Happy New Year!

It's the New Year somewhere.

I Think I Heard A Head Explode

...and it was poor Christopher Hitchens', reading that the Pope is the George Orwell of our time. And from a fellow atheist, no less.

A great deal of the hostility to the Pope’s visit was likewise caused by his having been right, at least in some things, such as the insufficiency of consumerist materialism as a basis for a satisfactory existence. There are few human types less attractive, surely, than failed materialists, which is what the British, or at least so many of them, now are. They consume without discrimination what they have not earned: which is why many of them are so grotesquely fat as well as so deeply indebted. Indeed, there is scarcely any kind of debt or deficit to which we as a nation have not resorted in order to continue (at least for a time) on our vulgar and degraded way. A nation that behaves thus is quite without honour or self-respect, collective or individual. All this Benedict XVI has seen with a perfectly clear eye; and if what George Orwell once wrote, that we have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men, we might even call the Pope the George Orwell of our time.

The important part of the essay is Dalrymple's assertion that hatred for the pope stems from the fact not that he stands athwart any particular policy, but against an entire Weltanschauung. He says what Benedict is doing is forcing a crisis of confidence in the dominant culture, akin to that described by J.S. Mill when he asked himself a question:

Suppose that all your objects in life were realized; that all the changes in institutions and opinions which you are looking forward to, could be erected this very instant: would this be a great joy and happiness to you?’ And an irrepressible self-consciousness answered ‘No!’At this my heart sank within me; the whole foundation on which my life was constructed fell down. All my happiness was to have been founded in the continued pursuit of this end. The end had ceased to charm, and how could there ever again be any interest in the means? I seemed to have nothing left to live for.

But I'm feeling puckish, and therefore skip to the yummy (because keenly observed) insult to the "arrest the pope" crowd:

the very resort of some liberals to the language of arrest shows how, not very far beneath a veneer of libertarianism, lies an authoritarianism that makes Benedict XVI look very liberal indeed. They want arguments to be settled by arrest: in other words, who can arrest whom, assuming that they will always be the ones to wield the handcuffs.

 The pope is the real liberal.

Seventh Day of Christmas

Julius Schnorr, 1820

Midnight Mass, 2010:

The infinite distance between God and man is overcome. God has not only bent down, as we read in the Psalms; he has truly “come down”, he has come into the world, he has become one of us, in order to draw all of us to himself. This child is truly Emmanuel – God-with-us. His kingdom truly stretches to the ends of the earth. He has truly built islands of peace in the world-encompassing breadth of the holy Eucharist. Wherever it is celebrated, an island of peace arises, of God’s own peace. This child has ignited the light of goodness in men and has given them strength to overcome the tyranny of might.

Sixth Day of Christmas

Madonna & Child, Carlo Crivelli, 1480

God is always faithful to his promises, but he often surprises us in the way he fulfils them. The child that was born in Bethlehem did indeed bring liberation, but not only for the people of that time and place – he was to be the Saviour of all people throughout the world and throughout history. And it was not a political liberation that he brought, achieved through military means: rather, Christ destroyed death for ever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the Cross.

--BBC "Thought for the Day" delivered by Benedict XVI

Fifth Day of Christmas

The Birth of Jesus, James Tissot

"The Word became flesh." Before this revelation we once more wonder: how can this be? The Word and the flesh are mutually opposed realities; how can the eternal and almighty Word become a frail and mortal man? There is only one answer: Love. Those who love desire to share with the beloved, they want to be one with the beloved, and Sacred Scripture shows us the great love story of God for his people which culminated in Jesus Christ.

 Pope's Christmas Message, 2010

Fourth Day of Christmas

Flight into Egypt, Domenico Fiasella

December 26, 2010 Angelus:

The Holy Family of Nazareth experienced many trials, for example – as mentioned in the Gospel according to Matthew - the" Massacre of the Innocents ," which forced Mary and Joseph to emigrate to Egypt. But, trusting in divine Providence, they found their stability and provided a serene childhood and a solid education for Jesus. "

"Dear friends - he concluded - the Holy Family is certainly unique and unrepeatable, but at the same time it is the “model” for every family, because Jesus, true man, chose to be born to in a human family, and in so doing has blessed and consecrated it. Therefore, we entrust to the Virgin Mary and St. Joseph all families, so they are not discouraged by trials and difficulties, but always cultivate conjugal love and confidently devote themselves to the service of life and education.

Third Day of Christmas

Madonna & Child, Marianne Stokes, 1907

Benedict XVI, homily for midnight mass 2010

...part of this night is simply joy at God’s closeness. We are grateful that God gives himself into our hands as a child, begging as it were for our love, implanting his peace in our hearts. But this joy is also a prayer: Lord, make your promise come fully true. Break the rods of the oppressors. Burn the tramping boots. Let the time of the garments rolled in blood come to an end. Fulfil the prophecy that “of peace there will be no end” (Is 9:7). We thank you for your goodness, but we also ask you to show forth your power. Establish the dominion of your truth and your love in the world – the “kingdom of righteousness, love and peace”.

Second Day of Christmas

The Holy Family, Bartolomeo Schedoni

In the Gospel we do not find discourses on the family but an event which is worth more than any words: God wanted to be born and to grow up in a human family. In this way he consecrated the family as the first and ordinary means of his encounter with humanity.

From feast of the Holy Family, 2007, Benedict XVI

Merry Christmas!

Madonna of the Fir Tree, Marianne Stokes, 1925

From the Pope's homily for Midnight Mass:

the angels’ message is both promise and call at the same time. God has anticipated us with the gift of his Son. God anticipates us again and again in unexpected ways. He does not cease to search for us, to raise us up as often as we might need. He does not abandon the lost sheep in the wilderness into which it had strayed. God does not allow himself to be confounded by our sin. Again and again he begins afresh with us. But he is still waiting for us to join him in love. He loves us, so that we too may become people who love, so that there may be peace on earth.

Saint Luke does not say that the angels sang. He states quite soberly: the heavenly host praised God and said: "Glory to God in the highest" (Lk 2:13f.). But men have always known that the speech of angels is different from human speech, and that above all on this night of joyful proclamation it was in song that they extolled God’s heavenly glory. So this angelic song has been recognized from the earliest days as music proceeding from God, indeed, as an invitation to join in the singing with hearts filled with joy at the fact that we are loved by God. Cantare amantis est, says Saint Augustine: singing belongs to one who loves. Thus, down the centuries, the angels’ song has again and again become a song of love and joy, a song of those who love. At this hour, full of thankfulness, we join in the singing of all the centuries, singing that unites heaven and earth, angels and men. Yes, indeed, we praise you for your glory. We praise you for your love. Grant that we may join with you in love more and more and thus become people of peace. Amen.

Ecumenical Christmas Greetings

David Mamet in The Tablet, shamelessly pinched from Kaching!

Pope's Year In Review

Haven't the energy at present to comment on the Holy Father's Christmas address to the Curia, but reading it I recall Oriana Fallaci's remark, "When I read the words of Ratzinger, I no longer feel so alone." More on this when leisure allows. For now, politics buffs, Tocqueville plays a major role in this address!

Update: I get by with a little help from my friends: Christmas address breakdown at the Benedict Blog.

Kaboom!

Jake Tapper: Director of National Intelligence admits he hadn't been briefed on London terror arrests. And the TSA can't find guns in bags.

All together now! Reprise!

Advent with Schall

Ken Masugi's latest interview with the good Padre, on the occasion of the publication of his 32nd book, The Modern Age. Naturally I like this, since I am in love with Spe Salvi.

KM: You maintain that "The modern age is characterized by the claim that man can propose his own final end, can decide the content of his own happiness." No doubt, in a manner he can do this, but is what he defines worth having?
JVS: Your question—"Is it worth having?"—in its own way, brings out the central theme of this book. Indeed, this "Is it worth having?" theme is why Benedict XVI's encyclical, Spe Salvi, is so fundamental for understanding the nature of political philosophy. We have had intimations all along from Nietzsche to Bury to Voegelin that the modern world is not nearly as "secular" in inspiration as it pretends to be. Rather it is an effort to accomplish the lofty goals that were found in the revelational tradition by means other than suggested there. Without this elevated background, our political ideologies and enthusiasms would simply never have happened.

Skipping a little, there's this interesting relation of B16 to Strauss:

 Quiet like Benedict, Strauss sees that the ends of everlasting life in happiness are proposed in Christian revelation. Their achievement requires grace. But their accomplishment is not to be found in this world. Yet, when faith is gone, these elevated ends remain demanding a "practical" response. The optimism of progress or utopianism ultimately comes from this forgotten grace's original addendum, as it were, to nature. Christianity in this sense has not been rejected. It has been relocated with a motivating force no longer dependent on faith, prayer, and good works. It depends rather on the technical/biological transformation of man and polity so that such ends are now produced in this world by man himself, by his "science." This is, as you put it, "an assertion of divinity."

Not looking good for Christianity at present, but in the end I have to think Christmas has to triumph over Carbon Credits and the War on Childhood Obesity for just the sheer boredom of the latter things. There's simply no beauty in the modern project, no awe.

There's a lot more of value in the interview, go read it all.

Belatedly

I know it's beside the point now, but for the sake of the external hard drive I wanted to highlight Paul Ryan's cogent arguments in favor of the tax deal. The first half is a pro-freedom argument for the Left. But the second half is what interests me. DeMint, Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Palin et al just got it plain wrong. Surprisingly, they seem to make the same mistake pro-lifers do when they go for all or nothing instead of understanding that votes are steps along the way in an argument and you always want to be advancing your cause.



Curtsy to Jennifer Rubin. If you don't feel like watching, you can read the arguments at her place.

Now That's A Gingerbread Latte

Shamelessly Pinched From Here

I'm alive, thanks for asking. Just caught up in baking projects such as the above. Not this exact one...but I'm thinking about it.

NOT Related To December 25th

Just putting this in the external hard drive for future use.

Party of Unwashed Wankers

'Scuse the rude term, but now the Leftosphere is mad at Sarah Palin for washing her hands during a cholera outbreak (the hair thing would have been bad had it been true)? Seriously? This is like when they all snickered at Christine O'Donnell for opposing self-abuse --indicating what, exactly, about themselves?

the multiple shots of Sarah sanitizing and washing her hands suggests the former Gov is primarily concerned, above all humanitarian else, about catching something.

I'm for civility, but would think twice about shaking hands with that poster or his readers.

Yes, Dears. May I politely suggest having a nice drink and taking a breather?

Too Many Layers of Dumb

I like Sarah Palin, but she's not my candidate for President, and I find her answer here a little gooberish. Not the Lewis part, but the "anything and everything..."

Go ahead, everyone have a good cringe...only why are we not equally cringing at Richard Wolffe's stupifying ignorance of the fact that C.S. Lewis wrote more than Narnia --which is a bit like not knowing Ronald Reagan had a career besides acting? Even Matthews has to warn the guy off that line.

Curtsy: CMR

Bad Vlad & The Polonium Band

Putin sings at a kids' cancer charity.

There's Not Too Many Of Us

Chicks Against Chick Peas

They're fine with Hamas, but don't touch the hummus. Though, to be fair, Hamas is not big on producing, so there's nothing to boycott. What these gals lack in commitment to human rights they make up for in sequins, though, I'll give them that.

When are pro-lifers going to do a catchy dance outside Planned Parenthood?

Meanwhile, in other self-congratulatory energetic youth mob news, ninme's got the speech of one of those 15-yr-olds who threw stuff at Charles & Camilla to fight the man, and CMR's got video of UN climate activists signing petitions to ban water.

Irena Anders

Irena Anders, World War II Poland's Bob Hope, has passed away in Britain at 90. She actually marched alongside Polish soldiers on their way to Monte Cassino.

Following the Russian-Polish military agreement in 1941, General [Wladyslaw] Anders was released from the Lubianka prison and asked to form an army from the Polish soldiers being similarly released from gulags in Siberia. Irena, (using her stage name of Renata Bogdanska) was there as part of the "Polish Parade", a theatrical company keeping spirits high among the new army as it marched through Russia to the the shelter of the Middle East, all the way to the decisive victory for the Allies at Monte Cassino in 1944.

Under the leadership of General Anders the Poles, secured a hard-won victory on the Italian mountain. And it was Irena Anders who is said to have first sung "Czerwone maki na Monte Cassino" ("Red Poppies on Monte Cassino"), written in the midst of the fighting in honour of those who lost their lives. Her beauty was famed and her talent was well remembered by those who were there: Polish veterans recal her singing to them on the back of trucks as they moved across war-torn Europe. 

After the war she married General Anders and they settled in the UK rather than see their beloved Poland under communism. She continued as sort of an ex officio first lady of Poland, always defending Polish culture and freedom.

She passed away November 29. The funeral mass was last Wednesday.

Obama Abdicates To Clinton

Obama ditches presser, turns it over to Clinton. What the....?

Advent Songs That Are Not THAT One

Christmas carols during Advent are just gauche.

As a friend used to say, the birth of the Savior is just a pious rumor until Christmas...you can't trust every angel that comes down the pike.

"O Come, O Come Emmanuel"  is gorgeous, but as it is the "O" antiphons put to music, it's really not liturgically appropriate until December 17th, by which time we're all tired of it because we've sung it every day since First Sunday of Advent, not knowing any other Advent hymns.

So, as a public service, here are a few others, each easily available in choral form or tinkly Wyndam Hill-style piano on iTunes or in midi files with lyrics if you just wish to learn them for singing purposes. All lovely in melody, theologically sound and an aid to meditation if you let the words sink in.

The links below are to whatever pops up on youtube...not vouching for the loveliness of the performances. Au contraire! I'm showing any amateur can learn.

The Advent of Our King
Comfort, Comfort O My People
Come, O Long Expected Jesus (choice of three tunes! here are others!)
Creator of the Stars of Night
Gabriel's Song (see, even Sting knows this one)
Hark! A Thrilling Voice is Sounding
I Sing A Maid (lovely contemporary hymn) 
Of the Father's Heart Begotten (each Advent one new hymn sinks into me; this year it's this one)
The King Shall Come
Lift Up Your Heads, Almighty Gates
People, Look East  (lyrics from a profoundly Catholic woman/old French carol)
Rejoice, Rejoice Believers (can't find the melody I know, but the lyrics are still wonderful)
O Come, Divine Messiah
On Jordan's Bank (here's another melody)
Rorate, caeli desuper
Wake, O Wake & Sleep No Longer 
When The King Shall Come Again  (this one was my obsession last Advent season --especially the third verse. What an image! "Now the deaf shall hear the dumb sing away their weeping; blind eyes see the injured come walking, running, leaping!" Like almost all hymns, it should not be performed at the dirge pace choirs and congregations drag them to, but like a march. Sing those lines in triumphant march tempo and imagine that day...)

There now, no excuses. It's by no means an exhaustive list, but let's have a more musical Advent from now on, shall we?

"This Is Not Science; Other Forces Are At Work"

From The Telegraph, top Physicist resigns from the American Physical Society. Here's his letter in its entirety.

Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.


It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:


1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)

Trying To Bring Down The Good Guys

Shamelessly pinched from here, curtsy to Kaching!

It is instructive that Julian Assange, the face for WikiLeaks, has not hacked into and exposed the secret files of Russia, China, North Korea, or comparable nations that are unfriendly to American interests and policies.

The reason, simply stated, is that Assange knows we would be talking about him in the past tense if he had.

That, plus the fact that while the Wikileaks info has been damaging to allies, to the war effort, and to our allies' ability to speak to us openly, what's also been revealed is that the government doesn't lie to us and things are more or less as we've been told...with the details prudently omitted, of course.

As for the charges against Assange in Sweden....I am amazed to discover there's any such thing as a sex crime in a Scandinavian country....  Hope for us yet?

Read My Lips: No New Taxcuts!

Geez. It's not just the professional Dems raging at Obama over the deal. My liberal Facebook friends are freaking out. I can't understand going livid over a temporary delay of tax hike myself, but the Prez seems to be experiencing his George H.W. Bush moment.

(New drinking game: every time Obama is compared to a different disappointing President....)

Hopkins For The Feast

St. Anne teaching the Child Mary, Murillo

The Blessed Virgin Mary Compared to the Air We Breathe

WILD air, world-mothering air,
Nestling me everywhere,
That each eyelash or hair
Girdles; goes home betwixt
The fleeciest, frailest-flixed
Snowflake; that ’s fairly mixed
With, riddles, and is rife
In every least thing’s life;
This needful, never spent,
And nursing element;
My more than meat and drink,
My meal at every wink;
This air, which, by life’s law,
My lung must draw and draw
Now but to breathe its praise,
Minds me in many ways
Of her who not only
Gave God’s infinity
Dwindled to infancy
Welcome in womb and breast,
Birth, milk, and all the rest
But mothers each new grace
That does now reach our race—
Mary Immaculate,
Merely a woman, yet
Whose presence, power is
Great as no goddess’s
Was deemèd, dreamèd; who
This one work has to do—
Let all God’s glory through,
God’s glory which would go
Through her and from her flow
Off, and no way but so.
I say that we are wound
With mercy round and round
As if with air: the same
Is Mary, more by name.
She, wild web, wondrous robe,
Mantles the guilty globe,
Since God has let dispense
Her prayers his providence:
Nay, more than almoner,
The sweet alms’ self is her
And men are meant to share
Her life as life does air.
If I have understood,
She holds high motherhood
Towards all our ghostly good
And plays in grace her part
About man’s beating heart,
Laying, like air’s fine flood,
The deathdance in his blood;
Yet no part but what will
Be Christ our Saviour still.
Of her flesh he took flesh:
He does take fresh and fresh,
Though much the mystery how,
Not flesh but spirit now
And makes, O marvellous!
New Nazareths in us,
Where she shall yet conceive
Him, morning, noon, and eve;
New Bethlems, and he born
There, evening, noon, and morn—
Bethlem or Nazareth,
Men here may draw like breath
More Christ and baffle death;
Who, born so, comes to be
New self and nobler me
In each one and each one
More makes, when all is done,
Both God’s and Mary’s Son.
Again, look overhead
How air is azurèd;
O how! nay do but stand
Where you can lift your hand
Skywards: rich, rich it laps
Round the four fingergaps.
Yet such a sapphire-shot,
Charged, steepèd sky will not
Stain light. Yea, mark you this:
It does no prejudice.
The glass-blue days are those
When every colour glows,
Each shape and shadow shows.
Blue be it: this blue heaven
The seven or seven times seven
Hued sunbeam will transmit
Perfect, not alter it.
Or if there does some soft,
On things aloof, aloft,
Bloom breathe, that one breath more
Earth is the fairer for.
Whereas did air not make
This bath of blue and slake
His fire, the sun would shake,
A blear and blinding ball
With blackness bound, and all
The thick stars round him roll
Flashing like flecks of coal,
Quartz-fret, or sparks of salt,
In grimy vasty vault.
So God was god of old:
A mother came to mould
Those limbs like ours which are
What must make our daystar
Much dearer to mankind;
Whose glory bare would blind
Or less would win man’s mind.
Through her we may see him
Made sweeter, not made dim,
And her hand leaves his light
Sifted to suit our sight.
Be thou then, O thou dear
Mother, my atmosphere;
My happier world, wherein
To wend and meet no sin;
Above me, round me lie
Fronting my froward eye
With sweet and scarless sky;
Stir in my ears, speak there
Of God’s love, O live air,
Of patience, penance, prayer:
World-mothering air, air wild,
Wound with thee, in thee isled,
Fold home, fast fold thy child.

December 7

Survivors to gather:

Art Herriford, president of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association, recalls watching from his ship, the Detroit, as the Arizona battleship was hit.
"I was looking directly at the Arizona when she went sky-high. It's still hard to believe that in the time period of the snap of a finger, 1,177 lives could be wiped out," said Herriford, 88, of Sherman Oaks, Calif.

A Thumping From St. Nicholas

Among St. Nick's numerous acts of kindness was his manual correction of Arius the heretic. I am shamelessly pinching a poem about that:

St. Nicholas the Plagologist, Possibly the First Muscular Christian

Saint Nicholas was my kind of Saint,
If sometimes short of temper.
Though pacifism was not his bent;
He was fidelis semper.

When Arius denied his Lord's
Divinity, Nick, feeling sore;
Deciding acts speak more than words,
Felled Arius to the floor.

His kind of knock-down plagologue*
Is now not to our taste.
We value courteous dialogue
Above such wordless haste.

And yet there is a time, one feels
To strike and not to speak.
When Reason with Unreason deals,
It's reason which is weak.

For who can mould a brain of mud
With philosophic lore?
Better to thump the stupid crud.
His place is on the floor.

*author's note: Plagologue = arguing or reasoning with blows. This word does not appear in any dictionary. It is my own coinage, being derived from Latin 'plagus' = a blow, 'plagosus' = full of blows, violent, cognate with Greek 'plegein = to beat, and logos = reason.

Curtsy: Mulier Fortis; and happy feast day to all you Nicks and Nicholes!

I'm Only Posting This Because I Have Boys

Curtsy: Kaching!

It includes 1,200 custom-designed cars and 18 lanes; 13 toy trains and tracks; and, dotting the landscape, buildings made of wood block, tiles, Legos and Lincoln Logs. The crew is still at work on the installation. In “Metropolis II,” by his calculation, “every hour 100,000 cars circulate through the city,” Mr. Burden said.

The Joooooos Run The World

The First Lady of Journalism says so. In a speech in Dearborn to about 300 people, Helen Thomas said:

“Congress, the White House and Hollywood, Wall Street are owned by the Zionists. No question, in my opinion,” she said. “They put their money where their mouth is. … We’re being pushed into a wrong direction in every way.” …

Actually, she may be right. Only self-loathing Jews could hate Israel & America as much as those institutions of late.

Update: Just for the historical record, her claim in the linked remarks that Israel has "Jew-only" roads is unmitigated hooey.

Skirts Are A Target

A middle-aged mom/lawyer describes how they treat you at the airport if you wear a dress.

Because I wear skirts and dresses, over the last few years I have been routinely subjected to a "secondary search" after passing through the primary airport security. This means that I pass through the detectors without setting off any alarm but am nevertheless detained for a body search.I travel a great deal and accepted this secondary search procedure as a consequence of that travel. As uncomfortable as I was being "wanded" from head to toe, I was still able to limit the intrusion and, more than once, warned a security agent that she had placed the wand as far up my inner thigh as I would permit.

Her husband and kids can't believe how often she gets the secondary search. And now, with the pat-downs, it's worse:

Recently, however, the secondary procedure has changed and is now being conducted by hand and with direct contact on the inner thigh, the genital area, and across the breasts, including running a finger under the bra. If you attempt to limit the physical intrusion, you will be warned and then told to leave the airport.
Subjected to this procedure once, I determined to avoid it again. Flying on Wednesday before Thanksgiving this year, I wore a lightweight travel skirt with pantyhose underneath. As I feared, I was waved into the Plexiglas holding cell for a "secondary search" because "you are wearing a skirt." When the agent came for me, I confirmed that my skirt was the issue, removed it, and handed it to her saying, "There. Now you can see I have nothing under my skirt."
The agent refused to proceed, confining me again to the holding cell while she summoned her manager. I handed my skirt to the supervisor and asked that I not be subjected to the secondary search. "No," he replied, "you are required to put your skirt back on and proceed for a hand search, or you will not be permitted past the security area of the airport."
My husband and my teenage sons, who have been amazed at the frequency with which I am searched, then gawked in embarrassment, horror, and helplessness, unable to protect me from the long, detailed, public poking I then received. I closed my eyes because I could not bear to look at them. I determined then and there that I would redouble my efforts to avoid this public humiliation.

 Her response is a "Security SuitTM": black leggings, black camisole, black shell. The last time she flew, she wore that under her dress, then removed the dress entirely to go through security. It worked.

 I say we all wear burkas and be done.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Focus

Thanks to Julie Ponzi for pointing me to Mac Owens' good piece on the repeal of DADT. Byron York has already shown that the "support" of troops doesn't mean what you think it does. Owens now shows that the Pentagon report misses the point, which is military readiness.

The “functional imperative,” i.e. the purpose of the U.S. armed forces is to fight and win the nation’s wars. Success in combat requires trust and personal/unit bonding. But as a number of commentators have noted, the report does not identify a single benefit of repealing the ban when it comes to recruiting, retention, unit effectiveness, and readiness of the force.

People talk as if all that were at issue is homophobic "discomfort" with serving with a homosexual. But has anyone answered these and other questions Owens raises?

What, he [a Marine colonel in an important command] asks, does “serving openly as a homosexual” mean? Is all homosexual conduct permitted, e.g. cross dressing when going to the PX?  What conduct is not permitted? 

Will “hate speech” policies apply to the armed forces after the repeal of the law? If a service member uses a term offensive to homosexuals, can he be charged with hate speech? Will commanders be required to take judicial action?  If no judicial action is taken, will commanders be subject to civil or criminal suit by various homosexual political groups and their elected sponsors? 

Will the personal opinion on homosexuality of a service member become an impediment to promotion or assignment to key billets? Are there any assignments to which homosexuals must be or may not be assigned?

Will the Senate and the House Armed Services committees demand sexuality statistics to make certain that homosexuals are being promoted at the same rate as non-homosexuals? Will homosexuals be promoted at a faster rate to "compensate" for previous years of discrimination?

Will homosexuals be deployed to countries where homosexuality is a crime? If not, who picks up the slack?

These aren't trivial questions, and the last thing the military needs during the era of terror is to be constantly adjudicating grievances of this nature. 

Those Hicks From New York

The other day I had this interview with Steve Martin in my reader. He's an interesting fellow. Everyone knows him as a comedian, but the guy can do anything, seemingly. I recall reading at the height of his stand-up days that some of the best bluegrass musicians had nothing to teach him in the banjo department. He's a serious art collector, and in the last few years he's turned to writing plays and novels. The interview was about writing and art and a fun read.

Not good enough for the 92nd St. Y, however, which refunded the money people paid to hear Martin give a very similar interview for an hour.

“We acknowledge that last night’s event with Steve Martin did not meet the standard of excellence that you have come to expect from 92nd St. Y,” he wrote in an e-mail to ticket holders. “We planned for a more comprehensive discussion and we, too, were disappointed with the evening. We will be mailing you a $50 certificate for each ticket you purchased to last night’s event. The gift certificate can be used toward future 92Y events, pending availability.” 

Apparently the Y never really discussed with interviewer Deborah Solomon what the topic of conversation would be. People who were wired in started emailing, demanding celebrity chit-chat, so at the end, in response to a note, Martin took 6-7 questions from the audience. Solomon commented:

“Frankly, you would think that an audience in New York, at the 92nd Street Y, would be interested in hearing about art and artists,” Ms. Solomon added in an e-mail. “I had no idea that the Y programmers wanted me to talk to Steve instead on what it’s like to host the Oscars or appear in ‘It’s Complicated’ with Alec Baldwin. I think the Y, which is supposedly a champion of the arts, has behaved very crassly and is reinforcing the most philistine aspects of a culture that values celebrity and award shows over art.” 

Martin himself seems mystified.

Mr. Martin said he was taken aback by the Y’s response, describing it as “discourteous” and adding, “It seemed to me that a consultation was at least in order.
“As for the Y’s standard of excellence, it can’t be that high because this is the second time I’ve appeared there.” 

It seems like anyone following his career would realize he's not doing stand-up anymore --and not for some time.

Art, schmart. New Yorkers just want the arrow through the head.

Update: Philip Terzian has more.

It is Steve Martin’s comments, however, which attracted my attention. In an injured tone, he explained to the Times reporter that he believes Deborah Solomon “is an outstanding interviewer” and that (here comes the shocker) “we have appeared together before in Washington, D.C. in a similar circumstance to great success” (emphasis mine).

He had the same reaction I did, for the same reason:

I don’t know if that observation strikes readers in the same way it affected me, but I conclude that what Steve Martin is saying, in effect, is that audiences in Washington are sophisticated and erudite while audiences in New York are boorish and uneducated. People who live in the nation’s capital want to hear what Steve Martin has to say about Georges Braque, but the arts crowd in Manhattan just wants to hear him sing “King Tut.” This is such a departure from the received wisdom about these respective communities—everybody in Washington is an ill-educated hack, New York is a city of gourmands, connoisseurs, and balletomanes—that I am not entirely confident that the Times comprehends what it has published. 

I, however, am not surprised.

Happy Hannukkah

Combat Veterans Don't Want To Ask Or Tell

What does the Don't Ask Don't Tell report really say? Depends on whether you ask people who have seen combat since 9/11 or not.

the Pentagon study group asked the following question of respondents "who have never been deployed or haven't been in combat environment since September 11, 2001":

If Don't Ask, Don't tell is repealed and you are working with a service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect your immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission on a day-to-day basis?

The answers are a mixed bag but suggest that there would be support for repeal of the current policy. Seventeen percent of all service members say repeal would have a positive effect, while 21 percent say it would have a negative effect; 33 percent say it would have equally positive and negative effects, and 29 percent say it would have no effect.

But ask men in combat and you get a different answer:

Then the Pentagon team asked service members "who have been deployed at some point and been in combat environment since September 11, 2001":

If Don't Ask, Don't tell is repealed and you are working with a service member in your immediate unit who has said he or she is gay or lesbian, how, if at all, would it affect your immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission in a field environment or out to sea?

The differences are striking.  Just 11 percent say repeal would have a positive effect, while 44 percent say it would have a negative effect.  Twenty six percent of those surveyed say it would have equally positive and negative effects, and 19 percent say it would have no effect.

It also matters if you're asking a Marine or a member of the Air Force:

Fifty-nine percent of Marines who have been in combat say repeal would have a negative effect, and just 11 percent say it would have no effect.  Forty-five percent of Army respondents say it would have a negative effect.  The opposition is less intense in the Navy and Air Force, where 35 percent and 41 percent say repeal would have a negative effect, but those are still significant minorities.

Moreover, the majority of respondents have been deployed.

According to the study, 70 percent of respondents are now or have been deployed, and 83 percent of them have been in a combat zone or an area where they received hostile fire pay.

Civilian control of the military is an important principle and the President and Congress want this. But let's not pretend for a second they are doing it with troop support or for any reason that is to the benefit of military readiness.