"Romney has a 20-point advantage among white voters."

"Obama is supported by 91% of black voters and 57% of other minority voters."

Subliminality.

Here's something the Obama campaign did in an ad — displaying the word "felons" for 6 seconds on a graph labeled "Romney."

More locally, a candidate named Mark Pocan, running for Congress in my district, had an ad displaying the word "assassination" over a photograph of his opponent — Kelda Helen Roys — looking oddly like Lee Harvey Oswald!

"Smoking meant a lot to her sometimes."

"She worked very hard and it had some ability to rest and relax her psychologically. She was a widow and she had no close relatives to write to in the evenings, and more than one moving picture a week hurt her eyes, so smoking had come to be an important punctuation mark in the long sentence of a day on the road."

ADDED: "The New Yorker this week is publishing a story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, 'Thanks for the Light,' that it rejected three-quarters of a century ago.

Turning the story down in 1936, the editors said that it was “altogether out of the question” and added, “It seems to us so curious and so unlike the kind of thing we associate with him and really too fantastic.”

It’s not hard to see why they thought so....

McSweeney's makes a comical list of "Suggested Buzzfeed Articles."

"Elvis Presley’s 42 Sweatiest Moments... The 100 Filthiest Bathrooms in Philadelphia... 11 Retired History Professors Being Stung by Wasps... 26 Celebrities Who Look Worse Because of the Passage of Time... 84 Things That Aren’t On an Everything Bagel... 41 Close-Ups Of Severely Rotting Teeth... 3 Raccoons That Would Kill You and Your Family... The World’s 13 Laziest Salmon... 16 Beautiful Photos From Underneath a Bed...."

You get the idea, don't you? Do you? Let's assume you do. Anyway, Buzzfeed — that website with those lists that are there to get you to click on them, because people love lists — went ahead and made "84 Things That Aren’t On An Everything Bagel," and got the upper hand, I'd say. And they kept going.

Forget McSweeney's. Buzzfeed is a thing, e.g., "Annoying Photo Trend: Girls With Mugs In Front Of Their Faces. This is a Thing." And: "The Unnecessary Censorship Of Men's Olympic Diving."

What would it take for you to realize you had 80,000 bees in your house?

"... it wasn't long after that honey began to slowly drip from newly emerged cracks in the living room and kitchen ceilings, while a cascade of the sweet liquid even blew a lightbulb after filling it half-full of honey."

And for comic relief after that (as suggested by a commenter there), try "Covered In Bees":

"I chose a pseudonym, Chris Marker, pronounceable in most languages, because I was very intent on traveling. No need to delve further."

The film director — whose 1962 short "La Jetée — was the basis of the 1995 movie "12 Monkeys" — died in Paris on Sunday at the age of 91.

His films often feature a first-person narrator, a device he once called “a sign of humility.” They abound with avatars and alter-egos, including his own cat, Guillaume-en-Egypt, which sometimes appeared, in the flesh and in cartoon form, as his surrogate....

“Sans Soleil” (1982), often acknowledged as the masterpiece among Mr. Marker’s late works, is one of his least classifiable, a free-associative mix of ethnography, philosophy and poetry. Purporting to be the footage of a fictional cinematographer accompanied by his letters to a nameless woman, the film roams from Iceland to Guinea-Bissau to Japan...

Here, you can buy a Criterion Collection DVD containing "La Jetée" and "Sans Soleil." ("La Jetée" is also in this collection) (And here is "12 Monkeys," one of my favorite movies.)

David Brooks is boring.

I mean, he's bored. That is, he says it's all so boring and everyone's bored.

Racializing Romney.

The press is.

Torso time.

Bookcovers and the bathing suits that match them. "Each match discovered by hand." Via Metafilter.

Also via Metafilter, and since we're gazing at the human torso: "The Naked World of Spencer Tunick." Comments made by me while looking at the set of photos:

Photo #1: "At least they let the people on the glacier wear slippers."

Photo #3: "He put the prettiest people in front."

Photo #6: "I like the painted people."

Photo #10: "Mmmm. Part of the pattern, with the aqua seats."

Photo #24: "It's kind of cool to see huge groups of naked people where they don't belong."

Photo #26: "This looks like the chicken display at the meat store."

Photo #29: "It's really funny the way some of them really look like naked people standing around and some of them look like a pattern and not really naked people at all."

"Romney Photo Spurs Domestic Abuse Incident."

"Suspicious that his live-in girlfriend was planning an affair, a Tennessee man confronted the woman after spotting a photo of an unknown guy on her Facebook page..."

Lowell Turpin, 40, “angrily demanded to know who the male was,” reported Anderson County Sheriff’s Department investigators.

Crystal Gray, 38, “replied that it was a picture of Mitt Romney.”

Despite being informed that the man on Gray’s wall was the presumptive Republican presidential candidate (and not some hunky, severely conservative sidepiece), Turpin apparently was not placated....

What standard of living should others feel moved to lift you up to? Question 1: What's your "social context"?

We saw in that NYT article about the "FUCK! I'm in my twenties" girl Emma Koenig that her mother had to do some analysis before deciding to help pay for her $1,200-a-month East Village apartment. The key line was: "It made me see that Emma’s social context was such that our helping with her rent was legitimate..."

It made me think about the refugees of Hurricane Katrina, housed in the Houston Astrodome, about whom presidential wife and mother Barbara Bush famously said:

"And so many of the people in the arenas here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."

What's your social context? Is that the right question?

I just got email from Barack Obama with the subject line "So"....

Text: "Sometimes politics can seem very small./But the choice voters face in this election couldn't be bigger./Over the past two months, we have been outraised by our opponents...."

So... whatevs.

I dunno. That... seemed very small....

Her blog's "title begins with a common vulgar interjection" and her book "goes by the same name as the blog and concludes with the words 'I’m in My Twenties'..."

How the NYT refers to Emma Koenig's "FUCK! I'm in my twenties."

The NYT article fusses (inanely) over "fuck." What do her parents think? Her parents are 61 and 62 — i.e., my age, i.e., big Baby Boomers. Why the fuck should the New York Times think East Coast Baby Boomers struggle with language on the level of "fuck"? The mother is a psychotherapist and the father is "a television and film set dresser." And yet the article is headlined "Wash That Blog Out With Soap," as if the parents were from middle America and a generation or 2 older. I mean, it's been obvious to me for a long time that the NYT is aimed at aging, east coast, middle-class women.

(That's exactly what I am, despite my decades-long exile in Madison, a city which, it must be said, imagines itself as not really part of the Midwest wherein it finds itself.)

Perhaps the Times is craftily stroking me (and my kind) by luring us into the fantasy where we self-flatter: I'm more hip than this woman whose daughter is profiled in the NYT. You experience that  envy — she's pictured there, kissing her adorable daughter — immediately palliated with feelings of bullshit superiority: I'm cool with "fuck"!

If you keep going in the article, you get past the faux "fuck" flap and on to the real sexuality of the inner pages of the New York Times: real estate. Would Koenig's parents finance her post-NYU-arts-school lifestyle in a Manhattan apartment?

[Koenig's mother Bobby] Bass made a spreadsheet of all her daughter’s friends who were in the performing arts. “I wanted to see who was making a living, who was making a living in their art and who was being supported by their parents,” she said. In a graph of 45 young adults, only 3 were getting no help whatsoever, and those 3, Ms. Bass said, were working full time either in a restaurant or baby-sitting, and had limited energy left over to pursue what they had studied.

We're invited to admire the rationality and (apparent) computer use, but I'm marveling at the accomplishment of getting all that information on 45 individuals!

“It made me see that Emma’s social context was such that our helping with her rent was legitimate,” Ms. Bass said. “I didn’t feel like we were indulging her. I felt like it was a necessary fifth year of college where she had to stabilize herself without the structure and positive feedback of school.”

Emma’s social context was such....

May the younger generation read that and learn — learn how to reason with your rational — emotional — Baby Boomer parents.

And Ms. Bass was familiar with the data points surrounding her daughter’s generation, otherwise known as “Generation Screwed,” as a Newsweek headline announced recently. 

Screwed? You mean fucked.

Anyway, over at The Atlantic, Richard Lawson is reviewing the NYT article.

Emma Koenig, 24, has a blog. It's called Fuck! I'm In My Twenties and is full of cutesily hand-drawn musings about the plight of the aimless millennial. This blog is popular enough to have been turned into an Urban Outfitters book and now Koenig is working on a TV pilot. 

An Urban Outfitters book. Are you familiar with that special category of books that are sold next to the comfy clothes and cutesy housewares at UO?

Reaction to the piece has been, let's say, mixed. Because of an implied privilege in Koenig's work (mom and dad are gainfully employed, her brother Ezra is in Vampire Weekend), and an abundance of clever cluelessness, the comments section on the Times profile is littered with people calling her a whiner or a spoiled brat, deeming her frivolous and self-obsessed.

This is a common criticism of a particular set of young creative types who tend to blab on about their own lives....

Lawson — who's not an aging Baby Boomer like me but a guy in his 20s, late 20s — assumes the article is about the daughter, which for him and for others who are at least somewhat young, I'm sure it is.

"Increasing Taxes on the Wealthy Is Lowest Priority Issue, Even Among Obama Voters."

Gallup discovers.

"'So patently false' Obama removed Churchill bust from the White House."

Politico headline for an article relying on White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer to contradict something Charles Krauthammer wrote in his WaPo column. The headline remains in that form, with no reference to the update that's now there, down at the bottom, saying:

Pfeiffer's "fact check" isn't quite right. While there is still a bust of Churchill in the White House, it's not the same one that was in the Oval when Bush was president. The bust by Sir Jacob Epstein... was lent to Bush's administration for the duration of his presidency, the British Embassy in Washington told Mediaite. When Bush left office, the loan ended and the bust was placed in the embassy. The White House collection includes its own Churchill bust by Epstein, which is the one that's now in the residence.

(All the boldface in this post is mine.)

Let's go back to Krauthammer's column. Here's the line that Pfieffer is quoted saying is "so patently false": "Obama started his presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office." Based on the update, I'd say what Krauthammer wrote was so patently true.

Krauthammer's column — which was about Romney's overseas trip — imagined Romney saying to the British:

 “We are grateful for your steadfast solidarity in awful places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The relationship truly is special.

“And one more thing. Still have that bust of Churchill?”

And in fact, Krauthammer says, on Thursday: "Romney did say he wants Winnie back in the Oval Office."

I've added boldface to stress the importance of the placement of the bust in the Oval Office (not tucked away somewhere less symbolic and high-profile) and the relationship signified by the loan from the Embassy. Those things might not seem that important to those who are pushing Obama's reelection, like Pfeiffer, but Politico should be ashamed of its shoddy work, taking what is obviously an unjustified shot at Krauthammer and leaving the accusation in the headline where it can continue its dirty work.

And here's Pfieffer's column on the official whitehouse.gov website (which should not be a campaign outlet!):

Now, normally we wouldn’t address a rumor that’s so patently false, but just this morning the Washington Post’s Charles Krauthammer repeated this ridiculous claim in his column.  He said President Obama “started his Presidency by returning to the British Embassy the bust of Winston Churchill that had graced the Oval Office.”

This is 100% false. The bust still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room.

Pfieffer's overreach is apparent from the start. He says "100% false," when it's at least partly true: There's no Churchill bust in the Oval Office.

News outlets have debunked this claim time and again.... just last year the AP reported that President Obama “replaced the Oval Office fixture with a bust of one of his American heroes, President Abraham Lincoln, and moved the Churchill bust to the White House residence.”...

Hopefully this clears things up a bit and prevents folks from making this ridiculous claim again.

So all the ridiculous folks need to stop talking about this... but then Pfieffer returns with an update, confessing his own ridiculousness (or craftiness, since he got his story out on the official White House website, beating back the Krauthammer narrative, and who's looking at updates now?):

Since my post on the fact that the bust of Winston Churchill has remained on display in the White House, despite assertions to the contrary, I have received a bunch of questions -- so let me provide some additional info. The White House has had a bust of Winston Churchill since the 1960’s. At the start of the Bush administration Prime Minister Blair lent President Bush a bust that matched the one in the White House, which was being worked on at the time and was later returned to the residence.  The version lent by Prime Minister Blair was displayed by President Bush until the end of his Presidency.  On January 20, 2009 -- Inauguration Day -- all of the art lent specifically for President Bush’s Oval Office was removed by the curator’s office, as is common practice at the end of every presidency. The original Churchill bust remained on display in the residence. The idea put forward by Charles Krauthammer and others that President Obama returned the Churchill bust or refused to display the bust because of antipathy towards the British is completely false and an urban legend that continues to circulate to this day.

And your effort to smear Krauthammer used patently false material. And you used the official White House website to circulate your own urban legend.

Is it even legal to use the the official White House website this way?

IN THE COMMENTS: Matthew Sablan said:

It's a good thing he didn't make up a Dylan quote. You can get fired for that sort of shoddy journalism. Good thing he just called someone no one really likes a liar.

Yeah, well, Jonah Lehrer needs a new job, so maybe he can be a White House blogger.

"It wasn't very long ago they were trying to tell us that Romney was a bully.... Now he's a wimp?"

Rush Limbaugh riffed on the new Newsweek cover today:

Calling Romney a wimp is aimed at suppressing the white blue-collar vote.  Blue-collar voters hate wimps.  You know, the working white voters that Obama has abandoned, and now whose votes they're trying to suppress, this is all about trying to make those people think that Romney is a wuss....

Rush goes on to say that if anyone's a wuss, it's Obama:

We've all seen Obama throw a baseball.  He looks not even as good as an average girl throwing a baseball....

That is: You want to talk about who's wussiest? We'll crush you. We'll knock you down and cut off your hair...

But what I'd like to say is: Attacking a man as "wussy" is homophobic. Do the Democrats care about gay people or not? The effort to label Romney a "wimp" is a betrayal of liberal values. It's hypocritical.

What's the best response to the Romney's-a-wimp attack?
	Ignore it.
	Use it as evidence of pathetic media bias.
	Punch back with the idea that Obama is the wimp.
	Defend Romney as a strong, brave man.
	Make the homophobia/hypocrisy accusation.
	Flip it: Wimp is good. Wimp power! It's the new gentlemanliness.
pollcode.com free polls

ADDED: Rush introduced the word "wuss." I changed some of my uses of "wuss" to "wimp." "Wimp" is the word Newsweek used against Romney (and back in 1987 against George H.W. Bush).

ALSO: My quick research says "wuss" and "wimp" mean exactly the same thing. The OED says the origin of "wuss" is "uncertain" and "[p]erhaps a blend of wimp... and puss..." That is, "puss," defined as a name for a cat. "Pussy" — according to the OED, goes back to the 1500s, meaning "A girl or woman exhibiting characteristics associated with a cat, esp. sweetness or amiability." Beginning in 1904, "pussy" is seen denoting "A sweet or effeminate male; (in later use chiefly) a weakling, a coward, a sissy. Also: a male homosexual." "Pussy" meaning "female genitals," goes back to 1699. (And there's this from 1865: "My poor pussy, rent and sore, Dreaded yet longed for one fuck more." "Philocomus" Love Feast.)

The OED defines "wuss" as "A weak or ineffectual person." The earliest usage is from 1976:

1976 Campus Slang (Univ. N. Carolina, Chapel Hill) (typescript) Nov. 6 Come on you wuss, hit a basket..! John's a wuss.
1981 C. Crowe Fast Times at Ridgemont High 57 You out to meet her first, you wuss.
1984 Washington Post (Nexis) 28 Aug. c1 Everybody thinks I'm a wuss. And I don't impress any of the stunt women at all.
1996 Courier-Mail (Brisbane) 24 Jan. 29 (caption) Give us y'lunch, Hooper, you great wuss!
2003 R. Williams Fallout 22 Shanice I had him cryin his eyes out to me... Ronnie Wuss.

The OED defines "wimp" as  "A feeble or ineffectual person; one who is spineless or ‘wet.'" The origin is "uncertain," but perhaps based on "whimper." We're told this word is "Used only as a term of abuse or contempt," a notation that doesn't appear with "wuss," which makes me think "wimp" is the harsher word.

The usages of "wimp" go back to 1920:

1920   G. Ade Hand-made Fables 97   Next day he sought out the dejected Wimp.
1964   Amer. Speech 39 119   A baff is ‘a person who does silly things deliberately’; but wimp is still mysterious and undefined in my notes.
1966   Current Slang Winter 8   Wimp, a backward person... He's a real wimp on a date.
1970   N.Y. Mag. 16 Nov. 10/2   That Goodell, he's nothing but a wimp. And this Ottinger, it got so I couldn't stand the sight of him.
1976   New Musical Express 31 July 8/2   Although he's best known here as a fairly muscular MOR wimp,..he has a big reputation as a prodigiously talented multi-media whizz in the States.
1979   T. Gifford Hollywood Gothic (1980) xxii. 220   Solly Roth and his wimp of a son..what a wet bunch that family was.
1981   P. Theroux Mosquito Coast vi. 48,   I can afford to be robbed... But what about the poor wimps who can't afford it?
1984   Sunday Tel. 30 Dec. 15/6   In daily life Ronnie Lee is a wimp. Put him in a balaclava and he thinks he's a he-man.
1985   She July 140/2   Masseur! Huh! He sounds a right little wimp.

I'm interested in that use of "wet" (in the definition and in the 1979 quote). The OED gives as the 15b definition of "wet": Inept, ineffectual, effete; also as quasi-adv. and in comb. wet fish, a wet individual, a ‘drip’. Also spec. in Polit. (see quots. 1981, 1983)." Here are those 2 quotes:

1981   Observer 26 July 12/3   The term ‘Wet’ was originally used by Mrs Thatcher, who meant it in the old sense of ‘soppy’, as in ‘What do you mean the unions won't like it, Jim? Don't be so wet.’ It meant feeble, liable to take the easy option, lacking intellectual and political hardness. Like so many insults, it was gleefully adopted by its victims, and so came by its present meaning of liberal, leftish, anti-ideological....
1983   Age (Melbourne) 5 Oct. 13   Britain's Tory Prime Minister, Mrs Margaret Thatcher, began this vogue terminology by contemptously dismissing dewy-eyed dissenters from her arid Right-wing policies as ‘wet’.

Fascinating! Stepping back, I can see softness and weakness associated with the left. It's the conservatives who think they are hard, strong, manly, and courageous, and this must make liberals want to get the accusation of wussiness/wimpiness going the other way.

And let's not forget that the most famous political use of the word "wimp" was not the 1987 "wimp factor" Newsweek cover. It was "Mush from the Wimp" — which referred to Jimmy Carter. "Mush from the Wimp" has its own Wikipedia page:

On Saturday, March 15, 1980, the Boston Globe ran an editorial that began:

Certainly it is in the self-interest of all Americans to impose upon themselves the kind of economic self-discipline that President Carter urged repeatedly yesterday in his sober speech to the nation. As the President said, inflation, now running at record rates, is a cruel tax, one that falls most harshly upon those least able to bear the burden.

There was nothing exceptional about it except the headline: "Mush from the Wimp". The headline — which was supposed to have read "All Must Share The Burden" — was corrected during the press run after 161,000 copies had already gone to circulation.

In November 1982, Globe editorial page editor Kirk Scharfenberg wrote a op-ed piece discussing his creation of the phrase and the use of "wimp" as a popular political insult afterwards. "I meant it as an in-house joke and thought it would be removed before publication," he explained. "It appeared in 161,000 copies of the Globe the next day."

"[Angel] Ortiz and a generation of urban latchkey kids who spray-painted their initials all over Manhattan in the 1970s and '80s and landed in the city's street art scene" are getting old.

"Fortunately, there's no forced retirement in graffiti," and life goes on:

For decades, Ortiz, 45, has been known on Manhattan's Lower East Side as LA II. A traumatic loss of a girlfriend brought him out of a 14-year hiatus from graffiti writing. He has since been caught three times spraying his tag on property, each time while walking a friend's dog.

"Everywhere that dog stopped to pee I would write my name," Ortiz says. "The streets were like my canvases. I just started writing my name everywhere."

The author of "Imagine" imagined some Bob Dylan quotes.

"The quotes in question either did not exist, were unintentional misquotations, or represented improper combinations of previously existing quotes. But I told Mr. Moynihan that they were from archival interview footage provided to me by Dylan’s representatives. This was a lie spoken in a moment of panic. When Mr. Moynihan followed up, I continued to lie, and say things I should not have said."

And now he has to resign from The New Yorker.

Here's the book, on Amazon, where it seems as though you're not allowed to buy it right now.

What sorts of Dylan quotes did Jonah Lehrer concoct? "It’s a hard thing to describe.... It’s just this sense that you got something to say." Why would you make up something like that? Arguably, he didn't. And that's what he says. He did some heavy editing on the Dylan chapter and somehow in the process lost track of the sources.

In [a] quote mined from Dont Look Back, in which Dylan is asked by a pestering Time magazine journalist about the inspiration for his songs, Lehrer quotes Dylan as saying: “I just write them. There’s no great message. Stop asking me to explain.” The last sentence sharpens and simplifies Lehrer’s point—that Dylan’s brilliance isn’t easily explicable. But it doesn’t appear in Dont Look Back.

Maybe Lehrer is just a horrible transcriber.

Ah, well, that last link linked me to Isaac Chotiner's review of the book. The review is very negative (and not because of the quote problem). I loved this part:

Imagine is really a pop-science book, which these days usually means that it is an exercise in laboratory-approved self-help. Like Malcolm Gladwell and David Brooks, Lehrer writes self-help for people who would be embarrassed to be seen reading it. For this reason, their chestnuts must be roasted in “studies” and given a scientific gloss. The surrender to brain science is particularly zeitgeisty. Their sponging off science is what gives these writers the authority that their readers impute to them, and makes their simplicities seem very weighty. Of course, Gladwell and Brooks and Lehrer rarely challenge the findings that they report, not least because they lack the expertise to make such a challenge.

I've never given much thought to Jonah Lehrer. (We've talked about him on this blog here and here.) But Gladwell and Brooks are a big deal. And Chotiner's pithy criticism in that paragraph is much more important than Lehrer inventing (or botching) some Dylan quotes and then desperately dissembling. It's important not just because Gladwell and Brooks are big. It's important because it says something about us, the readers, our needs and frailties.

***

Too much of nothing
Can turn a man into a liar
It can cause one man to sleep on nails
And another man to eat fire

"Just one piece of general advice from a writer has been very useful to me. It was from Colette."

Said Georges Simenon:

... I remember I gave her two short stories and she returned them and I tried again and tried again. Finally she said, “Look, it is too literary, always too literary.” So I followed her advice. It’s what I do when I write, the main job when I rewrite.

What do you mean by “too literary”? What do you cut out, certain kinds of words?

Adjectives, adverbs, and every word which is there just to make an effect. Every sentence which is there just for the sentence. You know, you have a beautiful sentence—cut it. Every time I find such a thing in one of my novels it is to be cut.

Is that the nature of most of your revision?

Almost all of it.

Ha ha. Here. Maybe this will help.

Pro-Romney super PAC spends $7.2 million to air Romney-saving-the-Olympics ad.

Featuring Kristi Yamaguchi:

"He faced a $400 million budget deficit and turned that around into a $100 million surplus."

Would you be prepared to survive in the event of a complete breakdown of modern civilization?"

"A man-made or natural global disaster could strand you for months, years or forever with no electricity, no water from the taps, no grocery stores, no city services and no government. Further, you'll be surrounded by countless others who didn't prepare — the very same people who mock survivalists by calling them paranoid pessimists and worse. But survivalists are the ultimate optimists. They believe that they will succeed - no matter what happens to the rest of the world — if only they can assemble the right supplies and learn the right survival techniques."

The book (recommended by Instapundit) is: "Long-Term Survival In The Coming Dark Age: Preparing to Live after Society Crumbles." I like that it's available in Kindle format. Gives me an idea for an update of that old "Twilight Zone" episode "Time Enough at Last." I'll blend in some elements from "The Shelter."

("Time Enough at Last" is the one where — after the nuclear holocaust — a man who wants to read breaks his glasses. "The Shelter" is the one where — as people think nuclear war is about to begin — one family has a bomb shelter and their neighbors don't and want in.)

"Any time someone has looked like superwoman in the history of our sport they have later been found guilty of doping."

John Leonard, the executive director of the World Swimming Coaches Association, saying that Ye "looks like superwoman."

Leonard rejected comparisons to Michael Phelps, who broke the 200m butterfly world record when he was just 15, back in 2001. "Phelps got consistently faster every year on a normal improvement curve. There has never been anything that you look at in any of Mr Phelps' swims that you look at and say 'well, that's impossible, that can't be done.'... [A] woman does not out-swim the fastest man in the world in the back quarter of a 400m IM that is otherwise quite ordinary. It just doesn't happen."

Because "law-school applications have fallen... prospective students have gained leverage" negotiating for more scholarship money.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Robert Rasmussen, dean of the University of Southern California Gould School of Law, said students have become increasingly "price sensitive," and are pushing back on tuition figures and scholarship offers. "Students are much more willing to raise this issue than they ever have been in the past."

Enterprising or cash-strapped students have long negotiated with schools over the price of admission. But more than ever, schools are listening. For instance, the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law earlier this year sent letters to admitted students encouraging them to bargain. "We very much hope you find this offer competitive with others you have received," read one letter, dated March 2012 and reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. "Please let us know."

It's a buyer's market: Don't behave as if you don't know it. Meanwhile, the sellers, the law schools, fret about the flow of information via U.S. News & World Report, which has the audacity to rank the law schools, partly based on GPA and LSAT, creating great power in the buyers of law school education who bring good statistics.

Applicants with high GPAs and LSATs are like the beautiful women who are served free drinks in bars, helping the bars draw more paying customers. So if you are one of the beautiful women, better get your drinks free. And if you're getting your drinks free and you're not that beautiful, maybe you wonder why you're patronizing that bar.

But there's no U.S. News & World Report ranking the bars according to beautiful people, not with specifically knowable statistics. If there were, and if everyone started marketing their beauty value to the best-ranked bar that would give them free drinks, there'd be a bar bubble, and it would have to pop. 

Of course, there is a law school bubble. It looks like this:


From: The Best Colleges

At least that's how it looked a year ago, when the champagne was much more bubbly.

When Paul Ryan was 16.

From a New Yorker article written by Ryan Lizza:

But the summer of 1986 brought a life-changing event. One night in August, he came home from work well past midnight, and he slept late the following morning. His mother was in Colorado visiting his sister, and his brother, who had a summer job with the Janesville parks department, had left early. Paul answered a frantic phone call from his father’s secretary. “Your dad’s got clients in here,” she said. “Where is he?” Paul walked into his parents’ bedroom and thought his father was sleeping. “I went to wake him up,” he told me, “and he was dead.”

“It was just a big punch in the gut,” Ryan said. “I concluded I’ve got to either sink or swim in life.” His mother went back to school, in Madison, and studied interior design; his grandmother, who suffered from Alzheimer’s, moved into their home, and Ryan helped care for her. “I grew up really fast,” he said.

He took both schoolwork and extracurricular activities more seriously, he told me. In his junior year, he was elected class president, which made him prom king and gave him a seat representing the high school on Janesville’s school board, his first political position. He played soccer and was on the ski team. He joined nearly every school club: Latin Club, History Club, the Letterman’s Club, for varsity athletes, and the International Geographic Society, which was open to students who received an A in geography, and which met monthly to learn about a different country. At the end of his senior year, he was elected Biggest Brown-Noser. (“At least I didn’t have a mullet,” he said.)

His father’s death also provoked the kind of existential soul-searching that most kids don’t undertake until college. “I was, like, ‘What is the meaning?’ ” he said. “I just did lots of reading, lots of introspection. I read everything I could get my hands on.” Like many conservatives, he claims to have been profoundly affected by Ayn Rand. After reading “Atlas Shrugged,” he told me, “I said, ‘Wow, I’ve got to check out this economics thing.’ What I liked about her novels was their devastating indictment of the fatal conceit of socialism, of too much government.” He dived into Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman.

"Life is short, even for the non-aborted."

Something I just found myself saying (in the context of why I've only blogged about abortion and not written the book I almost have in my head about abortion).

Is that really a book in my head? I'll be the one to define my own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of what constitutes a book.

"It is a racist statement and this man doesn't realize that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation."

"This man" = Mitt Romney.

ADDED:  Word is that Romney wasn't just comparing Israel to the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority. He also compared the U.S. to Mexico and Chile to Ecuador — other examples of countries that are geographically close and have "wide income disparities." Romney was using ideas in the books "Guns, Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond and "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations" by David Landes. Fine. Let's have the transcript!

"The Dark Knight Rises" "is a bold apologia for free-market capitalism..."

"... a graphic depiction of the tyranny and violence inherent in every radical leftist movement from the French Revolution to Occupy Wall Street; and a tribute to those who find redemption in the harsh circumstances of their lives rather than allow those circumstances to mire them in resentment."

Says Andrew Klavan (in the WSJ).

Let me restate an old theme of mine: Art is right wing, even when the artists will only consciously voice political opinions of the left-wing kind.

"Voter ID laws could swing states."

An article at Politico:

"Swing states are always much more likely to have these kinds of laws restricting voting,” said Wendy Weiser, director of Brennan’s Democracy Program. “To the extent that it’s a political tactic to try and game the system, … it does make sense that that is where we see a lot of that because that is where it could make a difference to the outcome.”

Weiser's argument doesn't prove as much as she'd like, because it's also true that it's in swing states where there's the most reason to worry about fraud. It's a corollary to the old saying "if it's not close, they can't cheat."

"Prized Olympic tickets entrusted to foreign delegations are being openly sold by touts on the streets of Britain..."

"The revelation came as a row raged over embarrassing scenes of banks of empty seating at many Games venues – including last night’s swimming finals."

Why, that's... you could almost say... that's... excuse my extreme language... disconcerting.

"Self-reliance — the new edgy lifestyle for the trendsetters among America’s youth?"

Glenn Reynolds asks in a NY Post column.

In today’s culture of immediate reward, a work ethic centering on self-discipline and the ability to defer gratification is almost, to use a favorite term of the avant-garde, transgressive. Hmm: With so much of our economy and politics now based on the absence of those characteristics, maybe it really is a bit transgressive.

He's looking at a new reality show — "Princess" — that makes entertainment out of forcing young women how to live within their means. And he's comparing it to pornography, which isn't exciting anymore. Supposedly. Despite the big "Shades of Grey" trend (which he mentions).

Could self-reliance become trendy? Maybe if it's imposed on some annoyingly bratty girl on television, but self-reliance is a low-profile matter in real life. It's about not getting noticed, not asking for help. Pornography is truly exciting when it interacts with shame. That's why the word transgression comes into play. There used to be shame in taking advantage of handouts and welfare, and people would apply themselves quite seriously to the tasks of remaining independent — staying off "the dole," as people used to say.

These days, half of Americans are getting government benefits. We've gotten comfortable leaning on each other, and where's the shame? People feel entitled, and we don't want to lose what we have, even if we perceive that what we're depending on might be/must be collapsing. But even if we did feel shame about our dependence, becoming independent would not be the escape from shame that one feels from pornography. When a person escapes shame through pornography, he is going ahead and indulging in the things that were the cause of shame. In the analogy, it's dependence on others that would be the source of the shame, and avoiding that dependence would be refraining from doing that which you're ashamed of. So quite aside from the present-day absence of shame, the analogy doesn't work.

You can't get to excitement and edginess unless you transgress — you move toward the behavior you were ashamed of. It might nevertheless — and for different reasons — feel beautifully rewarding to behave so well that you don't suffer from shame. But let's be clear about the analogy: self-reliance corresponds to chastity.

"At the urging of Valerie Jarrett, President Barack Obama canceled the operation to kill Osama bin Laden on three separate occasions..."

"before finally approving the May 2, 2011 Navy SEAL mission, according to an explosive new book scheduled for release August 21...."

The Daily Caller says it's seen text from the book, which is "Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him.

ADDED: The Daily Caller link is setting off a malware warning now. I wonder why....

Algebra class is hard — so should we stop requiring it?

That's what polisci prof Andrew Hacker argues in a NYT op-ed:

Algebra is an onerous stumbling block for all kinds of students: disadvantaged and affluent, black and white.... Nor is it clear that the math we learn in the classroom has any relation to the quantitative reasoning we need on the job.... Of course, people should learn basic numerical skills: decimals, ratios and estimating, sharpened by a good grounding in arithmetic....

Quantitative literacy clearly is useful in weighing all manner of public policies, from the Affordable Care Act, to the costs and benefits of environmental regulation, to the impact of climate change. Being able to detect and identify ideology at work behind the numbers is of obvious use. Ours is fast becoming a statistical age, which raises the bar for informed citizenship. What is needed is not textbook formulas but greater understanding of where various numbers come from, and what they actually convey....

Instead of investing so much of our academic energy in a subject that blocks further attainment for much of our population, I propose that we start thinking about alternatives. Thus mathematics teachers at every level could create exciting courses in what I call “citizen statistics.”... It could, for example, teach students how the Consumer Price Index is computed, what is included and how each item in the index is weighted — and include discussion about which items should be included and what weights they should be given.

"NBC tape delay coverage is like the airlines..."

"... its interest is in giving you the least satisfactory service you will still come back for."

Romney: “It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.”

That was a powerful statement, Jennifer Rubin writes, since the Obama administration has "repeatedly put out documents suggesting that Jerusalem isn’t in Israel and has attempted to scrub from the White House Web site the reference to Israel’s capital."

More quotes from Romney's speech at the link, including:

I believe that the enduring alliance between the State of Israel and the United States of America is more than a strategic alliance: It is a force for good in the world. America’s support of Israel should make every American proud. We should not allow the inevitable complexities of modern geopolitics to obscure fundamental touchstones. No country or organization or individual should ever doubt this basic truth: A free and strong America will always stand with a free and strong Israel.

"Mrs. Helen Althouse, the well-known mysterious Attica sleeper..."

"... had a narrow escaped from death from poisoning this week."

Two men visited Mrs. Althouse Thursday evening, and it is said one of them, while in the sick room, was seen to handle a cup of coffee and milk from which the patient drank occasionally.... The men were unknown to the family, but Mrs. Althouse seemed to know who they were, although she declined to talk about them. Vague talk about money and Mrs. Althouse's husband adds to the mystery. The men are said to be from Syracuse...."

An article published in the NYT on June 24, 1888. If it was mysterious at the time, it's even more mysterious now. How does one become "well-known" for being a "mysterious... sleeper"? Presumably — given that the men were said to be from Syracuse — Attica is Attica, New York... which you probably associate with the prison, the one with the riot and the Al Pacino... but the prison was not built until 1930.

ADDED: Several commenters are piecing together the story. Apparently, the woman's first name was not Helen but Emma. Edutcher found this old newspaper article, which includes some efforts at understanding the woman's condition (falling asleep for 25 days or more). One doctor said: "It is simply a condition of hysteria. The subjects are almost invariably women and of a particular temperament. There must be this temperament. I don to wish to be  understood as ascribing it to outside hypnotic influences." (The doctor was interested in hypnosis as a treatment for hysteria.)

Quaestor suggests Kleine-Levin syndrome — AKA "Sleeping Beauty Syndrome" — which has a Wikipedia page here. There doesn't seem to be much understanding of the cause or the treatment even today. But it's not true that the subjects are mostly women. They are 3 males to 1 female.

It's such an odd thing that we fall asleep and then wake up. We assume that will just happen. We've all had trouble sleeping, I assume, and when that happens we may observe the mystery of sleep. We seem to know how to do it but not how to do it. We don't so much worry that we won't know how to wake up. Outside of the unique problem of dying in one's sleep, we take it for granted that we will wake up. We have the knack. Who knows why?

"As a cultural ideal, women’s gymnastics is kind of weird."

Writes Robert Stacy McCain.

[I]’s not a sport for grown-ups. Pubescent girls can perform at levels that no mature woman can hope to match, and the petite physique type which is ideal for women’s gymnastics is ideal in no other sport....
Responsible adulthood, however, requires us to resist the mindless consumption of whatever TV is selling, and “Olympic fever” is a made-for-TV commodity whose value should be viewed skeptically.

If there is to be a competition to determine which nation has the most highly-skilled diminutive adolescent girls, it is my patriotic duty to hope that America wins the contest. But I reserve the right to observe that this is a freakishly weird thing to compete over.

I remember when this topic came up at the 1988 Olympics, and I opined about it in a letter to the NYT:

In ''Gymnastic Girls, Not Women'' (Topics, Aug. 1), you suggest there should be a separate competitive category for women in gymnastics, similar to the senior players' tour in golf. The notion that women past the 17-year-old mark resemble seniors should give us pause and make us examine some of the underlying problems in gymnastics, which reflect generally prevailing assumptions about women.

According to your characterization, the maturation process for a woman is from nimble, able girl to woman encumbered by a full-grown body. Yet for a man, to mature is to move from undeveloped boy, who ''would find it impossible to compete,'' to a man fully empowered with ''upper-body strength.''

It seems to me the sport is structured to favor girls and men, perhaps because our society favors ever-young women, particularly very slim ones, and well-muscled men, good-looking at any age. Are we not bombarded with images of these ideal types everywhere? We like to see tiny teen-age girls jumping all over the place like magical fairies. But we don't want to see any little boys doing the same. Please, keep them out of view until their bodies convey a message of masculine power. And we don't even want to think about a woman gymnast with strongly muscled shoulders and arms. Of course, this well-developed, powerful woman would not fit into the sport, not because she is encumbered by her body and needs a second-class category, but because the sport is designed to exclude her. She has no opportunity to perform on the equipment the well-developed men display their strength on, like parallel bars and rings.

And perhaps those men's bodies would ''encumber'' them on the balance beam and the uneven bars that young girls take to so well. If men's gymnastics covered that equipment, maybe we'd get to see the little boys perform.

It's not easy to be this bad.

An 11-year-old girl sings what some consider the worst version of the National Anthem ever (to an audience of 22,000). Here's the Christina Aguilera Super Bowl performance that really should never be imitated.

6 highlights from Chris Wallace's great interview with Justice Scalia.

From the transcript of this morning's Fox News Sunday (and video).

1. Obamacare. Since Scalia is on the show to promote his new book, Wallace duly begins with a quote from the book: "A statute should be interpreted in a way that avoids placing its constitutionality in doubt." Now, doesn't that undercut Scalia's criticism of Chief Justice Roberts's decision in the Obamacare case? Roberts found that what was called a "penalty" (for failure to acquire health insurance) was actually a tax, and reading the statute that way avoided the constitutional problem. Scalia responded that his principle of interpretation only allows the judge "to find a meaning that the language will bear":

You don't interpret a penalty to be a pig. It can't be a pig. And what my dissent said in the... Affordable Care Act was simply that there is no way to regard this penalty as a tax. It simply doesn't bear that meaning. You cannot give -- in order to save the constitutionality, you cannot give the text a meaning it will not bear.

How does one know what the language will bear and will not bear? Yes, it's not a pig, but why isn't it a tax? There wasn't any pursuit of that line of inquiry, but later in the interview, Wallace came back to the case, that time to ask about the new reports that said Roberts changed his mind in the middle of working on the Obamacare opinion. Wallace introduced the topic by asking if Scalia himself had ever changed his mind after voting in conference. Scalia said:

I have not only done that, I have changed my mind after have been assigned to write the majority opinion. I've written the opinion the other way, it just wouldn't write.... There is... nothing wrong with that.

Wallace then asked "Did Chief Justice Roberts change his mind in the ObamaCare case?" Scalia says he doesn't know — "You'll have to ask him." And Wallace tries again, asking whether at some point Scalia had a majority. Again, Scalia refuses: "I don't talk about internal court proceedings." Wallace resorts to the cutesy: "Just this once?" And Scalia responds in a similarly childish form: "No, never ever. Never ever." But when Wallace accepts the pushback and just says "OK," Scalia opens up:

And, listen, those who do, you shouldn't believe what you read about internal court proceedings, because the reporter who reports that is either: A, lying, which can be done with impunity, because as you know, we don't respond. It's the tradition of common law judges to lay back and take it. You don't respond in the press. Or B, that reporter had the information from some who was [sic] breaking the oath of confidentiality, which means that's an unreliable person. So, either way, you should not -- you should not put any stock in reports about what was going on in the secrecy of the court.

Take that Jan Crawford!

2. Second Amendment. Wallace asked about the scope of the right protected by the Second Amendment (which the Supreme Court did not detail in Heller). Scalia says:

What the opinion Heller said is that it will have to be decided in future cases. What limitations upon the right to bear arms are permissible. Some undoubtedly are, because there were some that were acknowledged at the time. For example, there was a tort called affrighting, which if you carried around a really horrible weapon just to scare people, like a head ax or something, that was I believe a misdemeanor.... My starting point and ending point probably will be what limitations are within the understood limitations that the society had at the time. They had some limitation on the nature of arms that could be born. So, we'll see what those limitations are as applied to modern weapons. 

It's clear, he says, as a matter of textualism, that the Second Amendment doesn't "apply to arms that cannot be hand-carried." But that doesn't mean it does apply to everything that can be hand-carried, for example, "handheld rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes." These are matters yet to be decided.

3. "How political is the court?" Scalia — unsurprisingly — says the Court isn't political at all, even though these days, the conservative/liberal split aligns with Republican appointees and Democratic appointees:

That... shows that they had been selected because of their judicial philosophy. The Republicans have been looking for, you know, originalist and textualist and restrained judges for 50 years. And the Democrats have been looking for the opposite, for people who believe in Roe versus Wade. Why should it be a surprise that after, you know, assiduously trying to get people with these philosophies, they end up with th[ese] philosophies?

4. Obama and the Court. Wallace invited Scalia to comment on Obama's criticizing the Supreme Court, first with video of 2010 State of the Union speech with Obama calling out the Justices who were sitting right in front of him. Scalia said that's why he doesn't attend. Second, Wallace showed video of Obama "jawboning" the Court while the Obamacare case was pending. Scalia called it "unusual" — "But as I say, I don't criticize the president publicly and he normally doesn't criticize me."

WALLACE: Did you feel any pressure as a result of that to vote a certain way?

SCALIA: Yes. What can he do to me? Or to any of us? We have life tenure and we have it precisely so that we will not be influenced by politics, by threats from anybody.

The "yes" didn't mean "yes" other than yes, I get what you're asking. It was absolutely clear in the video that he didn't feel at all threatened.

WALLACE: Did you view that as a threat?

SCALIA: I didn't view it as a threat. I'm not even sure I heard it.

WALLACE: Well, you heard it now.

SCALIA: You brought it to my attention.

Ha ha. That was a little theater, acting out his attitude that the President is over there in his branch, doing whatever it is he does, and I'm here in mine, fully insulated.

5. Dissing Judge Posner. Wallace quoted Posner's saying that part of Scalia's dissenting opinion in the Arizona immigration case had "the air of a campaign speech." Scalia went comically snobby:

SCALIA: He is a court of the appeals judge, isn't he?

WALLACE: Yes.

SCALIA: He doesn't sit in judgment of my opinions as far as I'm concerned.

WALLACE: You sit in judgment of his opinion?

SCALIA: That's what happens.

Wallace commented that Scalia knew how to "push people's buttons," and Scalia said "It's fun to push the buttons." Wallace pursued him — "Is it?... Why" — and Scalia basically says Posner started it: "When Richard Posner comes out with a statement like that, I should fire back a statement equally provocative."

6. He's 76, but is he a fool?

WALLACE: You are 76 years old. Will you time your retirement so that a more conservative president can appoint a like-minded justice?

SCALIA: I don't know. I haven't decided when to retire.

WALLACE: But I mean, does it go through your mind, if I retire, I'd like to see, since you talk about Republicans appointing one kind of justice and Democrats another, that you would want somebody who would adhere to your view...?

SCALIA: No, of course, I would not like to be replaced by someone who immediately sets about undoing everything that I've tried to do for 25 years, 26 years, sure. I mean, I shouldn't have to tell you that. Unless you think I'm a fool.

See how cagey Wallace was? Scalia didn't want to answer the question about timing his retirement to give the appointment to a conservative President, but then Wallace asked the question a different way, referring to the earlier discussion about why it seems — wrongly! — that the Court is political, and that caused Scalia to give the answer, which is of course he's going to time it. It amused me that he tacked on the ending "Unless you think I'm a fool," because Wallace actually did fool him into answering the question he didn't want to answer and because Wallace extracted that answer — which makes Scalia look political — by referring to the earlier discussion of why the Court looks political — but isn't!

At the Willow Café...

... I've got nothing to say.

"God bless you.”/“Here comes the next president!”/“He is for Israel!”

Romney at Jerusalem's Western Wall.

"The average car on the road is 11 years old, the highest figure ever recorded."

"[B]esides the economic reasons to hang onto cars longer... today’s drivers are more comfortable driving cars into the ground because today’s technology allows them to do so without too many worries...."

"Five-hundred gallons of dye bought with nearly $30,000 in taxpayers' money has turned the 267-acre Lake Delton to a tranquil, tourist-attracting aqua-blue..."

"'I think the proof is in the pudding if you look at the lake. You had seen it as pea soup and green, and if you look at it today, it's beautiful...'"

Michael Phelps swam the first swim "like it was the last."

"Like he has swum it one too many times. Like he was swimming out of obligation, rather than inspiration...."

"A few jurisdictions have laws against 'attractiveness discrimination.'"

"Try to guess which ones, then click on the link to see if you’re right."

"Next time someone is wasting your life with their voice, any look from this rainbow of options ranging from passive-aggressive..."

"... to aggressive-aggressive will help ward them off. Some might call you insensitive or rude, but to those haters, just shoot any other one of these looks right back at them. If you are continually criticized, just keep bitchfacing. Forever. And ever."

From "How to Bitchface" in "Rookie," the online magazine built on the persona of Tavi Gavinson, who started a fashion blog when she was 11 and is now 16 and profiled in this long NYT Magazine article.

In reaching out to young girls like herself, Ms. Gevinson seems to be positioning Rookie as a kind of antidote to what they are reading elsewhere.... [S]he criticized one of her competitors, Seventeen magazine: “I feel like if I followed their articles about boys and truly believed it was as important to do certain things or avoid certain things as they say, I would probably go crazy. Sometimes their ‘embarrassing’ stories are literally about boys finding out that you have your period.”

Indeed, it’s possible to see Rookie as a rejoinder to a teenage culture overrun by synthetic pop confections like Justin Bieber and “Twilight.” In her (decreasingly) eccentric attire and deadpan prose, Ms. Gevinson has carved out a distinct countercultural voice, the kind that existed in full force during the bygone decades she celebrates.

Liking and hating Obama.

Here are 2 articles on the front page of washingtonpost.com right now:

1. "Romney’s problem? Americans don’t like him as much as Obama, polls say."

2. "What drives the Obama doubters and haters?"

There's an inane amount of talk about liking/hating Obama. What's going on? Is it a struggle over race at some deep psychic level? Is it the media talking about race without talking about race?

More context, from the second article:

What drives [the haters]? Some of it can be attributed to the give-and-take of today’s harsh ideological divide. Some of it can be explained by the way misinformation spreads virally to millions of like-minded people, reinforcing preconceptions. And some of it, I believe, arises out of fears of demographic changes in this country, and out of racism.

It's no accident that the last word of the article is "racism." If you read that paragraph quickly, the impression left in your mind — or maybe not your mind but many minds — is: "What drives [the haters]... blah blah blah blah ... racism!

Race isn't mentioned in the first article, but there's talk of that "it's okay" ad:

Sounding a bit like a sympathetic psychotherapist, a recent Republican National Committee ad acknowledged Americans’ affection for Obama and offered them permission to move on.

“He tried. You tried,” the announcer said. “It’s okay to make a change.”

Is the "it's okay" message massaging our racial sensitivities?

"John Kerry was made to look effete in 2004 by Republican mockery of his windsurfing, his Turnbull & Asser shirts and his French fluency."

"Now Democrats have a chance to do something similar to Romney, with his Swiss bank account, his Grand Cayman and Bermuda tax havens, his multiple homes, his $10,000 bet, his friends who own NASCAR teams, and now the six-figure horses his wife imports from Europe. Nothing says 'man of the people' quite like horse ballet."

Dana Milbank — hey, isn't "Dana" an effete name for a man? — says it's payback time.

Want to see/hear Romney speaking that "fluent" French?



How fluent can that be? I could understand every word!

ADDED: Won't they backfire at some point — all these petty attacks on Romney... and his wife... and the horse she rode in on?

"I really like about Barack that he’s obviously kindling something in me — my voice to myself."

"He encourages it and w/ o knowing what it says, leaves room for it.… On Sunday I woke up, waiting for Barack to wake, writing a bit more — feeling severed from him through b’fast (lack of physical connection— it means so much more than lust, after all)… and then reading Neruda’s poetry— excellent translation — powerful words, the truth in existence so much prettier for the poetry— and reading it really transfigured my thoughts, emotions, mood— and I just lay, w/ my head on Barack’s lap and my eyes closed, w/ words and words and words lapping, lapping through my tongue and soul and I felt older, wiser, in harmony w/ things; the calm after the storm."

Excerpt from the diary of Genevieve Cook, February 20, 1984, reprinted in David Maraniss's book "Barack Obama: The Story," at page 471.

Is Barack Obama kindling in you your voice to yourself? He encourages it and leaves room for it. Now, you may feel severed from him, but perhaps after reading some poetry, your thoughts, emotions, and moods may be transfigured. Or do you feel older and wiser after all those words and words and words lapping, lapping through your tongue and soul?

Remnants of protest.

The view from the top of State Street at noon yesterday.



The "Solidarity Singers" were there, as they are now only once a week. I kept my distance, except with the zoom lens. At one point, you'll be able to read the sign that says "Gun Nuts R Nuts." I can't make out the song from the audio track, but it was one of those old civil-rights spirituals that seem — to this outsider to their religion — out of place applied to the present-day economic issues that affect unionized public employees. I considered walking over to get some better pics, but decided to do a video panorama that emphasizes the context. It was a calm and beautiful day, and many people were enjoying the sidewalk cafés. I don't want you to get the wrong impression of this place.

At the Cloud Café...

... you can float along all day.

"O HAI Ann Althouse!"

"Now you know how to greet people in Lolspeak."

On Flickr, just now, where they keep changing the "language" they use for the greeting.

Kinda makes me nostalgic for the old days when people were into lolcats and the like. Where did that all go? And what are the many web trends we've already forgotten?

"For those who insist they've located the least essential, or least sport-y Olympic discipline..."

"... may I present — via Kon Ichikawa's essential 1965 documentary Tokyo Olympiad — 50 kilometer Olympic race-walking?"



Wait! That was grueling. And in the rain? And wearing a straw fedora?

ADDED: Here's the Ichikawa movie. And here's a straw fedora.

"The most leftie opening ceremony I have ever seen - more than Beijing, the capital of a communist state! Welfare tribute next?"

A member of Parliament tweets.

Renting... at $60,000 a month.

"Will they get any takers? Especially when the undulating window design by the starchitect Frank Gehry lets you see and be seen by your penthouse neighbor, and possibly even by a neighbor below?"

“There is the whole vertical living thing here,” said MaryAnne Gilmartin, an executive vice president of the Forest City Ratner Companies, the building’s developer (and the developer of The New York Times building). “There are a lot of social connections in the building. There are little pieces and slivers of the building where you are looking into other units.”

To each his own, but to me that seems the biggest downside of the Gehry penthouses, along with interior finishes that, while supposedly designed by Mr. Gehry himself, don’t seem quite up to the standard of the top-flight condo buildings Ms. Gilmartin says they are competing with.

Ouch!

"There are no boundaries. There are no corrals."

A fascinating Bill Cunningham video this week.

Paddleboard.

Want one?

It's not that often that I do something new, but I did something new yesterday: stand-up paddleboarding. I managed to stand up, didn't fall in, and paddled around Lake Wingra as the sun set. It was cool. Cool enough to invest in all the equipment? I don't know. We rented: here.

No photos. We don't have a waterproof camera. Yet. Okay, I bought this one. And a wristband flotation device.

"Michelle Obama remained true to her patriotic fashion theme today in a dazzling white top and skirt for this evening's events in London."

So begins the Daily Mail:

The U.S. First Lady, who has stuck to a palette of red, white and blue since she arrived in the city this morning, opted for an ensemble from the resort 2013 collection of American label J Mendel for an early evening reception at Buckingham Palace.

Oh? But what's this, further down:

Mrs Obama performed a further outfit change right before the Opening Ceremony began. She was seen viewing the dazzling spectacle (above) wearing a lime green blazer over the top of a simple white blouse.

Lime green! Lime green, you say? Unpatriotic!

Speaking of fashion colors and the opening ceremony... why was the Queen of England wearing black gloves? (Photo at the link.) She had this brocaded pink/peach-colored dress and a matching feathery hat, but black gloves. In summer! She also looked incredibly grouchy. I found it hard to enjoy the show, myself, because I was constantly distracted by thoughts about how the Queen must feel about it. All those people, all those flashing lights, and loud music, including Queen blasting "just gotta get out... just gotta get out..." And then those black gloves. It's as if she thought the place was going to be grimy — too dirty for her — and the gloves were a precaution against the attachment of any commonness.

"Unfathomably, the programme notes for the Harry Potter author, who read from the opening of Peter Pan, declared her to be 'a great philanthropist, praised by the Government as a tax angel – one of the few who willingly pays her tax bill.'"

From the long, photo-filled Daily Mail article about last night's opening ceremony for the London Olympics.

Unfathomably? Oh, come on. It must be at least possible to fathom it!

The OED tells us that to fathom means "To encircle with extended arms." So: Can you get your arms around it? Can the government get its arms around you?

The opening ceremony also had a giant production number celebrating the National Health Service, replete with hundreds of dancing doctors and nurses in period costumes, and children in pjs bouncing on oversized hospital beds.

Socialized medicine will encircle you with its extended arms.

J.K. Rowling (the "Harry Potter" author) read from J.M. Barrie's "Peter Pan" — video — and we were told that Barrie donated the royalties from "Peter Pan" to GOSH (the Great Ormand Street Hospital).  We saw "GOSH" in big lights along with "NHS" in that production number.

(Wikipedia: "When the copyright originally expired at the end of 1987, 50 years after Barrie's death, the UK government granted the hospital a perpetual right to collect royalties for public performances, commercial publication, or other communications to the public of the work.... GOSH has been in legal disputes in the United States, where the copyright term is based on date of publication, putting the 1911 novel in the public domain, although the Hospital asserts that the 1928 version of the play is still under copyright in the U.S.")

Rowling tied it all together. Like Barrie, she's an author of children's literature. (The production number more generally celebrated Britain's children's literature, e.g., "Mary Poppins.") Like Barrie, Rowling represents giving up one's money to the greater good. Barrie voluntarily donated a specific flow of money — "Peter Pan" royalties — to a specific cause — a children's hospital. Rowling is just a very rich person who — visibly and graciously — submits to taxation.

This year's Forbes magazine rich list showed that Rowling "has dropped out of the world's exclusive billionaires' club as a result of Britain's high tax regime."

So, fathom that: The government has gotten its arms around her fortune.  Unlike the charitable giving of yore — exemplified by Barrie — the modern-day secular saint need only sit still for taxation, and the government will decide exactly where it goes. It's the way things are done now, and it's massively celebrated as part of the Olympics spectacle about what makes Great Britain so great. The spectacle notably took us through the phrases of history, and those wonderful children's authors have been giving children reading material and vast donations of wealth, in their own way and in their own time. And in our time, the government has an immense role.

***

"No man ought to graspe more then he can well fathome." Bp. J. Hall Horæ Vacivæ 71 (1646)(via OED).

"Look, if you colonists have been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own."

I didn't write this on my own. In fact, I didn't write it at all. Meade wrote this:

Lord North: Look, if you colonists have been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by colonists and yeomen who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.

George Washington: Without our consent, we reject your taxes.

Lord North: There are a lot of smart people out there in the New World. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking British subjects of the Crown out there.

Thomas Jefferson: Stop coercing us, Lord North. Your Acts are intolerable.

Lord North: If you yankees were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great King somewhere in your life. Some members of Parliament helped to create this unbelievable Royal Navy system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in French and Indian Wars and the East India Company.



Alexander Hamilton: The King is your king. He is only our king by our agreement.

Lord North: If you've got a medical practice or silver smithery or a cabinetmaking business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The printing press didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the printing press so that all the pamphleteers could make money off the printing press.

Sam Adams: Hey, Lord North, shove your Stamp Act where the sun don't set.

Lord North: All right, all right - everybody just calm down. In politics, we all tolerate a certain amount of spin. I understand these are the games that get played in political campaigns. Although when folks just, like, omit entire sentences of what you said, they start kind of splicing and dicing, you may have gone a little over the edge there, you pesky Americans.

Today at the Orpheum.

The State Street landmark has gone dark.


One of 2 building permit signs in the window says: "Remove all components of Stage Door theater." The Stage Door theater is the claustrophobic place around in the back where I've seen quite a few movies over the years, not the original, ornate theater that rarely showed things I wanted to see (or that I wanted to see but couldn't see under better conditions). But somehow I can only remember one movie I ever saw at the Stage Door theater: "Sling Blade."



The old marquee gives shade to the dobro-and-harmonica player. "Marquee" is a funny word. It originally meant "A tent large enough to hold many people (now usually one used for social or commercial functions)." The OED has that going back to 1690. The meaning we know — which is "chiefly U.S." — is "A canopy projecting over the main entrance to a building; spec. such a canopy at a theatre, cinema, etc., on which details of the entertainment or performers are displayed." That only goes back to 1926. For some reason, one of the examples given in the OED, from 1993, is:

Daily Tel. 15 July 21/3 At the Hubbard Dianetics Foundation there's an electric marquee that goes through this routine: Low Self Esteem? Failed Marriage? Tired Of Losing? Relationship Difficulties? Come In Now!

The marquee at the Orpheum today is pushing nothing. Which is always a good show.

"Ann changed her Religious Views."

The absurdity of Facebook:

Brian Lamb asks Justice Scalia why he's "so sensitive."

Why are you judges so sensitive about what they say when they have life tenure?



Scalia says everything he has to say is in the opinions, and it's fine for people to "paw over" the opinions, but he doesn't need to be there while us animals do that.

And here he is on cameras in the Supreme Court:



Basically, his point is the public would get "educated" if they'd look at the video the right way, which is watch all of the arguments on all of the cases, including all the really boring things about ERISA and so forth. But since the video would end up in edited sound bites, that would not be educational, and therefore we shouldn't be allowed to get our hands — should I say paws? — on it.

My position, you may remember, is that video would impose some accountability on the Justices, who do, as Lamb noted, have life tenure and may very well stay beyond the point of competency. Obviously, the written opinions aren't much good in this regard, since the Justices have excellent help writing the opinions.

"RAT is an anagram of ART. Do you think that inspired them, perhaps subconsciously?"

Asks Dr Weevil.

"A weevil is any beetle from the Curculionoidea superfamily. They are usually small, less than 6 millimetres... and herbivorous." Sounds delicious!

Dr Weevil. A nice portmanteau pseudonym. Combines Dr. Evil with our theme-of-the-day: pests.

Let's listen to Tex Ritter and Mantan Moreland:



10 things I judge to be interesting:

1. The term "portmanteau" originated in "Through the Looking-Glass," as Humpty Dumpty explains "Jabberwocky," within which, for example, "slithy" combines "lithe and slimy" and "mimsy" combines "flimsy and miserable." "You see it's like a portmanteau—there are two meanings packed up into one word." (The word "portmanteau" already meant suitcase.)

2. "Portmanteau" comes from French — combining words for "carry" and "coat" — but the French don't say "portmanteau" to refer to "suitcase words." They say mot-valise — which they came up with by making a literal translation of the English term "suitcase word." That makes "portmanteau" something that's called a "false friend" (a term I did not know).

3. Tex Ritter's real name was Woodward Maurice Ritter. You'd think if he needed a nickname, Woody would have popped up. Think of all the Woodys that that had to stretch to get to "Woody." Woody Allen, for example, was named Allan Stewart Konigsberg. I can't discern how he got to Woody from his Wikipedia entry, which says: "It the age of 17, he legally changed his name to Heywood Allen." That sounds like he was setting up a knock-knock joke: "Heywood who?"

4. Now Woody Guthrie got to Woody quite directly. He was named Woodrow Wilson Guthrie. Born in 1912. You might say: Woodrow Wilson! Woodrow Wilson didn't even become President of the United States until 1913. Yes, but he was Governor of New Jersey. No matter that Woody Guthrie was born in Okemah, Oklahoma. It would be like somebody today living in some state that's not New Jersey naming their new baby Chris Christie Smith or Chris Christie Jones or whatever.

5. Back to Mantan Moreland, the other guy in the Tex Ritter "Boll Weevil" video. Looking at his Wikipedia page, I see he was in a surprising number of movies, including many movies I'd never heard of like "Freckles Comes Home" (1942) and "King of the Zombies" (1941). "He is perhaps best known for his role as chauffeur Birmingham Brown in Monogram's Charlie Chan series. (The lyrics of The Coasters' 1963 song 'Bad Detective' are sung from the first-person perspective of Birmingham Brown, Mantan Moreland's character in the Charlie Chan movie series.)" There's some very heavy racial context here. Spike Lee's movie "Bamboozled" appropriates some things about Moreland. And the Beastie Boys sampled something of his about mashed potatoes, and you can listen to the original (NSFW) here.

6. Moreland "was briefly considered as a possible addition to the Three Stooges when Shemp Howard died in 1955." And he was in the 1957 Broadway stage production of "Waiting For Godot." He played Estragon, the role played by Bert Lahr in the original production of the play.



7. In the "Waiting for Godot" with Moreland, Geoffrey Holder played the character Lucky.



8. You may remember Geoffrey Holder from 1970s-era 7-Up commercials.

9. The New York Dolls recorded "Bad Detective" — replete with the opening notes that you may well recognize as the music that was always used in the past to signify: This is Chinese.

10. Mantan Moreland was known for his "Incomplete Sentences" comic routines. They went like this (from some Charlie Chan movies):