, It's a Private Business: No French Bread
Citing the good that the United States has done for Europe, Danish pizzeria owner Aage Bjerre has banned French and German customers from his establishment:
He's put two homemade drawings on the shop door, one a silhouette of a man coloured red, yellow and black for Germany and another in the red, white and blue for France.
Both silhouettes have a bar across them.
There's hope for German customers, depending upon their government's actions in the near future. French are out forever, "Their attitude toward the United States will never change."
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:49 AM EST
The Redwood Review Poem of the Week
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:45 AM EST
Tuesday, February 25, 2003
Things Having to Do with the Fire
I apologize if you've come here at all during the past week looking for a Rhode Island blogger's frequent updates regarding the fire at the Station nightclub. The Providence Journal's been keeping up with all of the details. Myself, I guess the whole thing's just too close for me to engage in the rollcalling and the speculation that might justify frequent comment. Regarding the former, somehow, surprisingly in this state, I didn't know any of the people who died or were injured.
Regarding the latter, the speculation, I just can't stomach it. The local talk radio station to which I listen smacked me with the reason why, today. For one thing, they've preempted all of their programming during the day to talk about the tragedy nonstop. I guess there's been a need for a forum for Rhode Islanders to express themselves, but there really isn't all that much information out there to cover so much time. Today, when I left school for a few minutes to grab a cup of coffee, the news division of the radio station listed all of the big ticket items involved in one club owner's recent divorce. I don't need that info.
People this guy knew are dead, too, and he lost his business (one of his claims from the divorce) at the same time. He's probably also got a mountain of guilt, whether he's guilty of any criminal activity or not. So, until he declares that he can't pay on lost lawsuits, or something, I see no need for the local media to air his private affairs. Beyond the media (and more directly important), the state district attorney seems to be sensing that this might be a moment to shine for the cameras:
For a second day, Atty. Gen. Patrick J. Lynch appealed to Derderian and his brother Jeffrey, who co-owned the nightclub, to cooperate with investigators.
Lynch said Jeffrey Derderian hasn't spoken to investigators since the night of the fire and Michael has refused to answer any questions at all.
"There's a long list of things that we're all looking into now," said Lynch. "Ninety-seven people have died. Others cling to life as we all stand here. We're all looking for answers."
Maybe now mightn't be the time to pump up the pressure and the rhetoric in the investigation, eh Mr. Lynch?
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:05 PM EST
Outrage of the
DayWeekMonthYearJoe Katzman offers a much-justified rant against Maine educators telling children of deployed military that... well, you read it:
Alan Grover, WABI-TV: "What the kids are facing is hearing that [from Principals, Teachers and/or Guidance Counsellors] their mother or father is a bad person for taking part in the confrontation with Iraq; comments that are coming from teachers. That's according to officers with the Guard’s Family Assistance Program who've been traveling throughout the state this week. The officers report that such incidents are relatively few in number but that they've occurred in practically every region of the state."
Absolutely despicable. There are links in the comment section through which to obtain relevant contact information, should you be inclined to make use of it.
ADDENDUM:
I'm making this an addendum because I don't want to detract from the agreement that I have with Mr. Katzman about the absolutely offensive nature of the object of the majority of his post, but one part toward the end bothered me:This is hard. It takes time. It doesn't always succeed. Just like all the other necessary and worthwhile things in life. Sometimes decency doesn't come as a given. Sometimes, you have to fight for it - and punish those who think it doesn't apply to them.
You want to push your foreign policy views? Invite and present other viewpoints, or get a show on local cable. You want to tell my daughter that abortion is murder? Buy a radio ad. You say you wanna revolution? Well, you know, we'd all love to see the blog.
Katzman links to a post by Trent Telenko that tangentially condemns the use of children in protesting at abortion clinics. I'll say right up front that I don't believe such activism to be right unless the parents support it. Even then, it smacks not only of indoctrination, but also of the theft of childhood itself. On the other hand, I've seen folks on the right go beyond the appropriate headshaking at activists inculcating their children with their values.
The citation of abortion, here, seems to conflict, in direction, with the rest of the post, even to the point of getting the tangential issue wrong. Put in simple political terms, the left-wingers in the public schools seem much more likely to impart an aesthetic demand for "choice," and the issue most pervasive (and outrageous, in my opinion) with respect to minors and abortion is that of attempts to undermine parental consent (here, we can only hope that England is not foreshadowing for our own country).
The larger reason that Katzman's slipping abortion into this post is nagging at me is that, by going beyond "foreign policy views" and naming an unrelated specific (domestic) issue, he seems to siphon some of the anger stirred by the specific wickedness perpetrated against the children of military personnel toward a different cause about which readers might disagree with him, as I apparently do, outside of the context of enlisting children. Obviously, the differences in type and degree between the two uses of children are considerable, and the blending of the two can't help but detract from the impact of the outrage at hand.No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 07:59 PM EST
For the "And They Wanna Start Cloning?" Department
Man-eating flies have been let loose without having been properly irradiated. This is right out of a black-and-white horror movie (except for the fact that it looks as if the project is worthwhile):
Named for the corkscrew motion with which they burrow into flesh, the screwworm larvae can kill their victim -- human or animal -- in five days. The worm's Latin name, cochliomyia hominivorax, means "fly that devours men."
"They feed off fresh blood, not dead tissue as other species do. That's why they are extremely dangerous. It's very hard for an animal to defend itself against something like that," said Alfredo Alvarez, a biologist at the plant.
In the 1950s, U.S. scientists pioneered a strange but effective way of eradicating the pests. The flies are zapped with high doses of radiation to sterilize them then released into the wild to mate with their fertile counterparts. ...
Last month, the plant had its worst ever when a radiation machine malfunctioned. Millions of fertile flies were sent into the wild in Mexico and Panama. To date 50 cases of the disease have been found in animals in Panama and 44 in Chiapas.
The damage could escalate and take months to repair.
"It's a disaster for us. We're on national alert," said Alvarez. "The outbreak gives us an inkling of what could happen if the flies were used as a biological weapon in a terror attack. It could be very dangerous."
Got the shivers?
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:27 PM EST
Want More Proof That the Music Industry Is Playing You?
A Spanish computer program has a 93% success rate at picking out pop hits:
Scientists in Barcelona, Spain, have created a new "tune technology" to accurately pinpoint which songs will be hits, using 22 variables, such as melody, beat, harmony and the distance between the singer and the microphone.
Researcher Mike McCready says the computer program is 93 percent successful in picking which songs become hits.
I've got a lot of question marks (e.g., how do they define hit? from among what songs is the program picking?), but I'm not surprised that such a thing would be possible. Don't be an automaton — buy independent!
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:22 PM EST
Creative Punishment
I like a bit of punishment-fits-the-crime creativity in meting out the law. Here's a good example:
Curtis Lee Robin last week pleaded guilty to a felony charge of injury to a child and, along with his attorney and an Orange County prosecutor, signed the below "Agreed Punishment Recommendations" form that will be forwarded to District Court Judge Buddie Hahn in advance of Robin's March 13 sentencing. The plea agreement calls for Robin to receive an 8-year probation term, pay a $1000 fine, and "sleep in doghouse on his property or at Orange County Jail for thirty (30) consecutive nights."
I think we'd be a much healthier and happier society if such innovative (and public) punishments were to flourish.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:18 PM EST
Songs You Should Know 02/25/03
The Timshel Music Song You Should Know this week is "A Look at Us" by me.
"A Look at Us" Justin Katz, Pop/Rock
Stream (HiFi)Download
from Singing my song to painted wallsNo Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:40 AM EST
Monday, February 24, 2003
No, No Risk at All; Only Choice
Although the procedure has not left it lacking for women, as is the case in India, abortion has likely had a negative effect on fertility in Russia — a nation in which certain towns offer incentives to couples to have children. Emily of After Abortion concedes that the problem likely affects "multiply post-abortive" women to a higher degree, a suggestion that reminded me of the horror stories in England.
As Mark Shea says, "Abortion: the gift that keeps on taking."
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:29 PM EST
Perception and Practicality in Iraqi Reconstruction
Now that I've found the time to pay a little bit of attention, it seems to me that those who object to temporary U.S. military government of Iraq deal almost exclusively in perception. On NRO today, Jed Babbin suggests that not transferring leadership directly and immediately to Iraqis would represent a diplomatic failure:
Saddam Hussein is an old enemy, but this is a new war. Removing him will be the first American-imposed regime change in the Arab world. Hussein, bin Laden, and assorted Saudi government officials and mullahs are propagandizing that America is the infidel crusader attacking the ummah, the idealized Arab "nation." Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said recently that any "unilateral" military action by America would be an "act of aggression." If we establish a military government for Iraq — even for a little while — we will aid those who want to destroy our credibility, and the freedom we can bring.
We will not have defeated terror once Saddam is gone. But if the Arabs see that we establish freedom — and how fast we can propel the Iraqis from oppression to freedom to prosperity — the concept of America as liberator will not be easily discarded. The peoples of other problem nations, such as Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, will see Iraq as an example of freedom to be followed. The hate that fills the government press and many sermons will increasingly be seen for what it is: propaganda.
This sounds wonderful, but it doesn't address how America would go about that "propelling" to freedom and prosperity. I'd suggest that the fastest way to secure freedom for the Iraqi people and establish the stability necessary to foster prosperity would be to tie the nation up to the United States until it can float on its own — in other words, to maintain U.S. control while the leeches are cleared off, repairs are made, and a new crew established. Noah Millman agrees, expressing some disillusionment with Iraqi National Congress head Ahmad Chalabi (N.B., I found it very difficult to select a quotation because the whole entry is worth reading):
Installing Chalabi means not just decapitating the existing Baath party state but driving a huge number of people out of power and installing a bunch of exiles who will be immediately resented by the whole population. Meanwhile, the ethnic and religious factions will be overwhelmingly concerned with getting more for their own tribes, not with forging an Iraqi nation. It's a recipe for disaster.
The only way I can imagine keeping the country together is to have a strong central authority that everyone recognizes it is unwise to challenge. That's either another Saddam - that would really be a betrayal - or an American military governor. Then, over a couple of years, you structure an autonomy arrangement for the Kurds, work out a Constitution, maybe bring back a Hashemite figurehead, and hand the majority of power to Iraqi civilian authorities.
Addressing practical matters, Millman's is a strong argument. As he says, Iraq is not like Germany, in which a strong national identity exists across all interested parties, nor does it have experience with anything resembling a modern government. As for the perception promoted by enemies of the United States, I have little doubt that those external forces that do not find Chalabi (or whomever) in their own interests will cast him as a fair-weather nationalist or as a puppet for the Americans (which he would, indeed, have to be). In fact, even if a new Iraqi government were to be entirely autonomous of the United States, such propaganda is to be expected.
The way to prove the deception of Middle Eastern press and sermons is to make the Iraqi people more free and more prosperous. At this point, tight U.S. control of the government structures appears to be the most efficient means of accomplishing that. Any plan for the government can be slandered through propaganda; the question is whether the experience of the people is such that the slander takes hold. If not, a clear path toward renewed Iraqi autonomy will likely be sufficient to overcome the lies.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:11 AM EST
Save Our Nation!
Iraqi Americans call for a Saddamless Iraq:
In an answer to this month's worldwide war protests, some 500 Iraqi-Americans on Sunday urged one of President Bush's top military strategists to topple Saddam Hussein.
U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz assured them that American military might would come with even greater humanitarian help for people under Saddam's grip.
Maybe the Iraqi Americans should have Martin Sheen speak (or try to) at their next event.
(via Instapundit)
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 09:59 AM EST
Sunday, February 23, 2003
Just Thinking 02/24/03
My Just Thinking column for this week is "Take Out," a short story about a guy getting take out from a chain restaurant.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:05 PM EST
Do-Gooders Do Evil in Africa
Medpundit is more credulous than I was about the African HIV study that found a large part of the disease's spread attributable to poor medical treatment. She's read the study, so she's much more qualified than I am to discuss it. I do have to say that it's nearly unbelievable, to me, that the do-gooder organizations would be so prejudiced, culturally and ideologically, as to choose what seems to have been the absolute worst possible path for addressing the problem. This is from the study (with ed notes by medpundit):
First, it was in the interests of AIDS researchers in developed countries — where HIV seemed stubbornly confined to MSMs [homosexuals - ed], IDUs [IV drug users -ed], and their partners — to present AIDS in Africa as a heterosexual epidemic; 'nothing captured the attention of editors and news directors like the talk of widespread heterosexual transmission of AIDS' ... In a prominent 1988 article in Science, Piot and colleagues generalize with arguably more public relations savvy than evidence that 'Studies in Africa have demonstrated that HIV-1 is primarily a heterosexually transmitted disease and that the main risk factor for acquisition is the degree of sexual activity with multiple partners, not sexual orientation'. Second, there may have been an inclination to emphasize sexual transmission as an argument for condom promotion, coinciding with pre-existing programmes and efforts to curb Africa's rapid population growth. Third, 'the role of sexual promiscuity in the spread of AIDs in Africa appears to have evolved in part out of prior assumptions about the sexuality of Africans', as Packard and Epstein document in a regrettably ignored 1991 article. Fourth, health professionals in WHO and elsewhere worried that public discussion of HIV risks during health care might lead people to avoid immunizations. A 1990 letter to the Lancet, for example, speculated that 'a health message — eg, to avoid contaminated injection materials — will be misunderstood and that immunization programmes will be adversely affected'. In short, tangential, opportunistic, and irrational considerations may have contributed to ignoring and misinterpreting epidemiologic evidence.
Not believing that the inhabitants of a continent could be convinced to copulate prudently (ABC — abstinence, be faithful, use condoms) is one thing, but insisting on a "safe sex" approach when the problem is within the clinic itself isn't even in the ballpark. So when do you think we'll start seeing mea culpas?
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 08:58 PM EST
Go Ahead and Mock
Perhaps it can be seen as indicative of the suspected merit of such questions that pondering the health of pervasive promotion of sex is an area of thought to be mocked. Who, in mixed company, would dare raise the subject of sex addiction without at least a hint of irony as an escape from ridicule? And yet, a broadly libertine perspective on sex within a culture will not be made benign no matter how frequently we are told that it is.
Steven [a research assistant for a Boston hospital] got help eight years ago after a clergyman handed him the card of a sex-addiction therapist. Often sufferers aren't that lucky.
"Many therapists out there don't recognize sexually compulsive behavior as a problem," he says. "We were told it was understandable behavior. Many people enter recovery because they couldn't deal with a therapist continuing to tell them it was OK."
This is especially dangerous because left untreated, most sex addicts' behavior will escalate. That's why Hochstrasser-Walsh is so frustrated with the dearth of treatment options in Rhode Island. He'd like to see enough 12-step groups to allow patients to attend several meetings a week, more training for therapists on sex addiction and more awareness of the problem. But first, locals need to be able to discuss the problem without smirking.
No matter how many therapists or voices of corrupt morality declare that any behavior is just fine, we will continue to know that it is not. Just as it once was important to insist on healthy attitudes emerging from cultural mandates of sexual suppression, now it is important to insist on healthy attitudes being rebuilt despite cultural encouragement of sexual license.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:56 PM EST
Campaign Finance: No Republican Missteps, Here
As was clear when the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance-reform crossed President Bush's desk, if it weren't for the limitations on free speech, the bill would have been a fairly unadulterated victory for the Republicans. As Philip Terzian points out, if the actual finance part of the law makes it past the Supreme Court, the Republicans will expand their already substantial fund-raising advantage. I'm no expert, but my sense is that the reason this turn of events proved possible was that liberals just do not realize (or accept) how the Democrats actually play the game. The issue may prove to be just one more force pushing the Democrats farther into the mistaken strategies of deceptive legal tricks, unbankable promises, and social division.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:17 PM EST
The Names of Those Lost to Fire
The names of those who lost their lives in the West Warwick nightclub fire are beginning to come out. I didn't know any of the first seven named, but I will pray for them and their families.
As for culpability, the investigation promises to be difficult and painful. I heard a heart-wrenching press conference by the co-owner of the club who was on the scene that night, and he vehemently denied that the owners gave any permission for pyrotechnics. Nonetheless, the claims of both sides, the band and the club, are surrounded by suggestive evidence. It has been widely reported that the band has been accused, by club owners in other states, of using pyrotechnics without permission. On the other hand, from what I've heard, Jack Russell (Great White's lead singer) supposedly mentioned the intended use of pyrotechnics on a local radio show a few days ago, and patrons have claimed seeing pyrotechnics at the club before.
I suspect that there is an unspoken level of permissiveness in the business in general, but all that can be done is to wait for authorities to investigate. And all that can be said is that it shouldn't have happened.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:37 AM EST
Saturday, February 22, 2003
That No Professor Should Fear Ridicule
As part of an assignment for a 200-level French class that I took my final year at the University of Rhode Island, I made my way to the language building's media room. I handed over my student ID and selected a TV/VCR combo at the back of the room. The movie, Chacun Cherche Son Chat ("everyone is looking for his cat"), was a light film about a young single woman looking for love. Although the chairs weren't the most comfortable, and watching an entire movie using headphones in a booth is not ideally conducive to enjoyment, I rather liked the film. I think my mind had wandered a little, perhaps reveling in my ability to understand much of the movie without the benefit of subtitles, when two naked male actors appeared on the screen, flopping about the room kissing and engaging in anal sex. "Oh," my teacher explained in class, "it's a thing they do in France: insert gratuitous sex."
I see. Boy, did I see. Apparently college students learning the French language are being made to see all over the country. And to see that they keep any objections to themselves.
Aaron Sanders, a student at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, has been fired from his position with the school's student paper for daring to print the opinions of fellow students that Ridicule, a French movie that opens with a close-up of an uncircumcised penis urinating on a man in a wheelchair, mightn't be appropriate fare, particularly given that students claim that Professor Claire Goldstein didn't warn them before presenting the film in her "Text in Context" class. (Note: I think the victim of the "golden shower" is in a wheelchair, but it's been a while since I saw the film.)
The column sparked controversy, and the professoriate taught the young (conservative) punk, and any who might share his views, a lesson. French and Italian department chairman Jonathan Strauss contacted the paper's faculty adviser, professor of journalism Cheryl Heckler, who emailed the paper's editor, Jill Inkrott, to fire Sanders. Heckler also emailed Sanders personally to inform him that he had "caused greater pain to a dedicated, careful, VALUABLE professor than you can possibly comprehend." I wonder whether the professor's emphasis on the word "valuable" is meant to suggest that it is a quality that Sanders, a lowly student and hopeful journalist, might lack. As for the incomprensible pain that Goldstein apparently experienced, I also wonder what fun it could possibly be to present potentially offensive material that doesn't offend anybody enough for them to make the feeling known.
Goldstein's sensitivity to criticism points to the most disturbing aspect of the whole ordeal, even beyond the First Amendment issues involved in Sanders's firing. In an editorial response (on the department's official Web site), Strauss insinuated that Sanders — a student currently attending the university, mind you — has "a fascination" with sex — "to each his own," writes the department chair. On Erin O'Connor's Critical Mass blog, a commentor identifying himself as Norman Levitt, Mathematics, Rutgers, calls young Sanders "idiotic" and "dimwitted." It might be advisable for Professor Levitt's students not to bring up the topic, or related issues, if they disagree (such avoidance ought to be relatively easy in math studies, I would think).
In his original response, Strauss wrote, "The real issue here isn't sex; the issue is controlling people's right to express themselves and think through their opinions without undue fear." Unless, presumably, those opinions merit ad hominem ridicule on the school's Web site and, more broadly, in the academic community.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:51 PM EST
An Argument for Temporary U.S. Military Rule of Iraq
I'll admit to being behind the curve in studying up on all of the contributing factors that one must take into account when suggesting governmental strategies for a post-war Iraq, but my sense is that the democracy fetishists who think anything other than an immediately democratized nation would be a travesty and a betrayal are way off base.
Noah Millman's done his homework and has written an insightful post on the topic:
The only way I can imagine keeping the country together is to have a strong central authority that everyone recognizes it is unwise to challenge. That's either another Saddam - that would really be a betrayal - or an American military governor. Then, over a couple of years, you structure an autonomy arrangement for the Kurds, work out a Constitution, maybe bring back a Hashemite figurehead, and hand the majority of power to Iraqi civilian authorities.
(Noah's direct links don't appear to be working, so look for the post that begins, "I hate to say this, but I'm falling off the wagon with respect to Ahmad Chalabi.")
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 05:00 PM EST
Junk (Food) Science
The more children you have, the more likely you are to be obese, whether you are a mother or a father, researchers said Monday.
And, at least among mothers, the risk of developing diabetes, high levels of fat in the blood and heart disease appears to climb with every additional baby born to the family.
How convenient that the "ideal number of children" for the waist line just happens to be the number for population replacement. "See," the overpopulation doomsayers will say, "you'll clog neither our world nor your arteries."
In addition, once families included two children, the addition of every new child increased the risk of heart disease among mothers by 30%, and among fathers by 12%.
On the other hand, there's another fact of the study: that these researchers have no more basis to make such claims than a kid taking mental notes at the local mall. They've tallied the numbers, but none of their conclusions can be considered more than speculation:
However, once the researchers removed the influence of obesity and other risk factors for heart disease from this relationship, the risk of heart disease remained only slightly higher among mothers with many children, and disappeared in fathers.
"Parents of large families tend to be poorer and also have less healthy lifestyles--which explains some of their increased (heart disease) risk," Lawlor explained.
So, will having that third, fourth, or fifth child really make you more likely to be obese and more prone to heart disease? No. The factors are only indirectly related (mostly by way of personality and lifestyle choice). However, it may very well increase your overall sense of purpose and joy. I suggest an alternate headline for this story:
Parents of Multiple Children More Likely to Die Unless Rich Folks Start Breeding
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:23 PM EST
What Newton Believed
So Sir Isaac Newton predicted the end of the world in 2060.
His theories about Armageddon have been unearthed by academics from little-known handwritten manuscripts in a library in Jerusalem.
The thousands of pages show Newton's attempts to decode the Bible, which he believed contained God's secret laws for the universe.
Newton, who was also a theologian and alchemist, predicted that the Second Coming of Christ would follow plagues and war and would precede a 1,000-year reign by the saints on earth - of which he would be one.
More fascinating than Newton's actually deriving a year, in my opinion, is the reminder that theists are often too quick to cede "ownership" of the greatest minds of history to materialists. I've by no means made a study of it, but it seems as if we're in the midst of a period of Godlessness in the sciences. Some signs suggest that we're at the tail end of the period, although others would dispute this. As a general rule, on this count, I think scientists would do well to be humble in their assessment of what their profession can and cannot accomplish. This isn't akin to discovering that a recommended diet has been in error.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 02:41 PM EST
How's Your State for Gas?
Rhode Island is at about the midway point of a cross-state gas-price comparison. It's nice to see, however, that convenience isn't the only reason for me to fill my car up in Massachusetts.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 02:26 PM EST
Friday, February 21, 2003
Just Thinking: Volume I
$12.00 (includes shipping)
Buy Just Thinking: Volume I and
get A Whispering Through the Branches for half price!$19.00 (includes shipping)
$25.50(includes shipping)No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:23 PM EST
Notes on Blogging and Vlogging
Looking over Dust in the Light today, I see I did manage a few posts. However, I feel as if it was a light blogging day, so I wanted to mention that it was largely owing to the drive to knock a few move-to-tomorrow items off my To Do list. Today was quite productive, and my feeling more satisfied than usual around this time of night has confirmed that I really need to get the blogging into perspective in comparison with the rest of my projects. There may very well be no noticeable change in output, but I will definitely not be checking my sources so frequently (which is to say, more frequently than they're meant to be checked).
As for vlogging, I'd like to do more because it really is fun. However, given the tepid response to the last vlog (even with an Instapundit link), I've put it where it belongs: for when I've got a significant amount of spare time. Of course, that spare time might be more forthcoming if y'all were to pay a visit, with open mind and open wallet, to Confidence Place.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 10:21 PM EST
Now 96 Dead; Reporter Caught the Whole Thing on Tape
The number of deaths in that nightclub fire in West Warwick, Rhode Island, has been raised to 39. Apparently, a local news videographer was there acquiring footage for a report on nightclub safety, and he caught the fire as it began. The local Fox news station's server is clearly overwhelmed, but here's the video (the fire scene starts around 2:25).
(Note: Apparently, the WPRI Web site isn't enabled to stream video in Netscape, so you'll either have to Save Target As or use Internet Explorer.)
ADDENDUM:
The casualty total is up to 54. God rest their souls.ADDENDUM II:
Here's a CBS RealMedia file with some additional footage of the escape. Funny, the announcer says it was a CBS camera on the scene, but WPRI Eyewitness News is "Fox Providence."ADDENDUM III:
The death toll is now up to 60. The tragedy is made so much the worse by the ever-increasing numbers. It hardly compares in scale, but I can't help but remember the cautious relief, even amazement, as the September 11 total continued to decrease as people were accounted for.ADDENDUM IV:
96. The search is now on for family and friends are who haven't found loved ones. The magnitude of this is starting to hit home; nobody ever wants to find himself in a situation like this:About 100 people gathered at a family support center set up at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Warwick by the Red Cross. Grief counselors and clergy members were on hand.
One father got some good news at the hotel: He went there for information about his missing daughter and learned she was safe.
"Her father was here and we were able to tell him she was fine, `Go call your wife,' and everybody cheered," said Nick Logothets, director of disaster services for the local Red Cross.
The relief, and yet the guilt, looking around at the hopeful faces around the room. It's such a foolish reason for so many people to die. The club owners deny granting permission for the use of pyrotechnics. I'd guess that it's probably just something to which nobody in that business gives much thought. Back when I used to go out to such concerts, I was often surprised at the size of the explosions that were allowed.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 08:51 AM EST
This Time in Rhode Island
More nightclub deaths, this time at The Station in Rhode Island. I've never been there, but it's pretty well known. This incident was different than the recent catastrophe in Chicago in that it was a pyrotechnics explosion during the show (Great White). If The Station is like most similar places, the people just squeeze right up against the stage, and the nightclub owners tend to pack in as many people as will fit.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 08:01 AM EST
The Redwood Review Fiction of the Week
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:47 AM EST
Will They Never Learn?
Although progressive "solutions" such as increasing sexual education and expanding provision of birth control and abortion for girls who should not yet be sexually active have led to a horrific state of affairs in England, the powers that be in the youth-sexualization industry continue to pile worse policy upon bad policy:
[A new course] aims to reduce promiscuity by encouraging pupils to discover "levels of intimacy", including oral sex, instead of full sexual intercourse.
More than 100,000 children are now taking the course at one in every thirty secondary schools. It forms part of efforts to tackle Britain’s teenage pregnancy rate, which is the highest in Western Europe.
I'm ever-more convinced that these problems follow directly from initial social choices that will be difficult, perhaps impossible, to unmake. In other words, improvement may require no less than a full admission that we have been wrong and a thorough assessment of how much of our current sexual thinking we can afford to keep.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:44 AM EST
Another Front
Here's a reminder that the war on terrorism is global:
Philippine and U.S. officials said they agreed to begin the joint offensive now for several reasons. Negotiations between the countries have been on-going for months, but Abu Sayyaf's repeated attacks and the bombing death of an American Green Beret last November spurred Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to work out an aggressive plan.
Among terrorist groups, Abu Sayyaf has stood out for its genocidal attacks on Christians.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:19 AM EST
U.S. Post-War Plans Seem Reasonable to Me
You'll likely hear a bunch of hooey about the United States' post-war plan for Iraq being proof that we're only there to take over oil fields and build an empire. The first thing to ask any hooey-speakers is what they would prefer. As the movement of Iranian troops into Iraq suggest, the vacuum left by a dethroned Saddam Hussein will likely be too attractive for the power struggle to not cause the situation to deteriorate rapidly if the U.S. doesn't initially fill it.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 12:17 AM EST
Thursday, February 20, 2003
Hey, Read the Book or Wait for the DVD
As much as I disliked it when I noticed that the space traditionally devoted solely to trailers before a movie at the theater had begun to be sold to advertisers, I think it's more than ridiculous for people to sue for lost time. Come on now. Out of all of the ways that the entertainment industry attempts to take advantage of its patrons, is this method really worth a lawsuit?
I guess it's easier (and more profitable) to sue than to write a letter or protest by staying home and reading a book and waiting for the DVD.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:30 PM EST
Giving Up on Doctors
So, about a year ago, I made an appointment to get a general check up with a doctor whom my brother-in-law recommended. A few weeks before the day arrived, the doctor's office called and told me that the doctor had to clear his schedule for a family emergency and that I should call later in the summer to reschedule. In no hurry, I followed the instructions and ultimately scheduled an appointment for this morning.
Arriving fifteen minutes early for my 11:15 a.m. appointment (in a clinic that opens at 10:00 a.m.), I sat down and counted the pages of the long chapter in The Lord of the Rings that intended to begin reading. Well, two hours later, that chapter was finished, and I still wasn't out of the waiting room, with two people still ahead of me in their own little white-walled cells. I left.
I am so furious that it may be a full week before I'm able to motivate myself to begin the search for another doctor, who will, hopefully, be able to see me before another year is out. I can't imagine expecting people to sit in a cramped room with soap opera noises overhead on the television and receptionists who refuse to estimate a wait time for the better part of a workday. And I can't help but think that, if the medical industry weren't structured the way it is, doctors would have to find ways to deal with such problems.
Why couldn't a doctor, who already knows that he's two hours behind, have the receptionist tell his patients his predicament and invite them to leave and come back at a specified time? Maybe, like at a restaurant, patients could be given pagers that go off when their rooms are almost cleared for service. Or better yet, the doctor's office could call people at home a half-hour or so before the doctor is ready for them. To not at least tell people to expect a wait that could accommodate the watching of The Lord of the Rings: Two Towers seems to me to indicate a lack of concern for them, a presumption that they'll do whatever the hell the doctor wants them to because, well, he's the doctor.
2 comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 03:11 PM EST
First Do No Harm
A study finding that only about a third of African AIDS is spread through sexual means would be hopeful news, if true. If the central problem is, indeed, "contaminated medical injections," then prevention would seem easier to achieve.
Still, I'm skeptical. The research is mainly based on extracted demographic information from other studies:
Many studies reported young children infected with HIV even though their mothers were not.
Typically STDs are associated with being poor and uneducated but HIV in Africa is linked with urban living, having a good education and higher income.
It wasn't long ago that I read of rumors in Africa that sex with virgins would cure HIV leading to some horrific behavior. As for the three factors associated with HIV in Africa, I haven't read the research, but it seems some of that association could be explained by studying any demographic shift that might have occurred based on the people who actually participated in the study. I also don't know why "urban living" is cast, here, as a de facto indication of higher class status.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 08:31 AM EST
Wednesday, February 19, 2003
The Redwood Review Nonfiction of the Week
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:19 PM EST
Offensive for the Wrong Reasons?
Anti-Bush T-Shirt Banned at Mich. School
Aha! Jingoistic censorship! The silencing of free political expression criticizing the President! Not quite:
School officials ordered a 16-year-old student to either take off a T-shirt emblazoned with the words "International Terrorist" and a picture of President Bush or go home, saying they worried it would inflame passions at the school where a majority of students are Arab-American. ...
Dearborn is the center of an Arab-American community of about 300,000 in southeastern Michigan. About 55 percent of the district's 17,600 students are Arab-American.
What can be said? From the fact that only the potentially anti–Arab-terrorist implications made the shirt objectionable to the assumption that reference to terrorists must surely offend Arabs in the first place, there's just too much here. This is PCism beginning to eat itself.
Along with the link to the school district's Web site, the Guardian provides a link to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Where's the link to the Bush supporter support group?
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 11:00 PM EST
The Right to Be Not-so-Subtly Racist
The subhead of a Providence Journal article says it all: "The Supreme Court is urged to preserve a college's right to consider race as a factor in admitting a student." And there's no way to describe it more clearly.
The folks doing the urging are the heads of America's most pampered academic institutions:
They said their current, "carefully designed" and multifaceted admissions systems have helped them to give students a better education, and predicted that a ruling against Michigan "would trigger wrenching disruption." ...
The colleges also made it clear that because Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids institutions that receive federal funds to engage in racial "discrimination," they feared a ruling against Michigan could "dramatically" compromise their own admissions systems.
There's no way to characterize that as saying other than, "allow us to continue unConstitutional discrimination." Even the breath-of-fresh-air Larry Summers is in on it:
"This case is enormously important for higher education and for our nation," Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers said in a statement. "We hope the Supreme Court, as it did 25 years ago in [Regents of the University of California v. Bakke], will preserve universities' flexibility to maintain carefully tailored admissions programs that do not turn a blind eye to the powerful educational value of student diversity."
But not a "blind eye" to race? I wonder how many of the students who attend these folks' schools are currently learning the postmodernist mumbo-jumbo that race does not exist. That is why, for me, the drive for affirmative action is just so incredibly bizarre. On the one hand, it is bad because it perpetuates racism; on the other hand, it is hypocritical because many of its supporters also believe that race is a fabrication that will disappear once we cease to believe in it.
This issue is so untenable that even America's most over-educated scribblers can't author a brief statement without writing nonsense:
The elite colleges' brief argues that such alternatives [as accepting top-ranking students from all schools] would be "disingenuous," and "infeasible and ineffective" for highly selective universities that already receive applications from far more top students than they can accommodate, and that draw students from around the world.
Such quotas can't be applied to graduate schools, the brief notes, and they are "fundamentally incompatible with the commitment to consider each applicant on his or her individual merit, taking into account all factors, not just test scores or class rank."
I'm concentrating particularly on the second paragraph. I continue to wonder why four years of opportunity to shine in undergraduate college wouldn't even the playing field sufficiently for graduate admissions to be race-blind. Moreover, it seems to me laughable to argue that we cannot judge based on academic achievement rather than race because the former is "incompatible" with consideration of "individual merit," whereas the latter is not. Huh?
My own opinion is that these collegiate presidents are full of it. Here's Brown University President Ruth J. Simmons:
"By almost all accounts, our institutions of higher learning have benefited enormously from greater diversity in their student bodies, faculty and staff," Simmons said. "The greater variety of backgrounds, life experiences, political positions, social perspectives and personal aspirations on their campuses has allowed the nation's colleges and universities to better prepare students for lives in an international, multicultural world."
The heart of this statement, involving variety of perspective in one way or another, is an utter lie. You don't have to take my own experience not getting into Brown's (or any other) graduate school for English as an indication (here's my résumé). Here's a blurb about Brown that draw's from David Horowitz's study of college professors:
At Brown University, 94.7% of the professors whose political affiliations showed up in primary registrations last year were Democrats, only 5.3% were Republicans. Only three Republicans could be found on the Brown liberal arts faculty. Zero in the English Department, zero in the History Department, zero in the Political Science Department, zero in the Africana Studies Department, and zero in the Sociology Department.
Well, I guess one way to teach youngsters that there's no difference between people of different races is to perpetuate homogeneity where difference really matters.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 09:45 PM EST
Can the Students Sue?
I remember being less shocked than my professor when he discovered that it had been left to him to teach basic argumentative writing to students in a 400-level class on Melville. At least the University of Rhode Island never made the claims that Duke did based on the Greatness of Stanley Fish. But it's likely a nationwide problem:
In fact, hundreds of thousands of recent college graduates today cannot express themselves with the written word. Why? Because universities have shortchanged them, offering strange literary theories, Marxism, feminism, deconstruction, and other oddities in the guise of writing courses. They've offered everything, really, but the basics of clear writing.
Carnegie Mellon University had a good program in this area when I was there. Of course, my Argument one-oh-something class took race and the construction and treatment thereof as its central theme, but the professor clearly understood that this was the medium, not the message.
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:34 PM EST
You Have to Chew the Crow to Eat It
About a month ago, I wondered how John Derbyshire would handle being wrong when it became apparent even to him that we were going to follow through with our threats against Saddam Hussein. Here it is. Apparently, it's our lack of bravado that fooled him. (Yeah, I know: interestingly different than the way his European brethren seem to see us.)
No Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:14 PM EST
Just War, the Vatican, and Me
Want more on the Just War, Iraq, and the Vatican? I've been discussing it in comment boxes at Mark Shea's blog all day. The direct links don't appear to be working properly, so if you're interested, go to Mark's page and look for the following posts (from oldest to newest):
Things that give me pause
Ambivalence! Get Your Fresh Hot Ambivalence Right Here!
Another Conflicted Reader writes
Unhelpful rhetoric
Mobile arguments for warNo Comments (click to link)
Posted by Justin Katz @ 06:05 PM EST
Campaign-Finance Posturing Payback
Well, the politicians are starting to find out what they signed into law during that campaign finance imbroglio. Here's my favorite part:
It turns out that the law also includes a provision requiring that federal candidates a
