CSotD: A Break in the Non-Action
Skip to comments
Joel Pett (Trib) has it pegged: Conviction is not the only goal in this impeachment, and that’s a good thing because it ain’t gonna happen.
And part of the historical record is not simply Trump’s actions as president but who and how many in the Senate are willing, in the name of blind party loyalty, to ignore the clear evidence and break their vows to uphold the Constitution.
Which, given the number of them who fervently declare religion important, is an opportunity to note that sometimes a man who claims to put God into everything turns out to put God into nothing, though Mike Pence seems to have lived up to his stated beliefs.
But if convincing 50 Republican senators, or even 17, to accept the obvious is impossible, Pett is right that you’ll never convince the Deplorables anyway, and you can start with the fact that, brilliant as the prosecutors’ roll out of facts has been, those who watch only right wing media won’t see it.
So a day of to hell with it won’t make a difference and I’m going with Non Sequitur (AMS) this morning.
It’s not like the crisis is going anywhere.
And it’s not like a really dumb joke like this BC (Creators) is going to leave me rolling on the floor so long that I miss today’s exciting presentations from the Senate floor.
If Mrs. Carter “could make a pudding as well as translate Epictetus from the Greek,” I can enjoy a few laughs while I continue to follow the impeachment trial and even argue something related to that remarkable woman, in this
Juxtaposition of the Day
Lemont often makes us think, but too often he makes us think, “Lemont, you need to lighten up.”
I chuckle when he demands that people use grammar according to the rules instead of according to how people speak but his latest quibble comes dangerously close to what the fascisti call “cancel culture.”
Yes, Aristotle was Greek and lived in the 4th Century BC, placing him in a culture quite different than ours, in which women lived in a sort of purdah and in which slavery was practiced.
The fellow on the bench is right, if not for the right reasons: Judging people within their cultural context is not simply axiomatic but valid historical practice.
And, BTW, a fundamental requirement for advancing contemporary diversity.
The real issue being relevance. It’s relevant to debate the hypocrisy of slaveowners who wrote of “freedom” at a time when the morality of slavery was being actively challenged.
Meanwhile, like Aristotle, Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi came from a culture that practiced both purdah and slavery. But, if you hate algebra, that ought not to be why.
It puts you in with the majority who feel that schools shouldn’t teach Arabic numerals.
The relevant point in this case is that nobody has ever asked anybody to be like Aristotle. They simply teach his method of reasoning and its place in the history of science and philosophy.
By contrast, they do ask you to be like Socrates, though mostly in the sense of questioning your beliefs, then standing up for them.
They also encourage you to be like Henry David Thoreau, which brings us to Zits, because even Henry David Thoreau wasn’t all that much like Henry David Thoreau except in spurts.
Someone brought up “Brave New World” the other day, and his justifiable disappointment in it. It is a book best read at 12 years old, before you recognize how badly written it is.
But it’s full of interesting ideas and metaphors, and “Walden” is much the same: Very tiresome to read but a good resource for conversation.
However, if you think “Walden” is hard slogging, you ought to try Aristotle.
Hence I finished my paper on “De Anima” sophomore year by having the rector on my floor, who taught classics, show me how to write “Aristotle is full of bad waste” in classical Athenian Greek.
I got a C, not a B-minus, and I think the prof gave me a more generous grade than I deserved because he got a chuckle out of my conclusion.
Historic Note: Jeremy adds “pond scum” to “sucks.” Some years ago, he used the lawnmower to carve “This Sucks” into his backyard but the syndicate made Scott and Borgman create a second version that said “Stinks.”
Apparently sucking pond scum is more acceptable than simply sucking.
I love this Bizarro (KFS) mostly because I miss the days when our culture advanced the Andy Taylor school of rural law.
We had two State Troopers in our town, and they weren’t exactly Andy Taylor, but one of them was married to our school’s dental hygienist, who was the daughter of my second grade teacher, who played organ in our church and was about as much like Aunt Bea as you can get in real life.
Once one of them came to the house and I had to pretend not to know about something I knew about.
I really felt bad about it because it really was like lying to Sheriff Taylor. He knew I was lying but he also knew that the woman who had called in the rowdy-teenagers complaint was a well-known, unpleasant crank, so he didn’t push it.
Can’t get any more like Andy Taylor than that.
Now, though, it seems we’re down to stupid Deliverance jokes instead.
The CBC even started their landmark “North of 60” series with a premise right out of this Bizarro: An urban Mountie, his partner killed in a drug raid, taking a job in a native community because of burnout and a failing marriage.
Ironically, that soap opera premise devolved into a real life one: The actor began a relationship with an important woman in the cast, and, when they broke up with rancor, the fictional Mountie moved back to Vancouver and was never seen again.
The actress, meanwhile, one of a predominantly First Nations cast, eventually went from deputy to head of the RCMP detachment and series lead and, in real life, something of a national treasure.
All of which I’m sure would please Lemont.
Comments 9
Comments are closed.