TURN OUT THE LIGHTS, THE PARTY'S OVER
today's commerce department figures, 7.2% quarterly economic growth, "the strongest in nearly two decades," and 57,000 new jobs in september (not great but a good start per the cognescenti). unless the president gets caught with a live boy or a dead girl, that's about all she wrote for the demos.
unbelievable that this knucklehead, this gentleman's "c" legacy, this failed oil man, who LOST the 2000 election, who has run an arrogant, ruthless, very right-wing administration, THIS guy is going to get reelected in a landslide. and the democrats will counter with the most illegitimate, laughable opponent, someone who will reinforce all the polity's fears about them. this could be a landslide of epic fdr/lbj proportions.
happy halloween.
-benjamin harris
Thursday, October 30, 2003
OFTEN WRONG, ALWAYS CERTAIN
the university of southern california, whose nickname is the "trojans," plays washington state university ("cougars") today in a college tackle football game. usc is favored to win by 12 points. they won't.
additional lingering doubts about our founding fathers faith in the wisdom of the common man are raised by the predictions that oklahoma will beat oklahoma state by 16 points or more and that THE ohio state university will squeak by (+6) THE pennsylvania state university. interest rates are at all time lows. a home equity loan placed on these two outcomes will return handsome dividends.
take the pittsburgh "panthers" getting one point against the boston college "eagles."
-benjamin harris
the university of southern california, whose nickname is the "trojans," plays washington state university ("cougars") today in a college tackle football game. usc is favored to win by 12 points. they won't.
additional lingering doubts about our founding fathers faith in the wisdom of the common man are raised by the predictions that oklahoma will beat oklahoma state by 16 points or more and that THE ohio state university will squeak by (+6) THE pennsylvania state university. interest rates are at all time lows. a home equity loan placed on these two outcomes will return handsome dividends.
take the pittsburgh "panthers" getting one point against the boston college "eagles."
-benjamin harris
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Good News, Bad News
GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS
the best overall indicator of the vulnerability of an incumbent president has always been the "right track, wrong track" question. the latest polls show that the president is in trouble. 53% say the country is on the wrong track. not as important, but reinforcing that result, is bush's approval rating, also at 53%, it's lowest since before 9/11.
but there are more ominous signs for the democrats. the lead economic story today is the robust corporate earnings report and the reinvigoration of the economy in general. this was also the story in sunday's times. this is a quote from today's article:
"the strong corporate profits are being reported as the economy
appears to have had its strongest quarter of growth in almost three
years [OUCH], spurred in part by the tax cuts earlier this year [DOUBLE
OUCH]. when government data are released later this month, economists
are expecting to see growth in the gross domestic product near 6% for
the third quarter, and they are forecasting strong growth--if slightly
lower--for the remaining three months of the year."
let's be realistic. the democrats have no shot, none, zero, zip, zilch, nada, of winning back the white house if these figures, or anything like them, hold up in 2004.
in a healthy two-party system them's the breaks. sometimes you're the windshield and sometimes you're the bug. as has been said here before though, what the democrats have to avoid is illegitimacy and the appearance of illegitimacy.
and there's more bad news on that front. some democratic poobahs were on the diane reem show this morning handicapping the candidates. the first significant sign this political season that howard dean was going to be a force were the early reports of his phenomenal fund-raising. this year he has raised more money than any democratic candidate EVER besides bill clinton in 2000.
what i did not know is that there is an iron law of politics: whoever is the fundraising leader at the end of the year preceeding the start of the primaries (that would be this year) has NEVER failed to win either party's nomination, and unless something really unexpected happens, that is going to be howard dean.
this is on top of the bad news that two major centrist figures, gen clark and sen lieberman, have decided to bypass the iowa caucuses. say what you will about that political strategy; what it can't help but do is dampen efforts by both to raise more money. that great snapping sound you just heard? that was the sound of wallets throughout the Democratic Nation snapping shut when lieberman comes calling for cash.
this page has spoken often and at length at the disastrous prospect of a dean nomination on the democratic party. so to avoid repeating myself, i'll let david brooks say it this time. his column today is titled "rescuing the democrats" it deserves to be quoted at length.
"john edwards has the most persuasive theory [of what's wrong
with the democrats]. he argues that most voters do not place
candidates on a neat left-right continuum. but they are really
good at sensing who shares their values. they are really good at
knowing who respects them and who doesn't. edwards's theory
is that the democrats' besetting sin over the past few decades
has been snobbery."
...
"edward draws an implicit contrast between himself and howard
dean and johny kerry...
"he draws an explicit contrast with george bush, arguing that the
bush administration rewards wealth and punishes work. this is
not about economics, he says; it is about values. the bush admini-
stration disrespects working americans. it lowers taxes for people
who sit around the pool and collect capital gains..."
this is EXACTLY right. the one thing i would disagree with brooks on is the following. after acknowledging that edwards campaign has not caught on he writes,
"but that doesn't mean edwards's theory is wrong, OR THAT THE
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS ACCURATELY UNDERSTAND THEIR
PLIGHT."
it's not that they, the democratic primary voters, don't understand the party's plight. they do. they're very "bright." it's that they don't care. they are selfish, self-centered elitists and they have one of their own in howard brush dean III and they don't care what happens to the democratic party.
brooks quotes edwards as saying "not only will i run for the real america, i will run in the real america...democrats too often act like rural america is just someplace to fly over between a fund-raiser in manhattan and a fund-raiser in beverly hills."
the problem for edwards and the democrats is that those elitist jet-setters are overwhelmingly influential in the democratic primaries.
brooks ends his column with this:
"except for bill clinton, democrats have nominated presidential
candidates who try to figure out middle american values by
reading the polls, instead of feeling them in their gut. if they do
it again, the long, slow slide will continue."
-benjamin harris
the best overall indicator of the vulnerability of an incumbent president has always been the "right track, wrong track" question. the latest polls show that the president is in trouble. 53% say the country is on the wrong track. not as important, but reinforcing that result, is bush's approval rating, also at 53%, it's lowest since before 9/11.
but there are more ominous signs for the democrats. the lead economic story today is the robust corporate earnings report and the reinvigoration of the economy in general. this was also the story in sunday's times. this is a quote from today's article:
"the strong corporate profits are being reported as the economy
appears to have had its strongest quarter of growth in almost three
years [OUCH], spurred in part by the tax cuts earlier this year [DOUBLE
OUCH]. when government data are released later this month, economists
are expecting to see growth in the gross domestic product near 6% for
the third quarter, and they are forecasting strong growth--if slightly
lower--for the remaining three months of the year."
let's be realistic. the democrats have no shot, none, zero, zip, zilch, nada, of winning back the white house if these figures, or anything like them, hold up in 2004.
in a healthy two-party system them's the breaks. sometimes you're the windshield and sometimes you're the bug. as has been said here before though, what the democrats have to avoid is illegitimacy and the appearance of illegitimacy.
and there's more bad news on that front. some democratic poobahs were on the diane reem show this morning handicapping the candidates. the first significant sign this political season that howard dean was going to be a force were the early reports of his phenomenal fund-raising. this year he has raised more money than any democratic candidate EVER besides bill clinton in 2000.
what i did not know is that there is an iron law of politics: whoever is the fundraising leader at the end of the year preceeding the start of the primaries (that would be this year) has NEVER failed to win either party's nomination, and unless something really unexpected happens, that is going to be howard dean.
this is on top of the bad news that two major centrist figures, gen clark and sen lieberman, have decided to bypass the iowa caucuses. say what you will about that political strategy; what it can't help but do is dampen efforts by both to raise more money. that great snapping sound you just heard? that was the sound of wallets throughout the Democratic Nation snapping shut when lieberman comes calling for cash.
this page has spoken often and at length at the disastrous prospect of a dean nomination on the democratic party. so to avoid repeating myself, i'll let david brooks say it this time. his column today is titled "rescuing the democrats" it deserves to be quoted at length.
"john edwards has the most persuasive theory [of what's wrong
with the democrats]. he argues that most voters do not place
candidates on a neat left-right continuum. but they are really
good at sensing who shares their values. they are really good at
knowing who respects them and who doesn't. edwards's theory
is that the democrats' besetting sin over the past few decades
has been snobbery."
...
"edward draws an implicit contrast between himself and howard
dean and johny kerry...
"he draws an explicit contrast with george bush, arguing that the
bush administration rewards wealth and punishes work. this is
not about economics, he says; it is about values. the bush admini-
stration disrespects working americans. it lowers taxes for people
who sit around the pool and collect capital gains..."
this is EXACTLY right. the one thing i would disagree with brooks on is the following. after acknowledging that edwards campaign has not caught on he writes,
"but that doesn't mean edwards's theory is wrong, OR THAT THE
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS ACCURATELY UNDERSTAND THEIR
PLIGHT."
it's not that they, the democratic primary voters, don't understand the party's plight. they do. they're very "bright." it's that they don't care. they are selfish, self-centered elitists and they have one of their own in howard brush dean III and they don't care what happens to the democratic party.
brooks quotes edwards as saying "not only will i run for the real america, i will run in the real america...democrats too often act like rural america is just someplace to fly over between a fund-raiser in manhattan and a fund-raiser in beverly hills."
the problem for edwards and the democrats is that those elitist jet-setters are overwhelmingly influential in the democratic primaries.
brooks ends his column with this:
"except for bill clinton, democrats have nominated presidential
candidates who try to figure out middle american values by
reading the polls, instead of feeling them in their gut. if they do
it again, the long, slow slide will continue."
-benjamin harris
Monday, October 20, 2003
big political news today. gen. wesley clark and sen. joseph lieberman have decided to pull out of--bypass is their word--the iowa caucuses.
reason: in clark's case, too late a start. a caucus state puts a premium on organization, which puts a premium on locking up key figures and groups in the state early. whatever clark's strengths as a candidate they were going to be dimished by the political machinations needed to do well in iowa.
lieberman though has been in the race for a long while. he certainly has had the time and has the money to have organized the state. his problem: iowa's leftist activist democrats, disproportionately powerful in the state, were never going to be receptive to a strong supporter of the iraq war and of free trade policies.
very risky strategy by both. noone has succeeded in doing this before. al gore punted on iowa in '88 hoping for favorite-sonism in the south, and although he did well on super tuesday, he was overwhelmed by big mo from iowa and new hampshire.
gore was a marginal candidate though in '88, very much like john edwards is this year, too young, too green, not enough previous exposure on the national scene. gore's run in '88 was a trial balloon for future efforts and to make himself visible as an attractive veep candidate for whomever won the nomination that year. in fact, michael dukakis went south for a running mate but went for maturity and someone who knew the intricacies of capitol hill rather than a fresh southern face.
it has been the suspicion all along, here and elsewhere, that this is gen. clark's strategy, to run for veep. he was a consultant to howard dean and others before entering the race himself and while his anti-war bona fides are almost as strong as dean's he had no chance of matching dean's or gephardt's organizational head start in iowa.
the problem for lieberman is that the race doesn't just go from iowa into super tuesday. the new hampshire primary is in between. gephardt must win in iowa to stay viable beyond. his campaign has explicitly stated that. but right now, dean is the favorite in iowa and all the other major candidates are mounting major efforts there.
let's say dean and gephardt come in one-two in some order in iowa with kerry third. that would be a major accomplishment for a governor from vermont. he would go into new hampshire with momentum, as a favorite son, and with a commanding lead in new hampshire's polls. gephardt would limp along and compete in new hampshire but barring a major upset he would be all but gone. new hampshire would then be waterloo for kerry. if he didn't win there he would be effectively done.
new hampshire has a way of shaking things up (see buchanan v bushI and mccain v bushII) and an outsider like clark might surprise in the primary there. if clark finished second to dean, kerry would certainly be done. if kerry finished second and clark even third, clark would live to fight on super tuesday.
lieberman and clark are hoping, in the new york times words, to put an asterisk beside the iowa caucus results to stop big mo. lieberman is a very smart man, a very shrewd politician and he's got a lot of money. it would be foolish to underestimate him. if somehow his strategy succeeds he will have forever changed the democratic nomination process, all to the good, in the opinion here.
if a dismal finish in iowa was inevitable, might as well make a virtue of a necessity. but pulling out removes the possibility of a surprise. if lieberman even finished third in iowa, behind say dean and gephardt, that would seriously hurt kerry and give lieberman, who is from connecticut after all, a real chance to narrow the race to him and dean in new hampshire.
but it seems far the more likely outcome of all this that lieberman will be permanently mired in the second tier of candidates and one more obstacle will be removed from howard dean's path to the nomination.
-benjamin harris
reason: in clark's case, too late a start. a caucus state puts a premium on organization, which puts a premium on locking up key figures and groups in the state early. whatever clark's strengths as a candidate they were going to be dimished by the political machinations needed to do well in iowa.
lieberman though has been in the race for a long while. he certainly has had the time and has the money to have organized the state. his problem: iowa's leftist activist democrats, disproportionately powerful in the state, were never going to be receptive to a strong supporter of the iraq war and of free trade policies.
very risky strategy by both. noone has succeeded in doing this before. al gore punted on iowa in '88 hoping for favorite-sonism in the south, and although he did well on super tuesday, he was overwhelmed by big mo from iowa and new hampshire.
gore was a marginal candidate though in '88, very much like john edwards is this year, too young, too green, not enough previous exposure on the national scene. gore's run in '88 was a trial balloon for future efforts and to make himself visible as an attractive veep candidate for whomever won the nomination that year. in fact, michael dukakis went south for a running mate but went for maturity and someone who knew the intricacies of capitol hill rather than a fresh southern face.
it has been the suspicion all along, here and elsewhere, that this is gen. clark's strategy, to run for veep. he was a consultant to howard dean and others before entering the race himself and while his anti-war bona fides are almost as strong as dean's he had no chance of matching dean's or gephardt's organizational head start in iowa.
the problem for lieberman is that the race doesn't just go from iowa into super tuesday. the new hampshire primary is in between. gephardt must win in iowa to stay viable beyond. his campaign has explicitly stated that. but right now, dean is the favorite in iowa and all the other major candidates are mounting major efforts there.
let's say dean and gephardt come in one-two in some order in iowa with kerry third. that would be a major accomplishment for a governor from vermont. he would go into new hampshire with momentum, as a favorite son, and with a commanding lead in new hampshire's polls. gephardt would limp along and compete in new hampshire but barring a major upset he would be all but gone. new hampshire would then be waterloo for kerry. if he didn't win there he would be effectively done.
new hampshire has a way of shaking things up (see buchanan v bushI and mccain v bushII) and an outsider like clark might surprise in the primary there. if clark finished second to dean, kerry would certainly be done. if kerry finished second and clark even third, clark would live to fight on super tuesday.
lieberman and clark are hoping, in the new york times words, to put an asterisk beside the iowa caucus results to stop big mo. lieberman is a very smart man, a very shrewd politician and he's got a lot of money. it would be foolish to underestimate him. if somehow his strategy succeeds he will have forever changed the democratic nomination process, all to the good, in the opinion here.
if a dismal finish in iowa was inevitable, might as well make a virtue of a necessity. but pulling out removes the possibility of a surprise. if lieberman even finished third in iowa, behind say dean and gephardt, that would seriously hurt kerry and give lieberman, who is from connecticut after all, a real chance to narrow the race to him and dean in new hampshire.
but it seems far the more likely outcome of all this that lieberman will be permanently mired in the second tier of candidates and one more obstacle will be removed from howard dean's path to the nomination.
-benjamin harris
Sunday, October 19, 2003
Some Look at the World and Ask 'Why?' Others Look at the World and Ask 'Why Not?'"
"SOME LOOK AT THE WORLD AND ASK 'WHY?' OTHERS LOOK AT THE WORLD AND ASK 'WHY NOT?' "
there's probably some mlb rule against this, but why i don't know.
nosebleed seat tickets for world series games in miami are going for three and a half bills. primo seats are going for ten times that. that's through scalpers of course. the face value is for something like $65 and $150. all that extra money people will pay for these seats goes to someone other than the supposedly cash-strapped, definitely season-ticket deficient marlins.
mlb clearly has some say in, if not complete authority over, the setting of prices for the "fall classic." fine. but what would be wrong with this: all those bandwagon jumping marlin fans (like me and a per-game average 48,000 others), all those yankee-loving, south florida-living cockroaches who want to go to a world serious game, you have to buy tickets to a whole bunch of games next year.
doing the math as they say, it'll work out the same for mr and mrs cockroach but give the club more money and avoid the scalping laws as well as the charge of price gouging. during the regular season--hell, during the division series against the gints--marlins tickets ran from about $9-$50, face. decide what you're going to charge for season seats next year--$10-$75?--. seats in section 430 row z going for $350 for the world series through scalpers? we will sell you a ticket up there to see the yankees but you have to buy tickets to 35 games next year too, our choice by the way. hey, you'll enjoy seeing the padres in may.
you mr. big-spender willing to part with $3500 for a box seat with a $150 face, you must buy 23 tickets to games next year, again our choice of dates.
this has been done for years in other sports. at the university of pittsburgh for instance, to get a ticket to this years game against notre dame you either had to buy a season ticket or bundle your purchase with tickets to two other attractive games, ball state and kent state. they've been doing that for years. single game tickets against notre dame? you've got to be kidding, bud.
public relations fallout. bull----. the public relations fallout in miami is over all these bandwagon jumpers and evil empire fans who are not "real" marlins fans. it would be treated as it is in pittsburgh, as a deliciously clever, understandable and fair way for the team to keep "its" money and provide some security for the future.
obviously, it's too late for the marlinskis to do anything like this now and as i said there's probably some mlb rule against it but there shouldn't be.
-benjamin harris
there's probably some mlb rule against this, but why i don't know.
nosebleed seat tickets for world series games in miami are going for three and a half bills. primo seats are going for ten times that. that's through scalpers of course. the face value is for something like $65 and $150. all that extra money people will pay for these seats goes to someone other than the supposedly cash-strapped, definitely season-ticket deficient marlins.
mlb clearly has some say in, if not complete authority over, the setting of prices for the "fall classic." fine. but what would be wrong with this: all those bandwagon jumping marlin fans (like me and a per-game average 48,000 others), all those yankee-loving, south florida-living cockroaches who want to go to a world serious game, you have to buy tickets to a whole bunch of games next year.
doing the math as they say, it'll work out the same for mr and mrs cockroach but give the club more money and avoid the scalping laws as well as the charge of price gouging. during the regular season--hell, during the division series against the gints--marlins tickets ran from about $9-$50, face. decide what you're going to charge for season seats next year--$10-$75?--. seats in section 430 row z going for $350 for the world series through scalpers? we will sell you a ticket up there to see the yankees but you have to buy tickets to 35 games next year too, our choice by the way. hey, you'll enjoy seeing the padres in may.
you mr. big-spender willing to part with $3500 for a box seat with a $150 face, you must buy 23 tickets to games next year, again our choice of dates.
this has been done for years in other sports. at the university of pittsburgh for instance, to get a ticket to this years game against notre dame you either had to buy a season ticket or bundle your purchase with tickets to two other attractive games, ball state and kent state. they've been doing that for years. single game tickets against notre dame? you've got to be kidding, bud.
public relations fallout. bull----. the public relations fallout in miami is over all these bandwagon jumpers and evil empire fans who are not "real" marlins fans. it would be treated as it is in pittsburgh, as a deliciously clever, understandable and fair way for the team to keep "its" money and provide some security for the future.
obviously, it's too late for the marlinskis to do anything like this now and as i said there's probably some mlb rule against it but there shouldn't be.
-benjamin harris
Saturday, October 18, 2003
Reincarnation, Cont.
REINCARNACION, CONT
"by forty a desreputable series of matrimonial scandals had been varied, and sometimes advertised, by a succession of [his] publications."
"...his [mirabeau's] reputation was such that he was barred by the not very sqeamish society of the paris drawing rooms..."
"by forty a desreputable series of matrimonial scandals had been varied, and sometimes advertised, by a succession of [his] publications."
"...his [mirabeau's] reputation was such that he was barred by the not very sqeamish society of the paris drawing rooms..."
Friday, October 17, 2003
True Crime Stories: Bailey/Haversham
TRUE CRIME STORIES: Bailey/Haversham
robert johnson sat at his desk reading a box file. he had gone through all of the meat of the case, the reports and statements, and now because of his obsessive-compulsiveness, he had begun reading the case-law that his predecessor had pulled and stuck in a folder.
the concentration required to parse the more important documents not needed, he sat back in his chair and read easily. he read the headnotes and the case summary and then moved on to the next one.
it was about the fourth case, jerome e. bailey v state. "jerome bailey, jer-ome bailey," where had he heard that name before? common enough name; the way the brain works, it was probably a false connection with some receptor that housed the memory of a basketball player or a porn star.
two sentences into the case summary it clicked and robert johnson sat up straight.
the brain is an automaton at these moments and all of the associated memories came back to him instantly, unconsciously.
he had been in the city only a couple of weeks when he first read about the case the first and last time until now. that was in june of 1982. he remembered exactly where he was when he read about it, in the open-air lobby of his apartment building one steamy morning waiting to give a friend a ride into work, the same work he had had for the last 21 years.
his mind riveted on the story, he could still see the photographs of the defendant, one from 1955, looking handsome but slick and, mouth slightly open, a bit deer-in-the-headlights overwhelmed by the phalanx of media reporters that he was trying to push through; and the other current photograph, looking old and haggard and smoking a cigarette. he had just been released from prison so that he wouldn't have to die of the cancer inside the institution. he remembered bailey's quote, "i knew what was going to happen, i could have prevented it, but i didn't."
robert johnson's friend came down to the lobby and they left. he didn't remember if he had finished the article or just left the newspaper there in the lobby. he was 27 and starting his career and he was in a hurry.
he thought of the case often over the years, had thought of going to the library and researching it, but he was in a hurry and over time details were forgotten. first to go was the defendant's name. jerome bailey was just too common.
for a long time after that he remembered the other name, h.d. haversham, so typical for 1955, so anachronistically anglo and southern for 1982.
no city had ever been transformed so suddently and completely and shockingly as miami had been, first in 1959 then again in 1980. and yet the past was so near. new york, as one contrast, has always been diverse and chaotic and edgy and ethnic and violent. you could go back one hundred years and find stories like this probably.
miami was new but with its past close by the contrast was more stark and it was easy to imagine the shock created by such a black act in that simpler, slower time.
robert johnson read the case intently now. he passed over the legal issues and tried to find the factual summary, to have his memory refreshed on the details. a defense attorney had told him once that you can always tell how the appellate court is going to rule in a big case by the detail they go into in the factual summary. the more detail, the more they reveal of the the heinousness of the crime, the more likely it is that they will affirm the conviction.
elizabeth haversham? he had forgotten. the wife had been murdered too. drowned, both of them. but there were no facts just "murder"...by drowning" and the legal reasoning.
it wasn't here but at least now he had the mother lode. he typed jerome e. bailey's name into westlaw and there was the companion case.
h.d. haversham, judge h.d. haversham. murdered by the procurement of jerome e. bailey, judge jerome e. bailey.
this wasn't even miami. this was palm beach. what was palm beach in 1955? wealthy and privileged and waspy. beautiful and natural and peaceful. staid, closed, clannish. proper. scandals, if at all, kept behind closed doors. the kennedy's longtime winter home. what a great name for palm beach, h.d. haversham. "judge" should be prefixed to that name.
robert johnson remembered from the newspaper article. there had been a scandal. haversham had caught bailey doing something and raised hell and went public with it. robert johnson remembered reading between the lines and thinking there was some bad blood there, maybe blueblood versus the ariviste bad blood, at least to the extent haversham made it so public. no black curtain of silence shielding the brethren here.
when the judge and mrs. haversham turned up dead, everyone in palm beach knew who had done it in the way everyone in small towns knows everyone else's business. it was an open secret yet bailey had not been indicted until 1960 and robert johnson recognized the irritation in the court's circumspect language. "the evidence reveals that despite the complete information obtained by law enforcement officials regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the murder event...the state nevertheless continued its investigationn without charging or arresting any of the suspects awaiting the time when further evidence might be developed..."
but even in the opinion in judge haversham's murder there was no factual recitation beyond mentioning "murder"...by drowning." bailey's status as judge was buried in both opinions, on page 13 of the 17-page opinion in h.d. haversham's case, on page 4 of 7 in his wife's. not a black curtain of silence, but of whispering at least.
a judge having another judge murdered was like incest in 1955. one simply didn't speak of it in polite society like the small, closed, clannish, polite legal community in palm beach in 1955, where every member of the bar knew each other as was reflected in the courtliness in both opinions paid to the "able attorney for the defendant."
but the details were kept out so that the case could be forgotten and lawyers generations later would not really know what had happened. this was one case where robert johnson's defense friend was wrong. this case was too big, to scandalous, too painful to remember. decide the case and forget about it. "we shall utter their names no more," is how it was put after the lincoln assasination conspirators had been tried, convicted, and hung. so robert johnson was left with his memory and the details would have to be sought in another forum, at the library or on google.
robert johnson read both opinions straight through now. the deference only went so far. the irritation in the delay in the arrest, "despite complete information," and the outrage at the act was evident in the legal "reasoning" affirming each conviction.
"much emphasis is placed by appellant upon the statements of counsel for the state that appellant when testifying in his own behalf 'took the fifth amendment.' the trial record discloses that appellant's counsel failed to object to such argument..." and further "once a defendant elects to testify, as did the appellant herein...argument directed to what he says and does not say is justified." robert johnson laughed out loud.
another point of error asserted was to the pre-trial and in-trial denial to bailey of access to "certain...tape recordings secretly made by investigating law-enforcement officers under the direction and supervision of the state attorney--some tapes recording the voice of defendant bailey and other tapes recording the voice of the [hitman who testified against bailey]." "the defendant failed to properly object to the procedure he complains of as to discovery." "PROPERLY" object. the opinion reflects that able counsel for the defendant damn well had objected, early and often, but apparently not "properly" so, in the court's opinion. johnson laughed. one must always take care to be "proper" in palm beach in 1955.
***
there were eight other cases that came up in robert johnson's westlaw search of "jerome e. bailey." his convictions were affirmed in per curiam opinions by the florida supreme court and his petition to the united states supreme court was denied.
a related case involved one of the hitmen. in 1957 the florida legislature passed an extraordinary law authorizing the payment of $100,000 for information leading to arrest and conviction in the case. one of the hitmen took the bait and contacted the lawyer who promptly made a deal with the state. the lawyer then sought to collect the reward. that was denied.
in 1959 bailey applied to withdraw from the florida bar. in its opinion granting the application the supreme court wrote that "approximately one year ago the grievance committee...conducted hearings concerning the applicant and that he believes that shortly he will be afforded the opportunity of offering testimony in connection with further proceedings in said matter but that he does not wish to avail himself of the opportunity to do so [at this time]."
in 1958 jerome e. bailey represented one j.c. clinton, who was convicted for possession of moonshine whiskey. that conviction was affirmed too.
the next to the last entry in the westlaw search was a 1953 workmen's comp case. bailey represented the employer. the appellate court ruled in bailey's favor, "reversing the judgment of the circuit court of palm beach, h.d. haversham, judge."
-benjamin harris
robert johnson sat at his desk reading a box file. he had gone through all of the meat of the case, the reports and statements, and now because of his obsessive-compulsiveness, he had begun reading the case-law that his predecessor had pulled and stuck in a folder.
the concentration required to parse the more important documents not needed, he sat back in his chair and read easily. he read the headnotes and the case summary and then moved on to the next one.
it was about the fourth case, jerome e. bailey v state. "jerome bailey, jer-ome bailey," where had he heard that name before? common enough name; the way the brain works, it was probably a false connection with some receptor that housed the memory of a basketball player or a porn star.
two sentences into the case summary it clicked and robert johnson sat up straight.
the brain is an automaton at these moments and all of the associated memories came back to him instantly, unconsciously.
he had been in the city only a couple of weeks when he first read about the case the first and last time until now. that was in june of 1982. he remembered exactly where he was when he read about it, in the open-air lobby of his apartment building one steamy morning waiting to give a friend a ride into work, the same work he had had for the last 21 years.
his mind riveted on the story, he could still see the photographs of the defendant, one from 1955, looking handsome but slick and, mouth slightly open, a bit deer-in-the-headlights overwhelmed by the phalanx of media reporters that he was trying to push through; and the other current photograph, looking old and haggard and smoking a cigarette. he had just been released from prison so that he wouldn't have to die of the cancer inside the institution. he remembered bailey's quote, "i knew what was going to happen, i could have prevented it, but i didn't."
robert johnson's friend came down to the lobby and they left. he didn't remember if he had finished the article or just left the newspaper there in the lobby. he was 27 and starting his career and he was in a hurry.
he thought of the case often over the years, had thought of going to the library and researching it, but he was in a hurry and over time details were forgotten. first to go was the defendant's name. jerome bailey was just too common.
for a long time after that he remembered the other name, h.d. haversham, so typical for 1955, so anachronistically anglo and southern for 1982.
no city had ever been transformed so suddently and completely and shockingly as miami had been, first in 1959 then again in 1980. and yet the past was so near. new york, as one contrast, has always been diverse and chaotic and edgy and ethnic and violent. you could go back one hundred years and find stories like this probably.
miami was new but with its past close by the contrast was more stark and it was easy to imagine the shock created by such a black act in that simpler, slower time.
robert johnson read the case intently now. he passed over the legal issues and tried to find the factual summary, to have his memory refreshed on the details. a defense attorney had told him once that you can always tell how the appellate court is going to rule in a big case by the detail they go into in the factual summary. the more detail, the more they reveal of the the heinousness of the crime, the more likely it is that they will affirm the conviction.
elizabeth haversham? he had forgotten. the wife had been murdered too. drowned, both of them. but there were no facts just "murder"...by drowning" and the legal reasoning.
it wasn't here but at least now he had the mother lode. he typed jerome e. bailey's name into westlaw and there was the companion case.
h.d. haversham, judge h.d. haversham. murdered by the procurement of jerome e. bailey, judge jerome e. bailey.
this wasn't even miami. this was palm beach. what was palm beach in 1955? wealthy and privileged and waspy. beautiful and natural and peaceful. staid, closed, clannish. proper. scandals, if at all, kept behind closed doors. the kennedy's longtime winter home. what a great name for palm beach, h.d. haversham. "judge" should be prefixed to that name.
robert johnson remembered from the newspaper article. there had been a scandal. haversham had caught bailey doing something and raised hell and went public with it. robert johnson remembered reading between the lines and thinking there was some bad blood there, maybe blueblood versus the ariviste bad blood, at least to the extent haversham made it so public. no black curtain of silence shielding the brethren here.
when the judge and mrs. haversham turned up dead, everyone in palm beach knew who had done it in the way everyone in small towns knows everyone else's business. it was an open secret yet bailey had not been indicted until 1960 and robert johnson recognized the irritation in the court's circumspect language. "the evidence reveals that despite the complete information obtained by law enforcement officials regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding the murder event...the state nevertheless continued its investigationn without charging or arresting any of the suspects awaiting the time when further evidence might be developed..."
but even in the opinion in judge haversham's murder there was no factual recitation beyond mentioning "murder"...by drowning." bailey's status as judge was buried in both opinions, on page 13 of the 17-page opinion in h.d. haversham's case, on page 4 of 7 in his wife's. not a black curtain of silence, but of whispering at least.
a judge having another judge murdered was like incest in 1955. one simply didn't speak of it in polite society like the small, closed, clannish, polite legal community in palm beach in 1955, where every member of the bar knew each other as was reflected in the courtliness in both opinions paid to the "able attorney for the defendant."
but the details were kept out so that the case could be forgotten and lawyers generations later would not really know what had happened. this was one case where robert johnson's defense friend was wrong. this case was too big, to scandalous, too painful to remember. decide the case and forget about it. "we shall utter their names no more," is how it was put after the lincoln assasination conspirators had been tried, convicted, and hung. so robert johnson was left with his memory and the details would have to be sought in another forum, at the library or on google.
robert johnson read both opinions straight through now. the deference only went so far. the irritation in the delay in the arrest, "despite complete information," and the outrage at the act was evident in the legal "reasoning" affirming each conviction.
"much emphasis is placed by appellant upon the statements of counsel for the state that appellant when testifying in his own behalf 'took the fifth amendment.' the trial record discloses that appellant's counsel failed to object to such argument..." and further "once a defendant elects to testify, as did the appellant herein...argument directed to what he says and does not say is justified." robert johnson laughed out loud.
another point of error asserted was to the pre-trial and in-trial denial to bailey of access to "certain...tape recordings secretly made by investigating law-enforcement officers under the direction and supervision of the state attorney--some tapes recording the voice of defendant bailey and other tapes recording the voice of the [hitman who testified against bailey]." "the defendant failed to properly object to the procedure he complains of as to discovery." "PROPERLY" object. the opinion reflects that able counsel for the defendant damn well had objected, early and often, but apparently not "properly" so, in the court's opinion. johnson laughed. one must always take care to be "proper" in palm beach in 1955.
***
there were eight other cases that came up in robert johnson's westlaw search of "jerome e. bailey." his convictions were affirmed in per curiam opinions by the florida supreme court and his petition to the united states supreme court was denied.
a related case involved one of the hitmen. in 1957 the florida legislature passed an extraordinary law authorizing the payment of $100,000 for information leading to arrest and conviction in the case. one of the hitmen took the bait and contacted the lawyer who promptly made a deal with the state. the lawyer then sought to collect the reward. that was denied.
in 1959 bailey applied to withdraw from the florida bar. in its opinion granting the application the supreme court wrote that "approximately one year ago the grievance committee...conducted hearings concerning the applicant and that he believes that shortly he will be afforded the opportunity of offering testimony in connection with further proceedings in said matter but that he does not wish to avail himself of the opportunity to do so [at this time]."
in 1958 jerome e. bailey represented one j.c. clinton, who was convicted for possession of moonshine whiskey. that conviction was affirmed too.
the next to the last entry in the westlaw search was a 1953 workmen's comp case. bailey represented the employer. the appellate court ruled in bailey's favor, "reversing the judgment of the circuit court of palm beach, h.d. haversham, judge."
-benjamin harris
Saturday, October 11, 2003
money-making opportunities abound today in college tackle football, perhaps not for followers of the advice offered here, but in general.
i think the penn state "nittany lions" will get closer to the purdue "boilermakers" than the 12 1/2 point line.
were i to offer wesley clark more economic advice i would recommend a home equity loan placed on michigan state to beat illinois by more than 3 1/2.
similarly, i think las vegas is wildly wrong in the nebraska-missouri game. take the "cornhuskers" giving 7.
wake forest will not beat georgia tech by 4 1/2 or more.
my contrarian personality is offended by the chatter on fsu-miami. i wouldn't have touched this game except for reading this morning, in the miami herald, of predictions of a seminole rout. fsu is snake-bit against miami! these games almost always come down to a field goal. so, just to be a punk i will take miami getting 7.
finally, i like the notre dame "fighting potato, or is it potatoe? eaters" getting 9 1/2 against pitt.
-benjamin harris
.
i think the penn state "nittany lions" will get closer to the purdue "boilermakers" than the 12 1/2 point line.
were i to offer wesley clark more economic advice i would recommend a home equity loan placed on michigan state to beat illinois by more than 3 1/2.
similarly, i think las vegas is wildly wrong in the nebraska-missouri game. take the "cornhuskers" giving 7.
wake forest will not beat georgia tech by 4 1/2 or more.
my contrarian personality is offended by the chatter on fsu-miami. i wouldn't have touched this game except for reading this morning, in the miami herald, of predictions of a seminole rout. fsu is snake-bit against miami! these games almost always come down to a field goal. so, just to be a punk i will take miami getting 7.
finally, i like the notre dame "fighting potato, or is it potatoe? eaters" getting 9 1/2 against pitt.
-benjamin harris
.
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
CALIFORNIA SCHEMIN'
what a disgrace this recall is.
let's take one of the most plausible scenarios. you really want davis recalled, you really want bustamente to replace him, but you really don't want schwartzeneger to win. what do you do?
if you vote for what you really want, yes to the recall, and for bustamente, you will probably end up with gov. arnold.
if you vote no on the recall and vote for bustamente you're voting for something you don't want with vote-one which may in fact cancel out vote-two.
so you have to try to predict probable outcomes. what do you want more, davis recalled or no arnold? what is more likely to happen if you vote this way or that?
the result therefore is not a democracy, a registration of voters wishes; it is perhaps more so, a demonstration of their
predictive (dis)abilities.
i bet there are a lot of californians who are in exactly this position right now; hispanics and women who are fed up with davis but who are more opposed to a nazi groper who supported prop. 54.
what a horrible position to put voters in.
voters shouldn't be thrown into these existential dilemmas. they have enough trouble with punch cards.
-benjamin harris
what a disgrace this recall is.
let's take one of the most plausible scenarios. you really want davis recalled, you really want bustamente to replace him, but you really don't want schwartzeneger to win. what do you do?
if you vote for what you really want, yes to the recall, and for bustamente, you will probably end up with gov. arnold.
if you vote no on the recall and vote for bustamente you're voting for something you don't want with vote-one which may in fact cancel out vote-two.
so you have to try to predict probable outcomes. what do you want more, davis recalled or no arnold? what is more likely to happen if you vote this way or that?
the result therefore is not a democracy, a registration of voters wishes; it is perhaps more so, a demonstration of their
predictive (dis)abilities.
i bet there are a lot of californians who are in exactly this position right now; hispanics and women who are fed up with davis but who are more opposed to a nazi groper who supported prop. 54.
what a horrible position to put voters in.
voters shouldn't be thrown into these existential dilemmas. they have enough trouble with punch cards.
-benjamin harris
Friday, September 19, 2003
OFTEN WRONG, ALWAYS CERTAIN
MEMO:
TO: GENERAL WESLEY CLARK
FROM: BENJAMIN HARRIS
RE: ECONOMICS
obviously, domestic issues are those on which you're most vulnerable. don't attempt to take a crash course in economics. forget rolling back the bush tax cuts for the wealthy. forget a middle class tax cut.
go on the stump right now and tell everyone in middle america to take out a second mortgage, contact their bookies and take the buffalo "bills" and the three points against the miami "dolphins" this sunday night.
this will result in the biggest wealth transfer since the institution of the progressive income tax.
if you'd like to discuss this further i can be reached at vip sports bet in the bahamas.
MEMO:
TO: GENERAL WESLEY CLARK
FROM: BENJAMIN HARRIS
RE: ECONOMICS
obviously, domestic issues are those on which you're most vulnerable. don't attempt to take a crash course in economics. forget rolling back the bush tax cuts for the wealthy. forget a middle class tax cut.
go on the stump right now and tell everyone in middle america to take out a second mortgage, contact their bookies and take the buffalo "bills" and the three points against the miami "dolphins" this sunday night.
this will result in the biggest wealth transfer since the institution of the progressive income tax.
if you'd like to discuss this further i can be reached at vip sports bet in the bahamas.
Tuesday, September 16, 2003
LOST IN TRANSLATION
LOST IN TRANSLATION
penguin books are great. inexpensive editions of the classics available at book sellers everywhere (not at books & books on lincoln road mall of course, but everywhere else) even in airports. who else publishes a $9.95 edition of the odyssey, a $14.95 issue of the koran?
a mild discomforting note was struck though when i read penguin's bhagavad gita a few years ago. the translator was someone named juan mascaro, curious hindu name, i thought. his bio said he was born in majorca and quoted from his times of london obituary in which he was described as one who had "achieved the unique feat of translating from languages not his own (sanskrit and pali) into another language not at first his own (english)."
"unique feat." like dr. johnson's comment on the dancing three-legged dog ("it's not that it's done well but that it's done at all"), one can appreciate the feat while still wondering about the quality. then followed this from the times obit: "his aim--DECRIED BY SOME ACADEMIC CRITICS...--was to convey the essence of the original in pure poetic english." my sanskrit being weak, i would have suffered a dusty, boring, old translation that was not "decried by some academic critics" to make sure i got the full intent of the original.
then i bought a copy of marcus aurelius' meditations, translated from the ancient greek by maxwell staniforth whose c.v. reads "plans for an academic career frustrated by war in 1914...infantry officer...railwayman in argentina...leaving with the rank of assistant traffic manager...returned to england...25 years as parish priest."
in his translator's note, assistant traffic manager staniworth lays out the case for his new translation, pronouncing the first WIDELY READ english edition as, in his opinion, "utterly unreadable." another "closely accurate version" he rejects because it "hardly lends itself to being read for pleasure." he then breezily states that "there is no attempt here to reproduce the CURIOUS PROSE STYLE OF THE ORIGINAL," and advises that the best current edition of the meditations, a comprehensive scholarly work "however is meant for a different class of reader." HEY!
now i come to penguin's odyssey. reading homer to begin with requires an incomparable leap of faith because he and his works' providence are so murky. no one really knows if homer even existed but the best scholarly guess is that he probably lived in the 8th century b.c. (b.c.e. for howard dean supporters) and was blind and illiterate.
the iliad and odyssey therefore were supposedly oral poems which itself strains credulity. the intro to the odyssey says that an oral presentation of its 12,000 lines would have taken between 20-30 hours to complete. "who could possibly listen to them?" who could LISTEN to them?
the first written edition that we have, and the one that all others are based on, was compiled in the 3rd century b.c. for the great library in alexandria, by which time there were already several versions to choose from.
the translator for the original penguin edition of the odyssey was e.v. rieu, who had been editor of penguin classics from 1944-64. his credentials, according to the introductory notes, seem impeccable.
the edition I read however was translated by his son, d.c.h. rieu who, penguin thought it important to note, had "joined the west yorkshire regiment and was wounded at cheron in 1941." he had thereafter been headmaster at a grammar school in canterbury and translated the acts of the apostles for penguin. the intro then completes the one paragraph summary of d.c.h. rieu's life with this sentence: "on retirement he worked for cruse bereavement counseling and, until sacked, for the samaritans." "UNTIL SACKED?" as in fired? what else could that mean? real sensitive word, "sacked."
with thoughts of another greek myth, that of oedipus, in my mind i charily read rieu the younger's preface. as did assistant traffic manager staniworth, d.c.h. rieu tackles head-on the world's need for his translation in light of that of his illustrious father.
"what need is there now for a revision of his odyssey? it had many virtues." (oedipus, knife in hand, walked stealthily toward his father's back...)
"it had joie de vivre." (step...)
"it did not read like a translation." (by step...)
"there were no echoes of the authorized version or other archaisms." (oedipus drew nearer...)
"it has been enjoyed by millions." (and nearer...)
"but in my opinion it does have failings." (his eyes grew wide...)
"one is over-elaboration." (he raised the knife in his hand...)
"e.v.r. sometimes attempts to add poetry to homer's poetry." (the light glinting off the blade...)
"some of e.v.r.'s modernisms seem out of place." (and swiftly brought it down...)
"in two respects e.v.r. misrepresents the greeks." (and PLUNGED the knife into the back of his unsuspecting father...)
"when we [he and a consultant] set out we gave ourselves the task of retaining the joie de vivre of e.v.r.'s version but being more accurate and faithful to homer." (who gasped once and then crumpled to the floor, DEAD.)
for the record, penguin's koran was translated by a man named n.c. dawood whose credentials appear beyond challenge and whose translation was not "decried by some academic critics." the quotes about jews being evil and animals--i have no reason to doubt them.
-benjamin harris
for an update on this subject see David Remnick's "The Translation Wars" in the November 7, 2005 issue of The New Yorker-bh (2-19-06)
PUBLIC OCCURRENCES
penguin books are great. inexpensive editions of the classics available at book sellers everywhere (not at books & books on lincoln road mall of course, but everywhere else) even in airports. who else publishes a $9.95 edition of the odyssey, a $14.95 issue of the koran?
a mild discomforting note was struck though when i read penguin's bhagavad gita a few years ago. the translator was someone named juan mascaro, curious hindu name, i thought. his bio said he was born in majorca and quoted from his times of london obituary in which he was described as one who had "achieved the unique feat of translating from languages not his own (sanskrit and pali) into another language not at first his own (english)."
"unique feat." like dr. johnson's comment on the dancing three-legged dog ("it's not that it's done well but that it's done at all"), one can appreciate the feat while still wondering about the quality. then followed this from the times obit: "his aim--DECRIED BY SOME ACADEMIC CRITICS...--was to convey the essence of the original in pure poetic english." my sanskrit being weak, i would have suffered a dusty, boring, old translation that was not "decried by some academic critics" to make sure i got the full intent of the original.
then i bought a copy of marcus aurelius' meditations, translated from the ancient greek by maxwell staniforth whose c.v. reads "plans for an academic career frustrated by war in 1914...infantry officer...railwayman in argentina...leaving with the rank of assistant traffic manager...returned to england...25 years as parish priest."
in his translator's note, assistant traffic manager staniworth lays out the case for his new translation, pronouncing the first WIDELY READ english edition as, in his opinion, "utterly unreadable." another "closely accurate version" he rejects because it "hardly lends itself to being read for pleasure." he then breezily states that "there is no attempt here to reproduce the CURIOUS PROSE STYLE OF THE ORIGINAL," and advises that the best current edition of the meditations, a comprehensive scholarly work "however is meant for a different class of reader." HEY!
now i come to penguin's odyssey. reading homer to begin with requires an incomparable leap of faith because he and his works' providence are so murky. no one really knows if homer even existed but the best scholarly guess is that he probably lived in the 8th century b.c. (b.c.e. for howard dean supporters) and was blind and illiterate.
the iliad and odyssey therefore were supposedly oral poems which itself strains credulity. the intro to the odyssey says that an oral presentation of its 12,000 lines would have taken between 20-30 hours to complete. "who could possibly listen to them?" who could LISTEN to them?
the first written edition that we have, and the one that all others are based on, was compiled in the 3rd century b.c. for the great library in alexandria, by which time there were already several versions to choose from.
the translator for the original penguin edition of the odyssey was e.v. rieu, who had been editor of penguin classics from 1944-64. his credentials, according to the introductory notes, seem impeccable.
the edition I read however was translated by his son, d.c.h. rieu who, penguin thought it important to note, had "joined the west yorkshire regiment and was wounded at cheron in 1941." he had thereafter been headmaster at a grammar school in canterbury and translated the acts of the apostles for penguin. the intro then completes the one paragraph summary of d.c.h. rieu's life with this sentence: "on retirement he worked for cruse bereavement counseling and, until sacked, for the samaritans." "UNTIL SACKED?" as in fired? what else could that mean? real sensitive word, "sacked."
with thoughts of another greek myth, that of oedipus, in my mind i charily read rieu the younger's preface. as did assistant traffic manager staniworth, d.c.h. rieu tackles head-on the world's need for his translation in light of that of his illustrious father.
"what need is there now for a revision of his odyssey? it had many virtues." (oedipus, knife in hand, walked stealthily toward his father's back...)
"it had joie de vivre." (step...)
"it did not read like a translation." (by step...)
"there were no echoes of the authorized version or other archaisms." (oedipus drew nearer...)
"it has been enjoyed by millions." (and nearer...)
"but in my opinion it does have failings." (his eyes grew wide...)
"one is over-elaboration." (he raised the knife in his hand...)
"e.v.r. sometimes attempts to add poetry to homer's poetry." (the light glinting off the blade...)
"some of e.v.r.'s modernisms seem out of place." (and swiftly brought it down...)
"in two respects e.v.r. misrepresents the greeks." (and PLUNGED the knife into the back of his unsuspecting father...)
"when we [he and a consultant] set out we gave ourselves the task of retaining the joie de vivre of e.v.r.'s version but being more accurate and faithful to homer." (who gasped once and then crumpled to the floor, DEAD.)
for the record, penguin's koran was translated by a man named n.c. dawood whose credentials appear beyond challenge and whose translation was not "decried by some academic critics." the quotes about jews being evil and animals--i have no reason to doubt them.
-benjamin harris
for an update on this subject see David Remnick's "The Translation Wars" in the November 7, 2005 issue of The New Yorker-bh (2-19-06)
PUBLIC OCCURRENCES
Saturday, September 13, 2003
no oceans of white hands in the photograph on the front page of the times today.
i see more black hands and brown hands, there's an asian hand in the lower right, than white hands. oh, and those hands are saluting.
no, even without the guy in the center of the picture you'd know right away this isn't a howard dean rally.
"if you were to pick a presidential candidate on the basis of social
standing--and really, darling, who doesn't--you'd have to pick howard
brush dean III over george walker bush."
the quote is from david brooks' op ed piece in the same issue of the paper.
bush and the republicans are economic elitists, always have been. bush was born a cultural elitist but grew up and made his mark, such as it was, in texas and so acquired a bit of a texas accent and a few other common folk characteristics. unfortunately, the democrats are about to nominate a man who is even more cultural elitist than bush and whose neo-smoot-hawley economics will hurt the middle class even more than bush's tax cuts for the rich.
this is not to say that dean is sui generis. the democrats have their aristocrats, fdr, jfk, jay rockefeller. but dean's elitism is the democrats problem today. it's a noxious, and obnoxious, combination of middle class contempt cloaked in a faux liberalism.
part of the cause of that elitism is symbolized in today's front page photograph. the brown and black and yellow, those with blue collars and red necks, did not, could not and did not attempt to, escape service during vietnam. they went and they fought and died.
howard brush dean III, george walker bush, bill clinton, and j. danforth quayle on the other hand did not serve. they were "bright," or socially and politically connected and so loopholes were fashioned for them or they fashioned them themselves.
dean was particularly creative, he must really have "done well" on his sat's. he somehow got himself declared 4-f but then fought through his disability and, according to brooks, "spent his time skiing in aspen." it's that kind of creativity, of thinking outside the box, that we need in a leader today.
brooks says bush and dean are the products of a culture that believed in the aristocratic notion of greatness achieved through "virility, courage, self-discipline and toughness." quite. one can see h.b.d.III's courage in tackling his first black run, perhaps during tet?, his toughness and self-discipline in overcoming physical adversity. we await accounts of the virility he displayed apres ski.
this is the difference between their generation and their fathers. george herbert walker bush was a bona fide war hero as was jfk. they each could have avoided the war if they had wished, bush's dad was a connecticut senator, jfk's of course was ambassador to the court of st. james. but they didn't. they served.
bush, quayle, clinton and dean ran. but crimminy, at least the other three did SOMETHING: national guard, oxford, SOMETHING. dean became a ski-bum and so has become the hero of all ski bums and "aging flower children and the tongue-studded next generation," whose idea of service is a maid and whose idea of real america is 92% white vermont.
-benjamin harris
Friday, September 12, 2003
richard clarke, former bush II nsc advisor said on mcneil/lehrer tonight that we are running on a treadmill in the war on terror because "while we have the support of the governments of saudi arabia and pakistan and egypt, we do not have the hearts and minds of the people in saudi arabia and pakistan and egypt."
here's how far out of the mainstream i am. here's how wrong clarke is. i'm in complete agreement with his statement. HE says therefore we should be winning those hearts and minds with "diplomacy," he actually said that, and something else like it, you know, pick one "international cooperation," "u.n. aid," "leave no child behind," "seed and weed," "it takes a village," whatever.
I say we should have used atomic weapons on afghanistan, thereby ensuring that we would not be playing the day's version of "where's waldo," "where's osama."
we should have in our minds the scope of this war. it is with islam. it is with the hearts and minds--and bodies--of the burghers of riyadh and islamabad and cairo. eventually all of islam will have to be defeated militarily by judaism/christianity. that will come at fearful expenditure of life and lucre. there is no other way.
***
uttered a bitter, gutteral "baahhh" tonight at the news that, at our behest, the u.n. was now going to lift sanctions against libya because it had admitted to bombing pan am 103 and was making recompense to the families.
baahh. the truth of that has been known for so long. it should have been the prelude, at any time in the last 15 years, including now, to make war on libya. instead we let that coward, that murderer, our enemy, in power, in charge of a government that we still say is a state sponsor of terrorism.
***
baahh. and bommbbb. that is what i have been preaching for two years now. i may be preaching it 20 years from now. if so, it will not be without genetic precedent. my dad never got over the great depression. every time the stock market broke through another ceiling dad's prediction was the same, "going to be a depression." "keep that money in the bank, or in t-bills, not in the stock market." dad predicted five of the succeeding zero depressions.
i am his son, like him, often wrong always certain.
-benjamin harris
here's how far out of the mainstream i am. here's how wrong clarke is. i'm in complete agreement with his statement. HE says therefore we should be winning those hearts and minds with "diplomacy," he actually said that, and something else like it, you know, pick one "international cooperation," "u.n. aid," "leave no child behind," "seed and weed," "it takes a village," whatever.
I say we should have used atomic weapons on afghanistan, thereby ensuring that we would not be playing the day's version of "where's waldo," "where's osama."
we should have in our minds the scope of this war. it is with islam. it is with the hearts and minds--and bodies--of the burghers of riyadh and islamabad and cairo. eventually all of islam will have to be defeated militarily by judaism/christianity. that will come at fearful expenditure of life and lucre. there is no other way.
***
uttered a bitter, gutteral "baahhh" tonight at the news that, at our behest, the u.n. was now going to lift sanctions against libya because it had admitted to bombing pan am 103 and was making recompense to the families.
baahh. the truth of that has been known for so long. it should have been the prelude, at any time in the last 15 years, including now, to make war on libya. instead we let that coward, that murderer, our enemy, in power, in charge of a government that we still say is a state sponsor of terrorism.
***
baahh. and bommbbb. that is what i have been preaching for two years now. i may be preaching it 20 years from now. if so, it will not be without genetic precedent. my dad never got over the great depression. every time the stock market broke through another ceiling dad's prediction was the same, "going to be a depression." "keep that money in the bank, or in t-bills, not in the stock market." dad predicted five of the succeeding zero depressions.
i am his son, like him, often wrong always certain.
-benjamin harris
Thursday, September 11, 2003
the cover of this week's NEW YORKER, the sept. 11 anniversary issue, is a skyline of the city with each of its buildings twinned. inside is a feature article on the war against religious understanding and the jews in particular. the article recounts the threat and quotes such as abraham foxman of the anti-defamation league and various scholars and theologians in the ecumenical movement.
the story is on an--unreleased yet--movie by the actor mel gibson on christ's passion. on the anniversary of the attacks by followers of the religion of islam on the united states and the murder of 2,800 innocents in new york city the magazine that bears that city's name does a feature on a b-movie actor's movie.
i see a political cartoon here. two bookish sorts with "new yorker editor" on their shirts, one reading "mel gibson's screenplay," his/her mouth distorted with indignity saying "OUTRAGEOUS RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY!", the other wearing one of those koo-koo clock beanies on his head with the plastic propeller that spins in the wind, reading THE KORAN upside down and saying, "HMM, VERY INTERESTING BUT WE MUST NOT RUSH TO JUDGMENT. WE MUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND THEIR PERSPECTIVE."
-benjamin harris
the story is on an--unreleased yet--movie by the actor mel gibson on christ's passion. on the anniversary of the attacks by followers of the religion of islam on the united states and the murder of 2,800 innocents in new york city the magazine that bears that city's name does a feature on a b-movie actor's movie.
i see a political cartoon here. two bookish sorts with "new yorker editor" on their shirts, one reading "mel gibson's screenplay," his/her mouth distorted with indignity saying "OUTRAGEOUS RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY!", the other wearing one of those koo-koo clock beanies on his head with the plastic propeller that spins in the wind, reading THE KORAN upside down and saying, "HMM, VERY INTERESTING BUT WE MUST NOT RUSH TO JUDGMENT. WE MUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND THEIR PERSPECTIVE."
-benjamin harris
Seen...
SEEN...
on the back of a car, two bumper-stickers,an american flag logo with MAKE LOVE NOT WAR on the left side and HOWARD DEAN, FOR AMERICA on the right.
on the back of a car, two bumper-stickers,an american flag logo with MAKE LOVE NOT WAR on the left side and HOWARD DEAN, FOR AMERICA on the right.
Wednesday, September 10, 2003
DEAN-ARAFAT?
"it's not our place to take sides," said the democratic nominee for president, one-term, former vermont governor, dr. howard dean on the israeli-islam issue.
liberman called him on it in the debate last night as he did on dean's neo-protectionist economic policies last week saying, "the bush recession will be followed by the dean depression."
liberman is wisely taking a confrontational tone with dean and appealing to the democrats moderate/conservative center. the primary season will turn into a two man, dean-liberman contest for the ideological heart of the party.
-benjamin harris
"it's not our place to take sides," said the democratic nominee for president, one-term, former vermont governor, dr. howard dean on the israeli-islam issue.
liberman called him on it in the debate last night as he did on dean's neo-protectionist economic policies last week saying, "the bush recession will be followed by the dean depression."
liberman is wisely taking a confrontational tone with dean and appealing to the democrats moderate/conservative center. the primary season will turn into a two man, dean-liberman contest for the ideological heart of the party.
-benjamin harris
Thursday, September 04, 2003
occasionally, the electricity in my apartment building goes out for short periods of time. when it does, my smoke detector makes an intermittent beeping sound as it would if its battery were low. it happened again at 3 am last night and woke me up. i tried to disconnect it but gave up after five minutes or so and shortly after that the electricity came back on.
this morning, i was reading and smoking my pipe and took a break. i decided to again try to disconnect the smoke detector so i stood on a chair and started twisting and pulling on it. i got it off its wall bracket but there were these red and blue wires coming out of the wall that were attached with a plastic buckle to wires coming out of the unit. i briefly tried to unhook the buckle but then thought i might have live electrical wires hanging loose, i didn't know what all, and so abandoned the idea.
at that point the alarm went off for real right in my face, that loud continuous, panicked, wail. it so startled me i almost fell off the chair. i started pushing the reset button and gave another tug on the plastic buckle but just gave up.
when you don't know what you're doing, you don't know what the outer limits are when things go awry and so in an instant, in the way the brain works in these situations, i thought of all sorts of apocalyptic outcomes. is this setting off alarms in all the apartments in the building? will the fire department automatically be called? will the building have to be evacuated? will a petition be circulated to force me to move?
i stepped off the chair and an instant later it stopped and i realized that i had been trying to disconnect a smoke detector while smoking a pipe.
-benjamin harris
this morning, i was reading and smoking my pipe and took a break. i decided to again try to disconnect the smoke detector so i stood on a chair and started twisting and pulling on it. i got it off its wall bracket but there were these red and blue wires coming out of the wall that were attached with a plastic buckle to wires coming out of the unit. i briefly tried to unhook the buckle but then thought i might have live electrical wires hanging loose, i didn't know what all, and so abandoned the idea.
at that point the alarm went off for real right in my face, that loud continuous, panicked, wail. it so startled me i almost fell off the chair. i started pushing the reset button and gave another tug on the plastic buckle but just gave up.
when you don't know what you're doing, you don't know what the outer limits are when things go awry and so in an instant, in the way the brain works in these situations, i thought of all sorts of apocalyptic outcomes. is this setting off alarms in all the apartments in the building? will the fire department automatically be called? will the building have to be evacuated? will a petition be circulated to force me to move?
i stepped off the chair and an instant later it stopped and i realized that i had been trying to disconnect a smoke detector while smoking a pipe.
-benjamin harris
Sunday, August 31, 2003
"Oceans of White Hands"
"OCEANS OF WHITE HANDS"
the how-do express rolls on. he's up 38%-17% in new hampshire over kerry. he's in the middle of his "sleepless" tour and, according to the new york times is drawing "staggering, "protest-size" crowds. he's raised $10.3 million, more than any democrat EVER except president clinton in '95.
dr. do-little is running, literally, all over the country. he's on the cover of time, newsweek and twice this week on the front page of the new york times. boob herbert has written an op-ed column on him and even joe klein, who has his clear-headed moments, is impressed. dean's democratic opponents seem stunned, deer-in-the-headlights paralyzed. and the green mountain green is emboldened by new polls showing support for bush DOWN, support for his handling of the iraqi war--how-do's signature issue-- DOWN.
when how-do gets the nomination he will be the most unqualified major party nominee in history. he is a one-term, former governor, with no foreign policy experience, even extra-governmentally, has never served in the congress or senate or in anyone's cabinet and his day job is being a doctor.
the state he was, for one term, governor of is one of the smallest (three electoral votes) and least representative in the country. it is as homogenous (92% white) as utah, rural (largest "city" burlington: 40,000), and has the only socialist member of congress.
for the republicans this is a god-send. i heard the chariman of the republican national committee being asked what he thought of bush running against dean. he actually had to swallow a chuckle and then got his game face on and in practiced seriousness said, "i think the democrats should nominate dean. i think they need to get back to their roots."
i have mixed feelings. to the right of bush on foreign policy, i wish we had a democrat like pat moynihan or scoop jackson or jfk who had the credentials and gravitas to debate HOW aggressive we should be--not whether we should be aggressive or not. hell, even bill clinton ran to the right of bush-1 on china policy.
but on the other hand my devilish humorous side that likes to see fools made fools of wants this guy to win the nomination SO bad. just for the fun of watching the train-wreck and seeing the body parts of the birkenstock men and ladies in sensible shoes, lying about. i admit i've watched an episode or two of real tv.
and maybe some good will come of it. i'm hopeful that after the general election debacle to come, one in a string stretching from mcgovern, to carter, to mondale, to dukakis and now dean, i'm hopeful that some kind of party realignment occurs. i don't think it will actually, historically that has taken a major national trauma like a depression, not just nominating some dippety-do, but maybe something along the lines of the creation of the dlc can occur, which came into being after "mike" dukakis' razor-thin 45-5 loss in '88. it's time to dismantle the democrats "big tent." there are too many tweety birds flying around inside and they're killing the party.
the new york times, aug. 27:
"the feisty crowds were filled with birkenstock liberals..."
"the folks buying 'the doctor is in' buttons were mostly aging flower children and the tongue-studded next generation."
"there were few union members, african-americans or immigrants [at the dean rallies]..."
"holding oceans of blue dean placards at every stop were nearly all white hands, a homogeneity the campaign tried to counter with a rainbow of supporters on stage, which only drew more attention to the lack of diversity in the audience."
that's the problem of the democrats elitism in a nutshell. they don't share the values of african-americans or union members or immigrants, the values of hard work, love of country, faith and material prosperity. the tongue-studded students don't work, the aging flower children are still stoned and "work" as librarians or writers or professors, the birkenstock liberals fled the "material culture" for back-to-the-earth places like vermont, 92% white. they fled the diversity of real america for all-white vermont just as they despise and label as racist the middle class for having fled the cities for the suburbs.
elitism is exclusion. there are no african-americans at dean rallies because these "liberals" don't champion diversity, they don't want to live with african-americans, they want the "simpler" life, the all-white life of vermont. the people who support howard dean are elitists and in this sense they are racists. they are high-i.q., cultural, intellectual, or intellectual wannabes, who reject and ridicule the middle class and its values. their coin-of-the realm is being "bright," one of the least relevant characteristics for leadership. "bush is so dumb! dean is SO smart." listen to them, it won't take five minutes before they say something like that. "mike" dukakis' campaign slogan when he ran for governor was "michael dukakis SHOULD be governor." has there ever been a more elitist campaign slogan in modern history? he's ENTITLED to be governor see, because he's SO "bright" and went to harvard and is an intellectual like us!
"[dean's] not running a campaign, he's running a movement," the new york times quotes a person as saying. "but it is unclear what the movement is for."
his "movement" is about anger, frustration and hatred. his supporters are angry because they are so bright but have accomplished so little in their lives. they are frustrated at seeing themselves ignored by more sensible people. "pay attention to me! i'm smart!" and they hate, they hate the middle class, they hate those who work hard and achieve, they hate the material rewards of that hard work, and they hate america for letting it all happen. it's not about bush, it's not about iraq. it's about them. it has always been about them.
last march, as the iraqi war began, my son's 8th grade class went on a trip to spain. at a concert in madrid the tufts university choral conductor shocked the audience by turning to them before the start of the concert and saying "today, i'm ashamed to be an american."
"for the second time in my life, i'm ashamed of my nationality," said karin overbeck at a dean rally. " i was born in germany and i was ashamed; now i'm ashamed to be an american."
so run howard run. "take back america," take your delusions and your delusional supporters back to 92% white vermont and leave your membership in the democratic party behind. better yet, leave the country you despise and are, as karin is, ashamed of. go somewhere else where you won't be "ashamed."
-benjamin harris.
the how-do express rolls on. he's up 38%-17% in new hampshire over kerry. he's in the middle of his "sleepless" tour and, according to the new york times is drawing "staggering, "protest-size" crowds. he's raised $10.3 million, more than any democrat EVER except president clinton in '95.
dr. do-little is running, literally, all over the country. he's on the cover of time, newsweek and twice this week on the front page of the new york times. boob herbert has written an op-ed column on him and even joe klein, who has his clear-headed moments, is impressed. dean's democratic opponents seem stunned, deer-in-the-headlights paralyzed. and the green mountain green is emboldened by new polls showing support for bush DOWN, support for his handling of the iraqi war--how-do's signature issue-- DOWN.
when how-do gets the nomination he will be the most unqualified major party nominee in history. he is a one-term, former governor, with no foreign policy experience, even extra-governmentally, has never served in the congress or senate or in anyone's cabinet and his day job is being a doctor.
the state he was, for one term, governor of is one of the smallest (three electoral votes) and least representative in the country. it is as homogenous (92% white) as utah, rural (largest "city" burlington: 40,000), and has the only socialist member of congress.
for the republicans this is a god-send. i heard the chariman of the republican national committee being asked what he thought of bush running against dean. he actually had to swallow a chuckle and then got his game face on and in practiced seriousness said, "i think the democrats should nominate dean. i think they need to get back to their roots."
i have mixed feelings. to the right of bush on foreign policy, i wish we had a democrat like pat moynihan or scoop jackson or jfk who had the credentials and gravitas to debate HOW aggressive we should be--not whether we should be aggressive or not. hell, even bill clinton ran to the right of bush-1 on china policy.
but on the other hand my devilish humorous side that likes to see fools made fools of wants this guy to win the nomination SO bad. just for the fun of watching the train-wreck and seeing the body parts of the birkenstock men and ladies in sensible shoes, lying about. i admit i've watched an episode or two of real tv.
and maybe some good will come of it. i'm hopeful that after the general election debacle to come, one in a string stretching from mcgovern, to carter, to mondale, to dukakis and now dean, i'm hopeful that some kind of party realignment occurs. i don't think it will actually, historically that has taken a major national trauma like a depression, not just nominating some dippety-do, but maybe something along the lines of the creation of the dlc can occur, which came into being after "mike" dukakis' razor-thin 45-5 loss in '88. it's time to dismantle the democrats "big tent." there are too many tweety birds flying around inside and they're killing the party.
the new york times, aug. 27:
"the feisty crowds were filled with birkenstock liberals..."
"the folks buying 'the doctor is in' buttons were mostly aging flower children and the tongue-studded next generation."
"there were few union members, african-americans or immigrants [at the dean rallies]..."
"holding oceans of blue dean placards at every stop were nearly all white hands, a homogeneity the campaign tried to counter with a rainbow of supporters on stage, which only drew more attention to the lack of diversity in the audience."
that's the problem of the democrats elitism in a nutshell. they don't share the values of african-americans or union members or immigrants, the values of hard work, love of country, faith and material prosperity. the tongue-studded students don't work, the aging flower children are still stoned and "work" as librarians or writers or professors, the birkenstock liberals fled the "material culture" for back-to-the-earth places like vermont, 92% white. they fled the diversity of real america for all-white vermont just as they despise and label as racist the middle class for having fled the cities for the suburbs.
elitism is exclusion. there are no african-americans at dean rallies because these "liberals" don't champion diversity, they don't want to live with african-americans, they want the "simpler" life, the all-white life of vermont. the people who support howard dean are elitists and in this sense they are racists. they are high-i.q., cultural, intellectual, or intellectual wannabes, who reject and ridicule the middle class and its values. their coin-of-the realm is being "bright," one of the least relevant characteristics for leadership. "bush is so dumb! dean is SO smart." listen to them, it won't take five minutes before they say something like that. "mike" dukakis' campaign slogan when he ran for governor was "michael dukakis SHOULD be governor." has there ever been a more elitist campaign slogan in modern history? he's ENTITLED to be governor see, because he's SO "bright" and went to harvard and is an intellectual like us!
"[dean's] not running a campaign, he's running a movement," the new york times quotes a person as saying. "but it is unclear what the movement is for."
his "movement" is about anger, frustration and hatred. his supporters are angry because they are so bright but have accomplished so little in their lives. they are frustrated at seeing themselves ignored by more sensible people. "pay attention to me! i'm smart!" and they hate, they hate the middle class, they hate those who work hard and achieve, they hate the material rewards of that hard work, and they hate america for letting it all happen. it's not about bush, it's not about iraq. it's about them. it has always been about them.
last march, as the iraqi war began, my son's 8th grade class went on a trip to spain. at a concert in madrid the tufts university choral conductor shocked the audience by turning to them before the start of the concert and saying "today, i'm ashamed to be an american."
"for the second time in my life, i'm ashamed of my nationality," said karin overbeck at a dean rally. " i was born in germany and i was ashamed; now i'm ashamed to be an american."
so run howard run. "take back america," take your delusions and your delusional supporters back to 92% white vermont and leave your membership in the democratic party behind. better yet, leave the country you despise and are, as karin is, ashamed of. go somewhere else where you won't be "ashamed."
-benjamin harris.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
just heard on npr that the expected cost of reconstruction in iraq is now at $16 billion "and will likely be much higher."
what the f*** is this? we did not do 16 bill worth of damage to iraq. we should repair what we damaged, give them a copy of the federalist papers and be done with it. $16 billion? what, are we putting gold leaf on all the mosques?
jfk told a joke about going to his father late in the 1960 campaign for more money and the old man replying, "i'll pay for a victory but i'll be damned if i'm going to pay for a landslide."
no landslides here, no shining cities on a hill.
what the f*** is this? we did not do 16 bill worth of damage to iraq. we should repair what we damaged, give them a copy of the federalist papers and be done with it. $16 billion? what, are we putting gold leaf on all the mosques?
jfk told a joke about going to his father late in the 1960 campaign for more money and the old man replying, "i'll pay for a victory but i'll be damned if i'm going to pay for a landslide."
no landslides here, no shining cities on a hill.
Saturday, August 23, 2003
Adieu Adu?
ADIEU Adu?
article yesterday in nyt on freddy adu, the lebron james of american soccer, no, no the embryonic michael jordan of american soccer. even scouts from european teams like juventus and manchester united pronounce him a possible a once-in-a-generation talent.
made me recall a conversation i had with a soccer fan friend of mine a few weeks ago. i said what i said above, that mls should sell the farm to keep this kid home. my friend said, "i hope he goes to europe so he can develop.
the sentiment was so foreign to me that i paused, not knowing quite what to say, then just essentially repeated myself. the THOUGHT that freddy adu would wind up with manchester united or someone had crossed my mind, as it has that of every soccer fan in america, but the SENTIMENT that an american soccer fan wuld WANT freddy to go to europe had not.
sometimes exposure to an opposite point of view can be mind-expanding. there's no doubt that adu would see better competition in the epl or serie a or the bundesliga than in mls, and because of that he would probably devlop more. i go on that assumption anyway.
the issue for my friend was the individual's interest, what's best for freddy. my interest was the opposite, or at least different, what's best for american soccer. soccer has always clung to life on the american sports scene. mls has always augmented its meager coffers by loaning or selling tis best players abroad--joe-max moore, brian mcbride, casey keller, etc. this deligitimizes mls and is something every league official and every american soccer fan recognizes, as does fifa, which looks askance at mls anyway.
if mls got freddy adu, and if that increased league revenues to the point where mls could stand of its own without loaning/selling its best players, soccer might gain a football in the u.s.
those are a lot of "ifs" and "maybes," too many for my friend, but not for me. i want american soccer to grow. i want to see the adus and zindanes and beckhams on AMERICAN fields, not have to go to some soccer bar to see them. maybe that's selfish. maybe even jingoistic. "boycott french wines!," "keep freddy adu home!"
these opposing values are not exclusive of course. i think my friend wants mls to succeed, i certainly hope adu develops to his potential, but the "equities" of this case, the point on the continuum where this case lies between "best for freddy" and "best for american soccer" are so skewed toward the latter that my friend's position seems as incomprehensible to me now as it did then.
america has got some great futbol players, our world team is ranked 10th or 11th depending on the week (we flip flop with england, by the way). conceedingly mls is not anywhere near as strong as the epl but it is major league, given the "first division" imprimatur by fifa. it's not like i'm wanting adu to stay home and play in the a-league for the pittsburgh riverhounds. freddy would develop just fine in mls.
and on the other side you have the enormous potential benefit to american soccer vs the drop-on-the-ocean effect he would have in europe. freddy adu would do nothing for man-u or real madrid compared to what he would do for mls. sometimes exposure to an oppositie point of view can be mind-expanding. sometimes not.
alas, my friend will probably get his wish. the times article also reported that adu is being pursued eagerly by...manchester united.
-benjamin harris
article yesterday in nyt on freddy adu, the lebron james of american soccer, no, no the embryonic michael jordan of american soccer. even scouts from european teams like juventus and manchester united pronounce him a possible a once-in-a-generation talent.
made me recall a conversation i had with a soccer fan friend of mine a few weeks ago. i said what i said above, that mls should sell the farm to keep this kid home. my friend said, "i hope he goes to europe so he can develop.
the sentiment was so foreign to me that i paused, not knowing quite what to say, then just essentially repeated myself. the THOUGHT that freddy adu would wind up with manchester united or someone had crossed my mind, as it has that of every soccer fan in america, but the SENTIMENT that an american soccer fan wuld WANT freddy to go to europe had not.
sometimes exposure to an opposite point of view can be mind-expanding. there's no doubt that adu would see better competition in the epl or serie a or the bundesliga than in mls, and because of that he would probably devlop more. i go on that assumption anyway.
the issue for my friend was the individual's interest, what's best for freddy. my interest was the opposite, or at least different, what's best for american soccer. soccer has always clung to life on the american sports scene. mls has always augmented its meager coffers by loaning or selling tis best players abroad--joe-max moore, brian mcbride, casey keller, etc. this deligitimizes mls and is something every league official and every american soccer fan recognizes, as does fifa, which looks askance at mls anyway.
if mls got freddy adu, and if that increased league revenues to the point where mls could stand of its own without loaning/selling its best players, soccer might gain a football in the u.s.
those are a lot of "ifs" and "maybes," too many for my friend, but not for me. i want american soccer to grow. i want to see the adus and zindanes and beckhams on AMERICAN fields, not have to go to some soccer bar to see them. maybe that's selfish. maybe even jingoistic. "boycott french wines!," "keep freddy adu home!"
these opposing values are not exclusive of course. i think my friend wants mls to succeed, i certainly hope adu develops to his potential, but the "equities" of this case, the point on the continuum where this case lies between "best for freddy" and "best for american soccer" are so skewed toward the latter that my friend's position seems as incomprehensible to me now as it did then.
america has got some great futbol players, our world team is ranked 10th or 11th depending on the week (we flip flop with england, by the way). conceedingly mls is not anywhere near as strong as the epl but it is major league, given the "first division" imprimatur by fifa. it's not like i'm wanting adu to stay home and play in the a-league for the pittsburgh riverhounds. freddy would develop just fine in mls.
and on the other side you have the enormous potential benefit to american soccer vs the drop-on-the-ocean effect he would have in europe. freddy adu would do nothing for man-u or real madrid compared to what he would do for mls. sometimes exposure to an oppositie point of view can be mind-expanding. sometimes not.
alas, my friend will probably get his wish. the times article also reported that adu is being pursued eagerly by...manchester united.
-benjamin harris
Monday, August 18, 2003
Things that You'll Like and that Are Good for You Too
Things that You'll Like and that Are Good for You Too
-Meditations, by Marcus Aurelius. Roman emperor, one of the founders (along with a slave) of stoicism, Aurelius had absolute power over the then known world. He exercised that power justly, with reflection before and after, and with restraint. There's a saying that the best form of government is a benevolent dictatorship, it being thought impossible. Marcus Aurelius was a benevolent dictator and the Meditations are his philosophical diary. He was the greatest human being who ever lived. This is Public Occurrences.
Monday, August 11, 2003
there was an op-ed piece in the times recently that cautioned against using the internet as a model for governmental regulation of the media because dominance by the few there is even more pronounced than in the convential media. something like the top three websites have as many hits as the next fifteen combined while the top three conventional media conglomerates are as big as the next ten.
the article noted that part of the reason for this on the internet is that search engines like google list websites according to popularity within their category, which of course, just reinforces their prominence.
is this a valid metaphorical use of the heisenberg uncertainty principle. the original applies to the bizarre contingency of quantum material. here a thing is a piece of matter, here an energy wave and the principle says that the act of observing affects the state we're seeing.
i once read that principle was analgous to an attempt to take the temperature of a glass of water by sticking a thermometer in it. the act of doing that changes the temperature of the water at some level far to the right of the decimal point, but still changes it so that ontologically we can never really know the "real" temperature of the water.
obviously the usage as applied to google is by no means precise but itsn't it true, isn't it the point of that op-ed piece that google's act of measuring affects the measurement?
-benjamin harris
the article noted that part of the reason for this on the internet is that search engines like google list websites according to popularity within their category, which of course, just reinforces their prominence.
is this a valid metaphorical use of the heisenberg uncertainty principle. the original applies to the bizarre contingency of quantum material. here a thing is a piece of matter, here an energy wave and the principle says that the act of observing affects the state we're seeing.
i once read that principle was analgous to an attempt to take the temperature of a glass of water by sticking a thermometer in it. the act of doing that changes the temperature of the water at some level far to the right of the decimal point, but still changes it so that ontologically we can never really know the "real" temperature of the water.
obviously the usage as applied to google is by no means precise but itsn't it true, isn't it the point of that op-ed piece that google's act of measuring affects the measurement?
-benjamin harris
certainly i am not the only one who thought it odd, uh curious, off-putting, dare i say, unpatriotic that our de facto national newspaper, the new york times used it's lead editorial to give political advice to tony blair, to mend fences with his british constituents he should decouple england from american and emphasize where the two countries disagree. does the "gray lady" now aspire to be the "gray Lady?"
don't suppose this is making the rounds in republican salons as another example of liberal "treason," do you?
don't suppose this is making the rounds in republican salons as another example of liberal "treason," do you?
Saturday, August 09, 2003
throughout colonial history there were those in leadership, jefferson and franklin prominently, who viewed religion negatively. not just anglicanism or catholocism but the claim of any religion to a position of moral or temporal power. religion was associated with oppression obviously, but also with illogical mysticism that was counter to the tenets of the enlightenment.
however private they might keep their views, the religious-based arguments against paine that man was inherently "bad" and therefore the masses were unfit to govern was viewed dismissively. they were not egalitarians but they were empiricists and they saw that the common man was doing exceptionally well by contemporary standards in america. the idea that the aristocracy MUST consume and not work, and the common man MUST work and not consume,and that this was the natural and only way that society could be ordered flew in the face of their experiences in america. as did the idea of a materially "disinterested" aristocracy, much less the need for one. increasingly, and by the time of the constitutional convention, predominantly, it was interests, many of them, that seemed in need of balancing, not the three anachronistic post-medieval estates.
paine's "common sense" did not carry the day but it did survive to live another day that was soon coming. in the meantime a constitution was drafted and ratified and the meager nod to the need of an aristocracy was an appointive upper legislative chamber. society was not divided three ways, but power was, to make sure that power of the new, emerging and clamoring interests of different groups in society did not capture the whole of government.
despite all of this history however modern republicanism, elitism, aristocracy was not dead. the federalist party led by alexander hamilton worked for the establishment of an american aristocracy all over again in post-independence america. they made the same old arguments and this time they were opposed by jefferson and the republicans (the ancestor of today's democratic party).
however private they might keep their views, the religious-based arguments against paine that man was inherently "bad" and therefore the masses were unfit to govern was viewed dismissively. they were not egalitarians but they were empiricists and they saw that the common man was doing exceptionally well by contemporary standards in america. the idea that the aristocracy MUST consume and not work, and the common man MUST work and not consume,and that this was the natural and only way that society could be ordered flew in the face of their experiences in america. as did the idea of a materially "disinterested" aristocracy, much less the need for one. increasingly, and by the time of the constitutional convention, predominantly, it was interests, many of them, that seemed in need of balancing, not the three anachronistic post-medieval estates.
paine's "common sense" did not carry the day but it did survive to live another day that was soon coming. in the meantime a constitution was drafted and ratified and the meager nod to the need of an aristocracy was an appointive upper legislative chamber. society was not divided three ways, but power was, to make sure that power of the new, emerging and clamoring interests of different groups in society did not capture the whole of government.
despite all of this history however modern republicanism, elitism, aristocracy was not dead. the federalist party led by alexander hamilton worked for the establishment of an american aristocracy all over again in post-independence america. they made the same old arguments and this time they were opposed by jefferson and the republicans (the ancestor of today's democratic party).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
