From the WSJ Opinion Archives
|
Nada,
Give Me Strength
We hadn't heard of Nica Lalli until we picked up USA Today and found her op-ed
titled "Atheists Speak With Just One Voice." Lalli, "an artist,
educator and writer who lives in Brooklyn," published a book earlier this
year whose title, "Nothing: Something to Believe In," is reminiscent
of our riff on the conspiracy
of none against Hillary Clinton. The current atheism fad seems to have passed
poor Lalli by; as of early this afternoon, her book ranked No. 37,402 on
Amazon, 37,335 slots below Christopher Hitchens's "God Is Not Great."
Lalli is unhappy with being lumped in with the likes of Hitch, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, who she pointedly notes are "mostly male." She wants you to know that "there is more than one kind of atheist," and that although she is "angry at some believers," as she "should be," she isn't the sort of atheist who has an "interest in telling anyone else what he should or should not believe." What she really yearns for is "dialogue." She is unhappy that atheists "are rarely even invited to the table when discussions among different religions (or beliefs) are held."
You may think she's exaggerating, but it really does seem as though the entire Christian religion has snubbed Lalli. How else to explain the opening paragraph in her piece:
I have a question for the Christians out there: If you could pick one living person to be the face of the entire Christian faith, who would that person be? Even if you could pick three, or even five people, it would still be a challenge. I imagine it would be hard to figure out whether you wanted to pick those Christians who think most like you, or if you would pick people who could better represent the many colors of Christianity, the subtle differences and big-picture similarities.
We lived in Brooklyn for a time in the early 1990s. Back then, at least, there were Christians there, and it seems unlikely that all of them have left. Lalli should see if she can find one so that she can ask her question directly. We're pretty sure the answer will be Christ.
Wag the Dog
WaiterRant.net, a blog by an anonymous waiter who used to work in an unnamed
Northern Italian restaurant in New York, features a pair of anecdotes that teach
a heartwarming lesson. The waiter begins by describing a visit to a gun range,
where a "a chubby fellow wearing a yellow polo shirt" was ostracized
by fellow shooters for leaving his dog in the car on a hot afternoon. He then
tells a story from his restaurant days, in which a woman "verbally castrated"
a man for doing the same thing to his canine. The moral of our story:
I hate to generalize, but the politics of the people who ate at The Bistro could best be classified as left of center. The politics of the people at the gun range? Hmmm. Judging from the ditty about Nancy Pelosi I read in the men's room, I'd have to say they're right of center. My old customer from The Bistro would probably think the men at this gun range are violence loving, small penis compensating, neoconservative, right wing nut jobs. To be fair, all the men here would probably consider her a frigid, wimpy, NPR listening, latte slurping, liberal surrender monkey.
I smile. Despite the gulf separating card carrying members of the ACLU from card carrying members of the NRA, it's nice to know they can occasionally agree about something--in this case the welfare of an innocent dog. There's hope for this country yet.
Unless the global warmists have their way. From the San Francisco Chronicle:
"People will kill their puppies to stop global warming these days," said Dave Snyder with a smile. Snyder is transportation policy director at the San Francisco Policy and Urban Planning Association, a think tank.
In fairness, this is the first we've heard of global warmists killing puppies, so maybe the phenomenon is limited to San Francisco, a weird place even by the standards of American coastal cities. Come to think of it, Nancy Pelosi is from San Francisco. Could global-warmist animal sacrifices have inspired that gun-range men's-room ditty?
Ignorance
Is Strength
"A new project in which university anthropologists study tribal customs
in Iraq and Afghanistan for the US military has prompted a fierce backlash among
academics, some of whom accuse their colleagues of engaging in a wartime effort
that violates their professional ethics," the Boston Globe reports:
The handful of anthropologists working with so-called human terrain teams designed to help commanders navigate the cultural thickets of both countries are being accused of "prostituting science" and presiding over the "militarization of anthropology," the study of the social practices and cultural origins of humans.
Internet blogs oppose the project, urging "anthropologists of the world, unite!" Academic journal articles with titles such as "Anthropologists as Spies" criticize the efforts. And some of the scientists under attack fear they could be blackballed by their profession. . . .
The US forces' superficial understanding of local tribal customs and ancient ethnic and sectarian rivalries has hampered their efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. An outstretched arm, palm facing forward, for example, means "stop" in most Western cultures, but in Iraq it's considered a sign of welcome. Confusion over the signal has had deadly consequences, leading US troops to open fire at Iraqi civilians who didn't stop at checkpoints.
The Paris edition of the New York Times, reporting from Shabak Valley, Afghanistan, has more on the program:
Colonel Martin Schweitzer, commander of the 82nd Airborne Division unit working with anthropologists here, said the unit's combat operations had been reduced by 60 percent since the anthropologists arrived this spring. He said the focus had shifted from combat to improving security, health care and education for the population.
"We're looking at this from a human perspective, from a social scientist's perspective," he said. "We're not focused on the enemy. We're focused on bringing governance down to the people."
What explanation can there be for academics' objecting to this, other than animus toward the U.S. military or America itself? They are determined to keep U.S. servicemen ignorant, and are willing to see Iraqis and Afghans die if that is what it takes.
Columbus
Discovers America, Poor Hardest Hit
Today is Columbus Day, and yesterday the New York Times veered into self-parody
with the statement: "It is one of those uniquely American holidays that
reward whole classes of people, while punishing millions of others." Columbus
Day's victims, it turns out, are parents who are expected to work today (i.e.,
pretty much anyone whose employer is not a bank or government agency) and are
faced with "the choice of burning a vacation day on the second Monday in
October or hiring somebody to mind the kids."
Here is one reason so few people celebrate Columbus Day:
Besides being the least widely observed federal holiday, Columbus Day may be the least popular, particularly in states with large numbers of American Indians, many of whom bristle at the suggestion that the New World was undiscovered before Columbus arrived. In Denver in recent years, American Indians and others have staged protests at the city's Columbus Day Parade. South Dakota changed the name of the holiday in 1990 to Native American Day.
Next time the immigration debate heats up, remember the inconveniences you suffered on Columbus Day. Nativism carries a real price.
The
Times Slimes
With the publication of Clarence Thomas's memoir, "My Grandfather's Son"
(buy it from the OpinionJournal
bookstore), executives at the New York Times have got to be regretting their
decision to end TimesSelect and put its jejune columnists on display for the
world to see. Maureen Dowd's column yesterday was written in Thomas's imagined
voice and titled "I Did Do It," an obvious reference to "If I
Did It," O.J. Simpson's ostensibly hypothetical confessional.
Dowd's joke can be summed up in a few words. Q: What do Clarence Thomas and O.J. Simpson have in common? A: They're both black!
As a newspaperman, we are embarrassed for our industry.
Frank Rich, meanwhile, excuses the racial discrimination Thomas says he suffered upon graduation from Yale Law School:
By [Thomas's] reckoning, a Yale Law graduate admitted through affirmative action, as he was, would automatically be judged inferior to whites with the same degree. The "60 Minutes" correspondent, Steve Kroft, maintained that Mr. Thomas had no choice but to settle for a measly $10,000-a-year job (in 1974 dollars) in Missouri, working for the state's attorney general, John Danforth.
What "60 Minutes" didn't say was that the post was substantial--an assistant attorney general--and that Mr. Danforth was himself a Yale Law graduate. As Mr. Danforth told the story during the 1991 confirmation hearings and in his own book last year, he traveled to New Haven to recruit Mr. Thomas when he was still a third-year law student. That would be before he even received that supposedly worthless degree. Had it not been for Yale taking a chance on him in the first place, in other words, Mr. Thomas would never have had the opportunity to work the Yalie network to jump-start his career and to ascend to the Supreme Court.
Does Rich really think that a black man has no business complaining about racial discrimination as long as he's able to get a job somewhere? This is not exactly a liberal attitude. Furthermore, Orin Kerr debunks Rich's implication "that this was the kind of plum position that perhaps only a Yalie could get":
As I understand it, in Missouri the title "Assistant Attorney General" is the standard job title given to an entry-level attorney hired in the state Attorney General's Office. It's not exactly a common destination for those "work[ing] the Yalie network"; my googling around suggests that most Assistant Attorneys General in Missouri are hired straight from Missouri law schools.
Perhaps Rich was misled by the fact that in the federal government, the job of Assistant Attorney General is indeed quite a job. It's a Senate-confirmed position, often heading hundreds of attorneys.
But state governments are different. In many states, that lofty title is given to entry-level lawyers. My sense is that this is the case in Missouri.
Also, according to this inflation calculator, $10,000 in 1974 was the equivalent of just under $44,000 in 2006--well above the poverty line, but far below what a freshly minted Yale Law grad could make in the private sector. In any case, Rich has to be pretty desperate to smear Thomas when he has to resort to accusing him of deflating his résumé.
Speaking of which, reader Darin Bartram has yet another view on Anita Hill's claim that the District of Columbia Bar Exam was "the most difficult in the country":
OK, I know that, sooner or later, you're going to have to let the Anita Hill story go, but I wanted to respond to Friday's contribution from Bruce Stewart.
There is no decent law school (Yale included) that teaches the state law where the school is located. Yale doesn't focus on Connecticut law, Harvard doesn't focus on Massachusetts law, and Georgetown doesn't focus on the law of the District of Columbia. Only the lower-tier schools teach local law, on the premise that students there are likely to come from nearby and are likely to practice nearby. So everyone coming out of a decent law school, in order to sit for the bar exam of a state where he wants to be licensed, has to prepare for that exam by learning local laws. (A glaring exception to this was Pennsylvania, where, for a while at least, your answers to the state essay portion had to demonstrate a "good faith effort" to address the law as it was or as it should be. Please.)
The idea that you had to learn the local laws to answer the state portion does not generally involve heavy lifting. After all, you are usually pretty smart going into law school, and, despite the best efforts of some law professors, they don't mess you up terribly much. Anyway, the fact that Mr. Stewart or Ms. Hill had to first learn D.C. law prior to passing the exam does nothing to distinguish the D.C. exam from others.
Sure enough, on Friday we asked a guy in a bar who went to law school at Duke, and he told us he did not receive instruction in North Carolina law.
Don't
Know Much Zoology
The logo of the 2008 Republican Convention is drawing sniggers from Democrats.
According to Josh Marshall, it depicts an "elephant bending over in Minneapolis."
Actually, it depicts nothing of the sort:
Marshall apparently is so ignorant about science that he does not know elephants walk on all fours! Thus, contrary to Marshall's preposterously partisan claim, the pictured pachyderm is not "bending over" but trying to stand erect--or perhaps climbing invisible stairs or mating with an unseen she-elephant.
Next Marshall will probably complain that the elephant's pants fell down because he forgot to wear red suspenders.
Reliable
Sources
From an Associated Press report on Burma:
One faithful Buddhist summed up common sentiment after emerging from a pagoda in Yangon last week.
"If the military kill monks, merciful monks, they are not Buddhists, they are savages," the retired teacher said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of fear.
It's nice to see a straightforward explanation for anonymity for a change.
Homer
Nods
Barry Goldwater received just under 38.5% of the popular vote in 1964, not the
electoral vote as we said in an item Friday (since corrected).
You
Can Say That Again!
"You can't say that. You can say what you didn't say because if you say what
you didn't say, then y'all print what is said. That's how you got me on the
Bird stuff. Whenever you say something, it just twists it."--New York Knicks
coach Isiah Thomas, quoted by the Associated Press, Oct. 6
It
Was in the Oven Too Long
"Ham Gets Tough With Mavericks"--headline, Dallas Morning News, Oct. 8
Luckily,
Our Area Onion Dip
"Special Report: Some Areas Weather Dip"--headline, Florida Today
(Melbourne), Oct. 8
It
Really Is the World's Biggest Bookstore
"Boy, 3, Found in Amazon; Lost 11 Days"--headline, Associated Press,
Oct. 6
Part
One, We'd Guess
"Which Came First? (Part Two)"--headline, NYTimes.com, Oct. 4
'That'll
Be $27.50'
"Man Charged After Cutting His Tongue Out"--headline, Associated Press,
Oct. 5
But We Thought
There Were No Gays in Iran
"Petraeus Outs an Iranian"--headline, New York Sun, Oct. 8
Too
Much Information
"Noon Event to Discuss Lesbian Oral History"--headline, News-Leader
(Springfield, Mo.), Oct. 8
Someone
Set Up Us the Bomb
"Hillary Wants Me to Restore Us Image, Clinton Says"--headline, Qatar
News Agency, Oct. 5
Breaking
News From 1522
"Adventurer Completes Circumnavigation"--headline, Associated Press,
Oct. 6
Breaking
News From 1928
"Republicans Tear Into Pope"--headline, Seattle Times, Oct. 8
News You Can Use
- "Get a Tattoo Then Donate Blood in Texas"--headline, Paris
(Texas) News, Oct. 5
- "Headed to Half Moon Bay for Pumpkins? Arrive Early, Be Patient"--headline,
San
Jose Mercury News, Oct. 5
- "Study: Sex OK for Men With Chronic Heart Failure"--headline,
FoxNews.com,
Oct. 5
- "Sword Swallowing Is Dangerous"--headline, Channel 4
Web site (Britain), Oct. 5
- "Cracking Down on Corruption Can Be Complicated"--headline, Times-Tribune (Scranton, Pa.), Oct. 8
Bottom Stories of the Day
- "Burnt Toast Brings Break From Class at Westlake"--headline, Journal
News (White Plains, N.Y.), Oct. 5
- "Surfers Honor Beloved Sport"--headline, San
Diego Union-Tribune, Oct. 6
- "Downtown Parking Goes Smoothly for Conference"--headline, Deseret
News (Salt Lake City), Oct. 7
- "Tiny Galaxy Spotted Halfway Across the Universe"--headline, Space.com,
Oct. 5
- "Jim Carrey Calls for UN Embargo Against Burma"--headline, CBC.ca, Oct. 6
Death
Wish
One sign that the George W. Bush era is drawing to an end is that people on
the right are beginning to exhibit odd behavior reminiscent of the Angry Left.
In December 2004 we
noted a paid
obituary that cited among the causes of death "a broken spirit arising
from the results of the Presidential election."
The Lowell (Mass.) Sun carries a paid obit for Athanasia "Ethel" Eliopoulos, the first woman to head a Social Security district office, who died Friday at 94. According to her obit:
With her passing, Ethel's final wish was ultimately granted when she did not have to see Hillary Clinton become president.
Let that be a lesson: When the Clintons are around, be careful what you wish for.
(Carol Muller helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Keith Rayburn, Dennis Fitzwilliam, Thomas Dillon, Michael Segal, Michael Garrett, Tom George, Anthony Antognoli, Ed Lasky, Mark Brown, Nathan James, Peter Chekovich, Darryl May, Curtis Edmonds, Brad Bettin, Randy Smith, Brent Silver, Doug Black, Marco Pizer, Tim Willis, Geoff Hazel, Stefan Sharkansky, Michael Throop, George Struve, Daniel Foty, Curtis Sherwood, Mark Davies, Paul Wicht, Jan Nicholas, Marcia Whitaker, Jason Rush and Larry Robins. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)
Today on OpinionJournal:
- William Clark and Ed Meese: What would Reagan do? On the Law of the Sea Treaty, we know the answer.
- Omar Fadhil (from Iraq the Model): Signs that the terrorists are losing.
- The Journal Editorial Report: A transcript of the weekend's program on FOX News Channel.
