Patriotism For Skeptics
This is a double repost from July 2008. It was repeated in 2012. They were originally posted in a red, white, and blue font. This is one mistake which will not be repeated, at least not today.
Both features are on the theme of patriotism for skeptics. America has given me a good life, and I appreciate this. The problem is crooks and liars who make patriotic noise while robbing you blind. They think that waving the flag will distract you from their thievery, and often they are right.
These features were originally posted sixty months ago. A few things have happened in that time. The economy has gone from bad to horrific. Lots of carbon dioxide has been pumped into the atmosphere, which may not affect us for a while, but probably will. The Gulf of Mexico has been poisoned. Israel killed women and children in Gaza, and is threatening to do the same in Iran. Meanwhile, Iran had a crooked election, and the people fought back. This is similar to what is going on in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and Syria.
The US dollar, with all its problems, is still the preferred currency of the world. There was speculation a while back that the Euro would replace the dollar in this role. The Euro is in worse shape than the dollar these days. All is not hopeless.
The U S of A elected a dark skinned man POTUS. Many said that race relations would be different, but that has not worked out very well. The combat troops were withdrawn from Iraq, but Babylon is still in a world of hurt. The new POTUS discovered the wonders of robomurder eight time zones away, and has wasted many women and children. Nuclear armed Pakistan gets more edgy every day. Maybe the best thing to do is live in the past, and enjoy some repeat posts. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. These images are Union Soldiers from the War Between The States.
The following is a repost . It was originally published in a red, white, and blue font. As a service to the readers, today’s posting will be in green. Yellowdoggrannie is going strong, and has not forgiven W.
I read an item at yellowdoggrannie’s place this morning. It was a link to a video about the writing of the Star Spangled Banner. (The link does not work anymore. The video is probably available somewhere.) YDG said it made her cry. It set off my BS detector. I am not a history buff. I do know that the War of 1812 was not the most glorious part of American History.
In 1812, Napoleon was on a rampage, but about to screw up. He invaded Russia on June 24, just six days after the U.S. Congress gave approval to “Mr. Madison’s War”. According to St. Wikipedia, the declaration passed by the smallest margin of any war declaration in American History.
The War was caused by several things. The British were “impressing” sailors for duty in their Navy. Among the deserters and British subjects were some Americans. The British were supporting the Native Americans who were fighting the white man. There was also some talk (in Washington) about annexing territory in Canada, either to keep, or to use as a bargaining chip with the British.
On the East side of the Atlantic, England had a change of government at this time, towards a regime that wanted peace with America. This being the early nineteenth century, word of this development did not make it to America in time to stop the War.
The War went on for a couple of years. It distracted the British from fighting Napoleon, and was a strain on the young American republic. In the Summer of 1814, negotiations were underway to end the conflict. The British launched a few military campaigns to put pressure on the U.S.A. Washington D.C. was captured and burned. The next move was the capture of Baltimore.
This is where the video begins its tale. Where the video said hundreds of British ships, Wikipedia says 19. An attorney, Francis Scott Key, was negotiating the release of an American POW. He secured his release, but they could not leave until the bombardment of Fort McHenry was complete.Here is an account of the story:At Fort McHenry, some 1,000 soldiers under the command of Major George Armistead awaited the British naval bombardment…. The attack began in the evening of September 13, as the British fleet of some nineteen ships began pounding the fort with Congreve rockets (from rocket vessel HMS Erebus) and mortar shells (from bomb vessels HMS Terror, HMS Volcano, HMS Meteor, HMS Devastation, and HMS Aetna). After an initial exchange of fire, the British fleet withdrew to just beyond the range of Fort McHenry’s cannons and continued to bombard the American redoubts for the next 25 hours.Although 1,500 to 1,800 cannonballs were launched at the fort, damage was minimal.
After nightfall, Cochrane ordered a landing to be made by medium boats to the shore just west of the fort, away from the harbor opening on which the fort’s defense was concentrated….Operating in darkness and in foul weather, the diversionary attack failed. On the morning of September 14, the 30 ft (9.1 m) × 42 ft oversized American flag, which had been made a few months before by local flagmaker Mary Pickersgill and her 13 year old daughter, flew over Fort McHenry, and Cochrane and Brooke knew that victory had eluded them
Mr. Key saw the flag the next day. He wrote a poem to the tune of a British drinking song, “To Anacreon in Heaven”. The song was made the National Anthem in 1931, and has been (badly) sung ever since. Two extra words, “Play Ball”, were added later.
On September 24, the Treaty of Ghent ended the conflict. The verdict was “status quo ante bellum”. In other words, nothing was changed by the death of those men. The war was, in effect, over when the Battle of Baltimore was fought. The word of the treaty did not reach America for a few weeks. (The Battle of New Orleans was fought after the end of the War.)
The video said the Flag at Fort McHenry was held up through the night by men, many of whom died. This might be true. It is also true that the negotiations were about to yield fruit. It would take a few weeks for word of the Battle of Baltimore to reach Europe, at which point the War was already over. Status Quo Ante Bellum.
Patriotism is one of the games that almost everyone plays. The rules seem to vary.
In 1967, JSM was flying planes in Nam, I was in the eighth grade, and BHO was in the first grade. He was in Hawaii, which might have been where JSM went for R&R if Hanoi did not have other ideas. America was about to hit a turning point about the Vietnam War. At first people were supportive, albeit without much enthusiasm. Opposition started to arise, and was frequently confused with treason. As the war dragged on, the homefront began to see things differently.
To this reporter, many of the patriots of 1967 were the ones who opposed the war. The conflict in Indochina was to cause many problems for the United States. Eventually, Richard Nixon got a fig leaf treaty that he called Peace with Honor. The early opposition was heard, but not after losing more than fifty eight thousand fine men.
That is the first way to be a patriot…to keep an eye on the government, and speak out in opposition when it is needed. Another way is to keep the United States strong and healthy. One way to do this is work hard and pay taxes. Now, the conservative windbags whine loudly about paying taxes. They want to pay for the current war by cutting taxes to make the economy grow. If we had no taxes at all the economy would grow even more.
The war in Babylon was an experiment in war without sacrifice. There was a tax cut when it was apparent we were planning an invasion. The national debt has gone out of control, and the federal reserve bank has cut the interest rates. The result is that the dollar is not worth as much as it once was. The oil market is based on the dollar. Oil is just as valuable as ever. The dollar is not, and it takes more dollars to buy a barrel of oil. This is an important factor in the rise of gas prices.
The way to keep America strong is to follow the three basic rules of the workplace: show up, stay awake, don’t kill anyone The citizens of the United States are a remarkable group of people. One way to be a patriot is to show respect for these people, and for yourself.
One way to help is to quit consuming so much. Drive smarter, and we would not need as much gasoline. We would not be so big if we ate less. Put a sweater on in the winter instead of turning up the thermostat. We are heading in this direction, but have a way to go.
Much of what you hear and read is not true. The so called conservatives are just as guilty as the so called mainstream media. Think for yourself. The freedom to think is a part of America that you are sometimes discouraged from exercising, but it is important.
This is a dangerous world, and we have a military to keep them away from our borders. We are also involved in a tough war of our own choosing. It is to be hoped that our next President will find an acceptable conclusion to this conflict.
Meanwhile, this is the fourth of july. It is a day to enjoy the good life we have here. America is a fine country. It has given me a good life. While I am not blind to the problems, there is no where else I would rather be. 2013 UPDATE The economy is marginally better today, although many people have not benefited. The American troops are out of Iraq, and that country is having problems. BHO was reelected in 2012. Race relations in America are no better, and in some ways worse. Some things have changed, some remain the same. 2014 UPDATE“It is to be hoped that our next President will find an acceptable conclusion to this conflict.”
The Problem With 18 Things
A link keeps turning up on facebook. It is for an item, 18 Things White People Should Know/Do Before Discussing Racism. It was posted at The Frisky | Celebrity Gossip, Relationship Advice, Beauty and Fashion Tips. The facility has a series of suggested posts at the top of the page. The first one you see is BLOWJOB TECHNIQUES YOU NEED TO TRY.
18 Things is supposed to be educational. PG was encouraged to read the piece two weeks ago, and found it lacking. The link today was from a combination facebook friend/ facebook unfriend. Maybe 18 Things deserves another look.
18 Things is garbage. Take a look at number one. “1. It is uncomfortable to talk about racism. It is more uncomfortable to live it.” You would never know this from the number of people who seem to enjoy talking about racism. The louder you talk, and the more passion you display, the more truth your words have. Maybe what is uncomfortable is to quit talking, and listen.
Is the idea is for everyone to talk at once? Here is item 16: “16. Silence does nothing. Blank stares and silence do not further this difficult but necessary conversation.” If you are going to listen to someone, it is very helpful to keep your mouth shut.
“2. “Colorblindness” is a cop-out. The statements “but I don’t see color” or “I never care about color” do not help to build a case against systemic racism. Try being the only White person in an environment. You will notice color then.” This is a curious paragraph. Sentence one has little to do with sentences two, three, and four.
Sentences three and four are connected. The author assumes that the PWOC reading this piece has never been the only pale face in an enviornment. Actually, it is probably more common to be the only white person in the room, than to be the only black person in a room full of whites.
“3. Oprah’s success does not mean the end of racism. The singular success of a Black man or woman (i.e. Oprah, or Tiger Woods, or President Obama) is never a valid argument against the existence of racism. By this logic, the success of Frederick Douglass or Amanda America Dickson during the 19th century would be grounds for disproving slavery.”
Has anyone ever said that the success of Oprah Winfrey is the end of racism? Do you have a link for that? Ok, and even if they did say that, it would be wildly untrue. But it gets better. If you agree with this statement that very few people have made, that is like saying that the success of Frederick Douglass disproves slavery. This is ridiculous.
The rest of the piece is not much better. Items 4, 5, 9, 14, and 15, can be summed up with the five words … there is racism in America. You are encouraged to use google to educate yourself. This can go in different directions. Maybe you could google “logical fallacy,” or “critical thinking.”
The article you are reading should not be taken as denying the existence of a race problem in America. (The words racism/racist are problematic.) People should be treated with kindness and respect. Opportunities should be available to all people. The police should not target racially defined populations. Celebrities should not say tacky things.
The question arises … what value do articles like 18 Things have? Do they inform people who need to learn? Are they preaching to the choir? (Frisky has a header ad for Red Bull. Do articles like this sell power energy drinks?)
There are other possibilities. Do articles like 18 Things trivialize racial problems? Maybe the constant promotion of nonsense like 18 Things will lead people to believe that there really isn’t a race problem in America. People who uncritically praise articles like this are doing more harm than good. Those who claim to educate should be held to some sort of standard. Posting nonsense on the internet is not the same thing as working for equality and justice.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress.
Author Insults
These author insults were borrowed from flavorwire. HT to Andrew Sullivan The pictures are from The Library of Congress This is a repost.
25. Gertrude Stein on Ezra Pound “A village explainer. Excellent if you were a village, but if you were not, not.”
24. Virginia Woolf on Aldous Huxley “All raw, uncooked, protesting.”
23. H. G. Wells on George Bernard Shaw “An idiot child screaming in a hospital.”
22. Joseph Conrad on D.H. Lawrence “Filth. Nothing but obscenities.”
21. Lord Byron on John Keats (1820) “Here are Johnny Keats’ piss-a-bed poetry, and three novels by God knows whom… No more Keats, I entreat: flay him alive; if some of you don’t I must skin him myself: there is no bearing the drivelling idiotism of the Mankin.”
20. Vladimir Nabokov on Joseph Conrad “I cannot abide Conrad’s souvenir shop style and bottled ships and shell necklaces of romanticist cliches.”
19. Dylan Thomas on Rudyard Kipling “Mr Kipling … stands for everything in this cankered world which I would wish were otherwise.”
18. Ralph Waldo Emerson on Jane Austen “Miss Austen’s novels . . . seem to me vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention, imprisoned in the wretched conventions of English society, without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world. Never was life so pinched and narrow. The one problem in the mind of the writer . . . is marriageableness.”
17. Martin Amis on Miguel Cervantes “Reading Don Quixote can be compared to an indefinite visit from your most impossible senior relative, with all his pranks, dirty habits, unstoppable reminiscences, and terrible cronies. When the experience is over, and the old boy checks out at last (on page 846 — the prose wedged tight, with no breaks for dialogue), you will shed tears all right; not tears of relief or regret but tears of pride. You made it, despite all that ‘Don Quixote’ could do.”
16. Charles Baudelaire on Voltaire (1864) “I grow bored in France — and the main reason is that everybody here resembles Voltaire…the king of nincompoops, the prince of the superficial, the anti-artist, the spokesman of janitresses, the Father Gigone of the editors of Siecle.”
15. William Faulkner on Ernest Hemingway “He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.”
14. Ernest Hemingway on William Faulkner “Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?”
13. Gore Vidal on Truman Capote “He’s a full-fledged housewife from Kansas with all the prejudices.”
12. Oscar Wilde on Alexander Pope “There are two ways of disliking poetry; one way is to dislike it, the other is to read Pope.”
11. Vladimir Nabokov on Ernest Hemingway (1972) “As to Hemingway, I read him for the first time in the early ‘forties, something about bells, balls and bulls, and loathed it.”
10. Henry James on Edgar Allan Poe (1876) “An enthusiasm for Poe is the mark of a decidedly primitive stage of reflection.”
09. Truman Capote on Jack Kerouac “That’s not writing, that’s typing.”
08. Elizabeth Bishop on J.D. Salinger “I HATED [Catcher in the Rye]. It took me days to go through it, gingerly, a page at a time, and blushing with embarrassment for him every ridiculous sentence of the way. How can they let him do it?”
07. D.H. Lawrence on Herman Melville (1923) “Nobody can be more clownish, more clumsy and sententiously in bad taste, than Herman Melville, even in a great book like ‘Moby Dick’…. One wearies of the grand serieux. There’s something false about it. And that’s Melville. Oh dear, when the solemn ass brays! brays! brays!”
06. W. H. Auden on Robert Browning “I don’t think Robert Browning was very good in bed. His wife probably didn’t care for him very much. He snored and had fantasies about twelve-year-old girls.”
05. Evelyn Waugh on Marcel Proust (1948) “I am reading Proust for the first time. Very poor stuff. I think he was mentally defective.”
04. Mark Twain on Jane Austen (1898) “I haven’t any right to criticize books, and I don’t do it except when I hate them. I often want to criticize Jane Austen, but her books madden me so that I can’t conceal my frenzy from the reader; and therefore I have to stop every time I begin. Every time I read ‘Pride and Prejudice,’ I want to dig her up and hit her over the skull with her own shin-bone.”
03. Virginia Woolf on James Joyce “the work of a queasy undergraduate scratching his pimples.”
02. William Faulkner on Mark Twain (1922) “A hack writer who would not have been considered fourth rate in Europe, who tricked out a few of the old proven sure fire literary skeletons with sufficient local color to intrigue the superficial and the lazy.”
01. D.H. Lawrence on James Joyce (1928) “My God, what a clumsy olla putrida James Joyce is! Nothing but old fags and cabbage stumps of quotations from the Bible and the rest stewed in the juice of deliberate, journalistic dirty-mindedness.”
Bonus. Mary McCarthy on Lillian Hellman “Every word she writes is a lie, including and and the.”
Bonus two, a comment to the original post.: RomanHans Re “The Cardinal’s Mistress” by Benito Mussolini, Dorothy Parker wrote one of my favorite bon mots: “This is not a book to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.”
Bonus Three, from Flannery O’Connor “I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you. The fiction of Ayn Rand is as low as you can get re fiction. I hope you picked it up off the floor of the subway and threw it in the nearest garbage pail. She makes Mickey Spillane look like Dostoevsky.”
Sharon Needles
PG got in one night, and found a summer storm brewing on facebook. “Dear white people who still love Sharon Needles. Before you begin to defend her or justify this as art or whatever, please keep in mind that THERE IS AN ENTIRE POPULATION OF PEOPLE AFFECTED BY RACISM WHO THINK THIS IS FUCKED UP. Can you respect that, or will you continue to tell people of color what does and does not oppress them?” The first question is, who is Sharon Needles? This is a repost.
A baby boy was born in Newton IA on November 28, 1981. His parents named him Aaron Coady. He did not fit in, and moved to Pittsburgh PA in 2004. His stage name was Sharon Needles. As the years went by, he developed a “personality”. There was a tv show, Ru Paul’s Drag Race. Miss Needles won season four. The Pittsburgh City Council honored her. Meanwhile, some people did not like her act.
There was a link on facebook, Dragged into Debate: Reality-TV fame puts spotlight on Sharon Needles’ controversial act. PG looked at the article, and found a video of a performance by Miss Needles. The show was in a noisy bar, with some drinking jokes. The makeup and costumes were flawless. (flawful might be better, if it wasn’t the name for hummus hushpuppies) The act was what one might expect of a button pushing drag queen. It is tough to be outrageous these days, but Sharon Needles is giving it the old college try.
Later, the matter got a bit more personal. “Sharon Needles recently performed in Nashville. I went to the performance. One of my friends got her autograph after the show. Sharon Needles wrote a note in the autograph in which she called my friend a n****r. Several of my white friends continue to loudly and publicly worship and promote Sharon Needles, despite having been at the show and knowing about the autograph (nevermind having heard other discussion about Needles’ unapologetic racism). Just thought y’all should know that supporting and promoting someone who is unapologetically perpetuating racism and refusing to be held accountable for it, is racist!
The fuss was a bit puzzling to PG. We can begin by breaking down the opening post. “THERE IS AN ENTIRE POPULATION OF PEOPLE AFFECTED BY RACISM WHO THINK THIS IS FUCKED UP.” Does this include Ru Paul? What about the millions of People of Color (POC) who had never heard of Sharon Needles? Do all caps help to get the point across?
“Can you respect that, or will you continue to tell people of color what does and does not oppress them?” Are those the only two options here? To “respect” the notion that a nightclub performer in Pennsylvania is oppressing 35 million Americans? Or, if you don’t “respect” this highly questionable concept, you “you continue to tell people of color what does and does not oppress them.” Are these the only two choices? What if you ignore the peroxide poster girl, and treat your neighbor with respect?
There is also the $64 question, is Sharon Needles racist? (Winning a tv contest hosted by RuPaul should be remembered.) The tumblr Fuck Yea Sharon Needles has a picture of the performer in blackface. She is singing the opening number of “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” … a pair of lips against a black background. PG did not hear anything racist in the video he endured.
Facebook is a magnet for people who enjoy a digital quarrel. Evidently, that sometimes includes PG. He made a comment: “There was a line in an article about Miss Needles that gave me a good laugh…”If Needles “were a straight person” engaging in this behavior, he adds, “people would feel more comfortable” criticizing it.”… I had never heard of this person before this conversation, and can’t say that I really enjoy her persona. It is like Charlie Brown after a four day speed binge. She is on the edge, which is where gay performers have traditionally been. I saw a video of her, and did not hear any racist comments… not that I doubt they exist. I found her act tough to enjoy, for reasons that have nothing to do with racism. Just ignore her, and find something more important to whine about. “
There was a reply. “Hey Luther, I don’t know how you meant for that to come off, but it’s not your job to tell us to ignore someone who is contributing to our oppression. Also, when you say, “find something more important to whine about,” I feel disappointed and dismayed because it sounds to me like you don’t understand that A) this is important to some of us, especially to those of us who are people of color, and it can be a very dehumanizing experience to be constantly confronted with people’s apathy around something that impacts our lives so intimately; and B) calling out racism in our community and “whining” are not the same thing, and, again, it’s really dehumanizing when we try to talk about something so important to us and people in the mostly-white communities around us dismiss our conversations as “whining” because they think our concerns or experiences are trivial, particularly when they personally, as white people, do not experience racism with the same intensity that people of color do. Obviously this is important to us and we have thought about it a lot. I stated that this has been going on (in my personal experience) for over a year and the autograph posted was signed months ago. It has actually taken us a long time to decide to say something so publicly about it, but I personally said something because THIS IS IMPORTANT AND PEOPLE NEED TO STOP IGNORING IT.
This person does not know very much about PG. All this person knows is that PG does not take a Pennsylvania drag queen seriously as an agent of oppression.
There is a lot of noise about racism. It is very one sided. The talk gets in the way of constructive action. There needs to be compassion and kindness for both people of color, and white people. To focus this kind of attention on a drag queen says more about the complainer than it does the performer. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. They are Union Soldiers, from 1861-1865.
Conspiracy Double Feature
This is the 2014 repost of a previously published effort. This is a work of speculation, and has no basis in proven fact. The thesis of this post cannot be proved nor disproved.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress. These images are from the Crimean War, the first war to be photographed. It was the conflict that gave us “The charge of the light brigade”, with the line “ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do or die”. Or often, to do and die. Thousands of men died in the Crimean War, and not one person today can tell you why.
Listening to talk radio while you drive is a dangerous activity. You might start to think, and look at the man behind the screen. Neal Boortz (spell check suggestions:Boor, Booster, Boozer) was on a rant today about Jane Fonda. It it the same story you have heard many times…she gave aid and comfort to the enemy, she is a traitor, American troops died because of her,she should have been executed.
Sometimes when you hear something too many times, you begin to have doubts about what you heard. A light bulb went off in PG’s head when he heard the Fonda Rant again.. .What if Jane Fonda was working for the US government when she went to Hanoi?
What was in it for the government? This trip gave our government a discredited leader of the antiwar movement to denounce. When the government was trashing Jane Fonda, they did not have to defend the disastrous policies of that war.
Miss Fonda has been an icon of right wing hatred ever since, as well as of military training. One story has Miss Fonda giving the North Vietnamese information about activities by American forces. How would she get this information?
The infamous trip to Hanoi took place in the Summer of 1972. American troops were being withdrawn, and anti war protests lost most of their passion. (It was also soon after the death of F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover, and the Watergate burglary) The war in Vietnam was essentially over for America. We were no longer trying to win, but to negotiate a face saving treaty. President Nixon called it “Peace with Honor”. Miss Fonda’s actions had little impact on these negotiations.
Miss Fonda made some radio broadcasts from Hanoi. Is it possible that coded messages to our troops were included in these broadcasts? Is it also possible that she gave the North Vietnamese misinformation on purpose?
Why would a women known for her left wing activism do such a thing? Maybe, the FBI had some dirt on her, and blackmailed her.
In 1967, Kurt Vonnegut published a book titled “Mother Night”. It tells the story of Howard W. Campbell Jr. Mr. Campbell made propaganda broadcasts for Germany in World War II, which were secretly used to pass coded messages to the Allies. He was condemned as a traitor after the war, but never prosecuted. He did not win an Academy Award.
The role of the government in this affair could have taken another role. Perhaps Miss Fonda was sincere in her actions, but aided by the government. Miss Fonda was under surveillance in 1972. The government would have known about her plans to go to North Vietnam, and perhaps could have stopped her. But, because her going to Hanoi was to their advantage, the government allowed the trip to take place.
The above is speculation, and could be horribly wrong. The fact that Miss Fonda has expressed regrets over her trip neither proves nor disproves this. She got great movie roles, and won two Academy Awards, during the seventies. This may be a coincidence, or maybe it was a reward for her service.
Clearly, the trip she made to Hanoi had propaganda value to the US government. It has been a Godsend over the years. You should always consider who benefits from an action.
During his rant today, Mr. Boortz said that US troops died because of Miss Fonda. (He does not discuss the man who went to Nam in his place, after his draft deferment.) By saying this, he can ignore the tens of thousands of troops who died because Richard Nixon chose to wait until 1973 to sign a “peace treaty”. He could have made the same deal in 1969. Peace with honor indeed.
This is a repost, through and through. Pictures are from The Library of Congress
A few days ago, the possibility that the government allowed Jane Fonda to go to Hanoi was discussed. Ms. Fonda’s trip to North Vietnam had numerous propaganda/p.r. advantages to the American government. Direct government sponsorship cannot be ruled out. Another scenario would have the government knowing about the trip, having the ability to stop the trip, but allowing it to happen. For the purposes of today’s discussion, we will call this the “Hoover Option”(HO). It is named for John Edgar Hoover, the publicity savvy director of the FBI until his death in 1972.
HO is a favorite of conspiracy theorists. It is difficult to prove or disprove, and explains a lot of things.
Another conspiracy rich event is the shooting of John Kennedy on November 22, 1963. The various hypotheses on this event are well known. Numerous people wanted JFK to retire…gangsters, teamsters, Republicans, Lyndon Johnson, Vietnamese… to the point to where it is tough to sort out all the possible candidates. The thinking goes here, that J. Edgar Hoover knew of the plot to kill JFK, could have stopped it, but chose to allow it to happen. Even conspiracy skeptics think this is plausible.
The concept of Lee Harvey Oswald working alone does not eliminate the possibility of HO. Here was a sketchy character, known to have traveled to the Soviet Union, and favor “fair play for Cuba”. He worked in a building on the parade route. As much as the FBI knew…especially about those with Soviet connections…is it possible that Mr. Hoover knew what Mr. Oswald was going to do that Friday? And decided to allow it to happen. And why did Jackie choose that photogenic pink outfit?
A few years later, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was murdered in Memphis, TN. Mr. Hoover had a well known hatred of Dr. King. How did a sketchy character get a room, within gunshot range of the hotel Dr. King stayed in? How did he know when Dr. King would be stepping on the balcony? Did Mr. Hoover know all of this, and still allow the shooting to take place? Why was Jesse Jackson there?
J. Edgar Hoover died on May 2, 1972. This was 13 days before Arthur Bremer shot George Wallace, six weeks before the Watergate burglary, and eight weeks before Jane Fonda went to Hanoi. Mr. Hoover died at the height of the Nixon administrations “dirty tricks”, just a few weeks before they got caught. No doubt, Mr. Hoover knew what Tricky Dick was up to.
HO has probably been in existence throughout history. Most leaders have blood on their hands, and it is always better to get someone else to do the dirty work.
Pearl Harbor has long been the object of this speculation. There is little doubt that Mr. Roosevelt wanted the United States to join the war, but was having a tough time with an isolationist public. After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, Mr. Roosevelt got what he wanted. It has long been speculated that he knew in advance about the attack, and let it go down. There were obvious advantages to him.
Which brings us to the Pearl Harbor of the modern era, 911. The attacks that day were a political jackpot for George W. Bush. He was able to ram many restrictions on civil liberties through congress, and begin a war in Iraq, that had clearly been planned for some time. Did our government know about plans for the 911 attacks, and quietly let them happen?
Spelling Bee And Dee
There is a post to be considered, The Seven Deadly Spelling Sins. The first sentence should send any sane person running… “Because I am a writing teacher and a former editor, I am constantly exposed to the most egregious mistakes in writing, grammar, and spelling.” PG is not a sane person. Here is the post, with supplemental comments for your reading pleasure.
1. There, Their, and They’re These are three different words, and they are not interchangeable. “There” refers to a place and is the opposite of “here.” “Their” refers to ownership of something. “They’re” is a contraction that means “they are,” as in: They are having a spelling party.
This is what is known as a homophone. You might have thought that was a communications device in midtown. If you think about it a bit, you realize that one is possessive, one is a place, and one is a clumsy third person plural verb. They’re going to take their ice cream and go there with it.
2. To and Too “To” is the beginning of any infinitive form of a verb: to run, to be, to smile, to write, to blog. Taking foreign language classes is the best way to drive this one home. It is also a preposition. “Too” means “also” or “in addition to.” It can also mean “in excess,” as in: There are too many shoes in my closet. (Well, that’s simply not possible, but you get the idea.)
This forgets two, which is a number, but the spelling is so different that usually the distinction is made. Just like spelling, as in bee, is different from Aaron Spelling. He was the father of Tori Spelling, and a Hollywood producer. Aaron Spelling made lots of money, built the biggest house in California, and was married to Morticia Addams.
3. You’re and Your “You’re” is a contraction form of “you are.” “Your” again refers to ownership.
Words like this are a problem with spell check. If the word is spelled conventionally, it will not set off the device. This also happens when you mean to say to, but type do instead. This is a normal word, and spell check will not know the difference.
4. Judgment This word never ever (in the United States) has an “e” in the middle.
Words like this are pronounced in different ways by white people and black people. White people say “munt”, and accent the first syllable. Black people say “mint”, and accent the second syllable. The mint sounds like a brand of gum, like spearmint or double mint. Did you know that the doublemint twins have had substance abuse issues? They are currently in a twenty four step program.
5. Definitely I don’t know why, but some 90 percent of my students have difficulty spelling this word. There is it, in black and white. Memorize it. I have seen it misspelled as: Defiantly, Definately, Definetley, Definitly And so on. I’m sure there are numerous variations to a bad spelling.
PG is part of the ninety percent here. This is a toughie. Maybe if you break it down into parts, it will make sense. De Finite Ly. De is pronounced duh, which is smart. Finite means only so many, all there is and there ain’t no more. Ly is one of those suffixes that gets tacked onto everything.
6. Its and It’s Again, we have a contraction. The contraction means that two words have been combined, so “it’s” means “it is.” Now, the tricky part is the fact that possession usually uses an apostrophe. However, because this apostrophe is already taken for “it is,” “its” refers to possession.
This is one of those things that make you think English was invented by a race of drunks who call soccer football. To any reasonable person, a word meaning possession should have an apostrophe and s. Here, it’s means it is. Sometimes, the best thing to do is play along and don’t wonder why things are so screwed up. It is usually easier.
7. Lightning This one is my personal pet peeve. This refers to that giant flash of light in the sky that usually occurs during a rainstorm and is always followed by thunder. However, I see many people spell it as “lightening,” which can refer to making something lighter, in color or weight. However, it also means the dropping of the baby before a woman gives birth, and that’s what I always think of. So, when people write on Facebook, “The lightening was fantastic last night,” I can’t help but wonder if they are relieved to have finally given birth.
PG was going to end with a comment about religion, but was afraid of being hit by lightning. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
Help Al Qaeda Succeed
There is some talk in the media about what are tastefully called drone strikes. Unmanned airplanes are piloted by remote control. The focus on a target, and fire a AGM-114 Hellfire II Missile. Often, a second strike is made, after rescuers come to the scene. When the dead are buried, there is sometimes a strike on the funeral.
This kind of warfare costs money. The Hellfire II Missile costs $40,000. The drones use lots of fuel, and require maintenance. For a broke government, this adds up.
The moving lips in Washington say that no civilians are killed by these attacks. The dead are labelled militants. Anyone speaking out against this can expect to be denounced by the government.
“More recently, on February 8, the Times reported the BIJ’s findings that the CIA’s drone attacks in Pakistan “have repeatedly targeted rescuers who responded to the scene of a strike, as well as mourners at subsequent funerals.” But after highlighting BIJ’s report, the article then allowed a “senior American counterterrorism official, speaking on the condition of anonymity” to not just question the report’s findings, but to state: “One must wonder why an effort that has so carefully gone after terrorists who plot to kill civilians has been subjected to so much misinformation. Let’s be under no illusions — there are a number of elements who would like nothing more than to malign these efforts and help al Qaeda succeed.”
The use of drone warfare has increased dramatically under BHO. This tactic is employed against populations in countries like Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan. America is technically not at war with these countries. Since the program is secret, there may be other countries.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress. They are Union Soldiers, from the War Between the States. Drones were not used in this conflict. This is a repost.
The Last Night Of Judy Garland
In march of 1969, Judy married her fifth husband, Mickey Devinko, better known as Mickey Deans, a gay night-club promoter. Judy had an unfortunate habit of marrying gay men. They lived together in a tiny mews house in Chelsea, London. The evening of Saturday June 21 1969, Judy and Mickey were watching a documentary, The Royal Family, on television, when they had an argument. Judy ran out the door screaming into the street, waking the neighbors.
Several versions of what happened next exist, but the fact remains that a phone call for Judy woke him at 10:40 the next morning, and she was not sleeping in the bed. He searched for her, only to find the bathroom door locked. After no response, he climbed outside to the bathroom window and entered to find Judy, sitting on the toilet. Rigor Mortis had set in. Judy Garland, 47, was dead.
The press was already aware of the news before the body could be removed. In an effort to prevent pictures being taken of the corpse, she was apparently draped over someone’s arm like a folded coat, covered with a blanket, and removed from the house with the photographers left none the wiser.
The day Judy died there was a tornado in Kansas…. in Saline County,KS, a rather large F3 tornado (injuring 60, but causing no deaths) did hit at 10:40 pm on June 21st, that would be 4:40 am, June 22nd, London time, the morning she died. I know the time of death has never been firmly established, but since Rigor Mortis had already set in, I think this tornado may very much be in the ballpark in terms of coinciding with time of death…. Other news articles suggest the tornado struck Salina “late at night” which could certainly also mean after midnight on June 22, or roughly 6:00 am London time.
The Toledo Blade for June 24th, also in an article located right next to a picture of Garland, in a write-up on the Salina tornado noted that “Late Saturday [June 21] and early Sunday [June 22, another batch of tornadoes struck in central Kansas.” So it seems the legend seems confirmed.
The text for this story comes from Findadeath. You can spend hours at this site. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
November 17, 1963, Liza Minnelli was on “The Judy Garland Show”. The former Frances Gumm was looking rusty from years of hard living. Five days later, President Kennedy made a trip to Dallas. Six years later, Judy Garland left the building. Liza Minelli is still with us, fifty years later. She has been every bit as wild as her mother, but lived to see another day. Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a rerun of two previously posted items.
Eagerness To Label
During the Booknotes chat with Howard Zinn, someone compares Mr. Zinn to Noah Chomsky and Michael Parenti. PG had never heard of Dr. Parenti. There was a Booknotes chat, to promote The Assassination of Julius Caesar: A People’s History of Ancient Rome.
There is a lot about Roman history that PG does not know. It seems as though the death of Julius Caesar marks the end of an ara. Arguably, it was downhill from then on. There were many people who were not happy with Mr. Caesar, and had reasons to kill him.
Mr. Parenti was critical of the American government being focused on communism during the cold war. This leads to the best quote of the show.
LAMB (Brian Lamb, host of Booknotes) : I was on a Web site … they defined you as a Marxist. Is that fair? PARENTI: Well, what I don`t like about the term is, I write about all sorts of things that Marx — you know, that`s what somebody said about “Inventing Reality.” Is this a Marxist analysis of the media? The eagerness to label something puts a closure on thought. And I said, Well, you know, I don`t know what Karl Marx had to say about U.S. corporate media in the 20th century. In fact, he didn`t have a word to say about it. He`s been dead for 100 years. So I came to these things on my own. So I don`t use — I don`t use labels of that sort.
There are two more dandy quotes. If you have an hour to spare, the entire show is worthwhile.
PARENTI: Could I read a quote by Joseph Schumpeter? LAMB: Sure. Who was? PARENTI: Joseph Schumpeter was a conservative economist who was read widely in the first half of the last century. … and he said, “Rome was governed by that policy which pretends to aspire to peace but unerringly generates war, the policy of continual preparation for war, the policy of meddlesome interventionism. There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome`s allies. And if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for breathing space. The whole world was pervaded by a host of enemies, and it was manifestly Rome`s duty to guard against their indubitably aggressive designs.” ….
LAMB: So where does that phrase, “as pure as Caesar`s wife,” come from PARENTI: It`s — it`s — that`s true. It`s only half the phrase. It really should be “One must be.” If you`re Caesar`s wife, you must be pure, in other words. And his statement was, I`m divorcing her. He maintained, No, no, she had no affair with Claudius. But Caesar`s wife must be above suspicion, so Caesar`s wife must be pure. Doesn`t mean Caesar`s wife was pure. You know, it`s a misphrasing, in a way.
Pictures are from “The Special Collections and Archives, Georgia State University Library”.
Howard Zinn
Howard Zinn, author of A People’s History of the United States: 1492 to Present, spent an hour talking on Booknotes. This is a C-SPAN show, with author interviews. The show aired March 12, 2000. Later that night was a show about the 2000 election, featuring Green Party candidate Ralph Nader. The role Mr. Nader would play in the November election was unimaginable in March. Life is bad fiction.
The first serious job Mr. Zinn had was World War II. He served in the Air Force. Towards the end of the war, “we bombed a little French town on the Atlantic coast called Royon… `We’re not going to use regular demolition bombs. We have something new. We w–you’re going–instead of dropping our usual 12 500-pound demolition bombs, you’re going to drop 30 100-pound canisters of jel—jellied gasoline.’ It was napalm–the first use of napalm in the European theater.”
Later, Mr. Zinn thought about it all. “And it didn’t s–the–the thing is you’d bomb from 30,000 feet. You don’t see what’s happening down there. You don’t see people suffering. You don’t see people burning. You don’t see limbs falling. You–you just see little flashes in the–in the d–in the dark, you know. And—and you go back, and you’re debriefed and you don’t think about it. And it’s horrifying.
Later–only later did I begin to think about it, and I was horrified by what I had done, and I’m still horrified by what I did. But I think that had an effect on my thinking about war, because here I was in the best of wars. And I believed it was the best of wars because I volunteered for it. A war against fascism? I mean, how could you find a more bestial enemy? And yet it’s a–it complicated the war for me. It complicated the morality of the war, and it made me begin to think that war itself is evil. Even when it starts with good cause, even when the enemy is horrible, that there’s something about war, especially in our time when war inevitably involves indiscriminate killing–and I came to the conclusion that war simply cannot be accepted morally as a solution for whatever problems are in the world.
Whatever tyranny, whatever borders are crossed, whatever problems there are, somehow human ingenuity has to find a way to deal with that without the indiscriminate killing that war involves.”
Brian Lamb is the host of Booknotes. He speaks non theatrically, often with questions that are very different from the narrative presented by the author. After this talk about war, the question was “LAMB: What would you have done had you been president and those bombs were dropped on Pearl Harbor? Mr. ZINN: That’s the toughest question I’ve ever faced. I … And–and I confess, I–I–I haven’t worked out an alternative scenario.
PHOTUS is known for taking a non-heroic view of our history. Regarding the US Constitution, “When they set up the new government, when they set up the new Constitution, I mean, they set up a strong, central government which will be able to legislate on behalf of bondholders and slaveholders and manufacturers and Western land speculators.”
Mr. Zinn does not discuss The War Between The States on this show. (PG has not read PHOTUS, and does not know how WBTS is treated.) This was a case where the central government was favoring the industrial interests, at the expense of the agricultural interests. How much of that conflict was economic, with abolition serving as a moral fig leaf?
After the war, Mr. Zinn went back to school. A job appeared at Spelman College, and he worked there seven years. After that, he taught at Boston University for 24 years. His next door neighbor was five year old Matt Damon, who later read the audiobook version of PHOTUS.
There is one more bit of amusement from the transcript. Mr. ZINN:`For the United States to step forward as a defender of helpless countries matched its image in American high school history books but not its record in world affairs. It had opposed the Haitian revolution for independence from France at the start of the 19th century. It had instituted a war with Mexico and taken half the country. It had pretended to help Cuba win freedom from Spain and then planted itself in Cuba with a military base, investments and rights of intervention. It had seized Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam and fought a brutal war to subjugate the Filipinos. It had opened Japan to its trade with gunboats and threats. It had declared an open-door policy in China as a means of assuring the United States would have opportunities equal to other imperial powers in exploiting China. It had sent troops to Peking with other nations to assert Western supremacy in China and kept them from–kept them for over 30 years.’ LAMB: There’s a lot more in here about Colombia and Haiti and Nicaragua. Is this country at–this sounds like I’m–I’m arguing here, but has this country done anything right?
Pictures today are from The Library of Congress
Uganda Be Kidding Me
Three weeks ago, PG found “Uganda Be Kidding Me” at the Chamblee library. It is due back today. The bookmark is on page 82. This book is not worth checking out a second time.
Last fall, a copy of My Horizontal Life appeared. It was a fun book. The comic boasting about alcoholic excess was fun to read. If you don’t think about the squalid reality behind the jokes, you enjoy it.
Apparently enough people enjoy the Handler schtick to make money. Some publisher gave her a contract, and needed product for the pipeline. Miss Handler went on a animal watching trip to Africa. Someone thought this would be a good excuse for a book. They were mistaken.
The routine is getting old. Maybe PG is just a retired drunk, lacking a sense of humor. At any rate, the book does not work. Alcoholic jokes are not funny to third parties.
Last fall, Miss Handler made an Atlanta stop on her book tour. One appearance was in a L5P bookstore. The facility was about the size of an SUV. There was a line of a hundred people waiting to get in. The book buyers probably need a shoehorn to get in that small a space with Miss Handler, her ego, and a cash register. Maybe Miss Handler lost some of the weight she gained in Africa.
During this year’s oscars, someone at Huffington Post let Miss Handler use their twitter account. The result was “Chelsea Handler slammed for Lupita Oscar tweet” Miss Handler lives the adage that there is no bad publicity. The two tweets that got the most attention: “Congratulations #lupita To pre order #ugandabekiddingme go to http://amzn.to/1pS4qpG #Oscars.” “Congratulations #12yearsaslave Go to Africa or buy #ugandabekiddingme http://amzn.to/1de1ka9 #aheadofthecurve #Oscars.”
Pictures today are from The Library of Congress
Mrs. Dora Stainers
Some pictures have longer captions than others. Shorpy published one with a mouthful.
Mrs. Dora Stainers, 562 1/2 Decatur St. 39 years old. Began spinning in an Atlanta mill at 7 years, and is in this mill work for 32 years. Only 4 days of schooling in her life. Began at 20 cents a day. The most she ever made was $1.75 a day & now she is earning $1 a day when she works. She is looking for a job. Her little girl Lilie is the same age she was when she started work, but the mother says, “I ain’t goin to put her to work if I can help it. I’m goin’ to give her as much education as I can so she can do better than I did.” Mrs. Stainers is a woman of exceptional ability considering her training. In contrast to her is another woman (this name was withheld) who has been working in Atlanta mills for 10 yrs. She began at 10 yrs. of age, married at 12, broke down, and may never be able to work again. Her mother went to work in the cotton mill very young. Location: Atlanta, Georgia.
The photographs of Mrs. Stainers were made in March, 1915. The photographer was Lewis Wickes Hine. “Working as an investigative photographer for the National Child Labor Committee (NCLC), Lewis Hine (1874-1940) documented working and living conditions of children in the United States between 1908 and 1924.” “In 1954 the Library received the records of the National Child Labor Committee, including approximately 5,000 photographs and 350 negatives by Lewis Hine. In giving the collection to the Library, the NCLC stipulated that “There will be no restrictions of any kind on your use of the Hine photographic material.”
The house that Mrs. Stainer lived in is long gone. 562 1/2 Decatur Street is across the railroad tracks from the Fulton Cotton Mill. With real estate agents demanding names for all neighborhoods, the area is known as the Old Fourth Ward. At 552 Decatur Street is A & R Welding.
Pictures are from The Library of Congress. This is a repost.
leave a comment