nancynall.com » A personal friend.

A personal friend.

I set out yes­ter­day on my police rounds via bicy­cle, which would be my favorite work­out of the week if not for all the sweat­ing: I cover 15 miles or so with five cop-shop breaks for rest and enter­tain­ment. There’s noth­ing like find­ing a report on a neigh­bor com­plain­ing that his neighbor’s gar­den foun­tain is too loud to brighten a girl’s Mon­day, or see­ing a grim­mer one to fuel the grind to the next station.

But alas, it was not to be. The skies opened en route to the Farms, and I had to cut the whole thing short. I knew it was trou­ble when I stopped at a cor­ner, and just that gen­tle brak­ing was enough to make me skid. There’s enough skid­ding to be done around here in win­ter, no need to pile it on. As I stood under the shel­ter­ing eaves, screw­ing it up for a drench­ing, one of those Lance Arm­strong types blew past — dressed European-style, head down, lean as…well, as Lance. A rolling Nike com­mer­cial. Just do it, it said. So I did.

Got pretty wet. But as my dad used to say, “You’re not sugar. You won’t melt.” (Other dads tell their daugh­ters they’re pretty pretty princesses. My father pre­ferred a dif­fer­ent model.)

Ladies and gen­tle­men, a moment of silence: An F.O.M. has died. Which is? Why, a friend of Mitch (Albom), of course. I first dis­cov­ered the F.O.M. obit when War­ren Zevon left us; I thought the top of my skull would fly off, as Mitch told us all how much the deceased had loved… Mitch. Today’s F.O.M. is typical:

We first got to know each other when our books came out a year apart. We shared the joys and pres­sures of fast suc­cess, ask­ing each other, “So what do we do now?” Frank wasn’t much into sports, but he would quiz me about “DEE-troit,” the accent on the wrong syl­la­ble, the “tr” rolling through his Irish brogue and mak­ing our indus­trial town sound like some­thing out of “Finian’s Rainbow.”

“You’re a good fel­lah,” he would tell me, after we did speeches or book fairs together. To sit next to him was to sit at the knee of a bet­ter sto­ry­teller than your grand­fa­ther. And when I played “Danny Boy” on the piano, he would rise as if singing a national anthem.

That’s Frank McCourt, of course. I strived to see any­thing that would indi­cate Mitch had even read the man’s books, but other than the obvi­ous Irish clichés — the word “imp­ish” appears, as does “twinkle” — alas there was noth­ing. But you don’t have to have read a famous author (McCourt) when you’ve appeared onstage with him, do you?

The last song he did with our band was the cow­boy tune “Don’t Fence Me In,” an odd choice for an Irish­man. But it seems sadly fit­ting now, because you couldn’t fence him in…

I love things that are “sadly fit­ting” in ret­ro­spect, and espe­cially when they are sadly fit­ting in a trite, obvi­ous way, don’t you? It’s so satisfying.

Oh, it’s been a great morn­ing for all the book­marks in my Idiots folder. Lileks:

As I’ve said before, noth­ing sums up the sev­en­ties, and the awful gut­ter­ing of the national spirit, than a pop song about Sky­lab falling on people’s heads. “Skylab’s Falling,” a nov­elty hit in the sum­mer of ’79.

Wha-? Huh? Once again: What the hell is he talk­ing about? A lit­tle Googling, and it seems it’s most likely this, and to call it a “hit” seems to be stretch­ing it, but well, when you’re a sol­dier in the War on Straw, what’s a stretch, any­way. “Sky­lab” seems to be by none other than Steve Dahl, whose wife reads this blog from time to time; I hope she gets a kick out of this. I remem­ber Sky­lab fondly, m’self, as I won an office pool on the splash­down site. My guess: Kraka­toa, east of Java.

Lileks is dust­ing off this week’s meme, pop­u­lar among con­ser­v­a­tive lib­er­tar­i­ans: Damn the tor­pe­does, on to Mars! Depend­ing on where they fall on the spec­trum, lib­er­tar­i­ans will advo­cate remov­ing the gov­ern­ment from every­thing from zon­ing to infra­struc­ture main­te­nance to edu­ca­tion, but if you talk to them long enough, you inevitably find the place where they advo­cate Uncle Sam just write a blank check, and why? Because they like this thing, that’s why, and so you find your­self talk­ing to a per­son who doesn’t think the gov­ern­ment should build an inter­state high­way, but should sink bil­lions or tril­lions into a mis­sion to Mars. Per­haps they all imag­ine that in another time, they would be the men stand­ing on the prows of ships sail­ing off to the unknown, in pro­file to a set­ting sun. Because they are Lib­er­tar­i­ans, and they are Free.

I need to stop read­ing these peo­ple, although they cer­tainly don’t dis­ap­point in the blog­fod­der depart­ment, do they?

Blog­gage else­where: I also need to start fol­low­ing Sarah Palin on Twit­ter, but maybe that’s what Gawker is for.

Speak­ing of Sarah: Funny.

Back to Gawker: Rachel Mad­dow, national treasure.

Off to the gym for death squats. Why do I bother? I’m still fat.

69 responses to
“A personal friend.”

  1. coozledad said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:22 am

    Read­ing Sarah’s cat­e­ch­esis is eerily like stand­ing in a crowd of Red Guards while one of them reads from the Lit­tle Red Book. You won­der where she’s think­ing of ship­ping all the run­ning dogs.

  2. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:24 am

    Why do I bother? I’m still fat.
    If a Lileks Approved lit­tle Irish lep­rechaun sud­denly appeared, and with a twin­kle in his eye and an appror­pi­ate lilt in his voice granted me just one wish, it would be to remove the deep-seated “I’m fat” belief that beau­ti­ful women — such as my wife, and the Pro­pri­etress of this place (who my lovely wife refers to — with a mis­chie­vous twin­kle in her eye! — as my ‘inter­net wife’), and pretty much every other woman seem to be cursed with.

    Sorta the inverse of the typ­i­cal man’s self-image, as a cross between Andy Grif­fith and Vin Diesel (did I spell that right?)

  3. Colleen said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:33 am

    I have a whole fam­ily full of Irish peo­ple. I’ve never seen any­one twinkle.

  4. moe99 said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:35 am

    The edits of Sarah’s speech were rem­i­nis­cent of edits applied to some of my first work as a law clerk work­ing in pri­vate prac­tice. Some­times what came out looked noth­ing like what went in. But I learned a lot from the process and now offer the same ‘learn­ing’ oppor­tu­nity to the law clerks in our office. I think Ms. Palin is past the time where it would sink in for her.

  5. Deborah said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:44 am

    At the bot­tom of the body of your post today it said “2 com­ments”, but when I clicked there are clearly 4? I clicked back and forth a cou­ple of times to see if it would change but it didn’t.

  6. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:49 am

    Do a “refresh”* and see what happens

    *Like Irish Spring (manly Irish voice: “Smells like a man”; del­i­cate but firm female Irish voice: “But I like it, too!”) (see, THIS is what comes of spend­ing years watch­ing too much tv)

  7. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:54 am

    The Irish in my fam­ily got infected by Ger­mans, so maybe that’s why we don’t twin­kle. And try call­ing a few of my 6-foot-3-and-then-some male cousins “imp­ish”.
    I would love to know Frank McCourt’s ver­sion of his Mitch encounters.

  8. beb said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:01 am

    I don’t know why Rachel Mad­dow con­tin­ues to have Pat Buchanan onher show. Mon­day she spent more time cor­rect­ing the numer­ous and in many cases obvi­ously inten­tion errors he made dur­ing a pre­vi­ous inter­view. Buchanan has become painfully obvi­ous as a hater, a racist, a cranky old man and a delib­er­ate bull­shit­ter. And that’s his “good” side.

    Mean­while a skim­ming of my daily polit­cal blogs has left my eye­ing the sharp knives.… Gold­man Sachs is a crim­i­nal enter­prise in the most com­mon mean­ing of the work. The exec­u­tives should be join­ing Mad­off in prison instead of see­ing $6Bn in new bonuses. The war in Afghanistan is turn­ing into Iraq, which was our Viet Nam II, Obama hasn’t stopped either war as promised. The Health Care reform we’ll get will be about as use­ful as the Medicare Pre­scrip­tion reform that Bush gave us. Our “lib­eral” gov­ern­ment thinks it needs to con­tinue to spy on us and shield crim­i­nals from jus­tice because they’re named Dick Cheney.….
    It’s rain nearly every day for the last week and is pro­jected to rain for the next.

    On days like today I think Lewis Black is a bloom­ing optimist.

  9. ROgirl said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:01 am

    Mitch man­aged to reduce Frank McCourt to a twin­kling lep­rechaun who wrote a few books.

  10. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:17 am

    And speak­ing of lep­rechauns, does any­one watch ‘The Sports Reporters’ on ESPN? Before I knew Mitch from this blog, I only knew him as a com­men­ta­tor on that show. I’m sus­pi­cious that he’s seated delib­er­ately at the end so the cam­era can show that his feet don’t touch the floor. Well, maybe they do but you know he’s stretching.

  11. mark said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:51 am

    Yes, beb, there are many inter­est­ing and trou­bling things going on cur­rently. While I doubt we agree on much, your post cov­ers a few issues where I at least share your concern.

    But it is much eas­ier to con­tinue to ridicule Palin, Buchanan and other eas­ier tar­gets than to address those issues. Sarah’s stu­pid so all lib­eral is good, con­ser­v­a­tive bad.

    I won­der how the jour­nal­ists here would view it if Albom was used not as a sur­ro­gate for all things con­ser­v­a­tive, but all things jour­nal­is­tic? “That Mitch, he typ­i­fies the self-absorption that is destroy­ing jour­nal­ism. When will jour­nal­ists learn?”

  12. Catherine said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:55 am

    God bless Van­ity Fair. That’s exactly what I wanted to do when I read Sarah Palin’s speech, but then I was afraid it would hurt my head to try to under­stand her reasoning.

    I am unrea­son­ably sad about Frank McCourt’s death (not “MJ changed so many lives!” sad, but misty that I’ll never hear him speak). If you haven’t read Teacher Man, I rec­om­mend it.

  13. LAMary said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    Pat Buchanan has always been a nasty anti semite racist. He’s just being more pub­lic about it now.

  14. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm

    Rev­erend Wright has always been a nasty anti semite racist. He’s just being less pub­lic about it now.

  15. paddyo' said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:17 pm

    Actu­ally, Brian, I think the line uttered by the brogue-ish Irish Spring lass is “Manly yes, but I like it, too” — and yeah, this IS what comes from too many years of watch­ing TV!

  16. moe99 said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:17 pm

    Some­how, Danny, the equa­tion does not add up. Rev­erend Wright has never had a national bully pul­pit like Pat Buchanan has. So apples/oranges.

  17. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:23 pm

    Mary, agreed. Danny, agreed.

    And, Pres­i­dent Obama specif­i­cally rejected Wright’s wrong-headedness; just as some elected Repub­li­cans rejected this meme that Sota­mayor is a ‘racist’ — that Pat was retailing.

    So, if the object is to say that Rs and Ds both have unsa­vory ele­ments — then we’re there; but if one wants to equate the state-of-play within the (cur­rently gov­ern­ing) 2009 Demo­c­ra­tic Party, with the state-of-disarray within the (cur­rently inco­her­ent) 2009 Repub­li­can Party —  no sale.

    When the GOP was out of power in the late /70’s, and again in the early 90’s, they offered hope, opti­mism, and pos­i­tive change.…which some­how sounds famil­iar, just now

  18. Bob said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    “Because they are Lib­er­tar­i­ans, and they are Free.”

    make that: Because they are Lib­er­tar­i­ans, and they read Robert Hein­lein when but lads.

  19. Catherine said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:32 pm

    OK, not try­ing to start an argu­ment, but some com­par­isons on the Mars thing:

    Esti­mated cost of Iraq war from incep­tion in March 2003 to the end of 2009: $694 billion

    Lowest-cost manned Mars mis­sion (paid out over 10 years): $55 billion

    Esti­mated cost to date of Mars Sci­ence Lan­der (an unmanned rover): $2.3 billion

    Some manned-mission pro­po­nents def­i­nitely have that damn-the-torpedoes irri­tat­ing swag­ger; how­ever, NASA bud­gets are much smaller slice of the fed­eral pie than most peo­ple think.

  20. mark said on July 21st, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    But Cather­ine, you would have us dis­cuss an idea with ref­er­ence to it’s mer­its, rather than what we think of some of the peo­ple who pro­mote the idea.

    That’s kind of labo­ri­ous and doesn’t pro­vide much oppor­tu­nity to feel smug or superior.

  21. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm

    Moe, one thing to thing con­sider with respect to Wright: Pres­i­dent Obama, who I think we all agree is a very smart fel­low, sat under his preach­ing for 20 years and gave thou­sands of dol­lars (20 or 30k?) to the church … yet had no inkling as to what this guy was all about?!

    Right.

  22. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    Mark, cheap shot. You are bet­ter than that; I’ve read much bet­ter than this from you. Con­tribute, please, or go troll else­where. If you think the main body of com­men­tors here are just look­ing to feel smug or supe­rior in our com­ments about con­ser­v­a­tives, let me say that when some­one like Fox News Strate­gic Ana­lyst Ralph Peters gets air time to appar­ently sug­gest the death of an Amer­i­can sol­dier at the hands of the Tal­iban, ‘smug’ and ‘supe­rior’ are not my imme­di­ate reac­tions.
    These are the peo­ple who are speak­ing for con­ser­v­a­tives at this time, and they are behav­ing in a way that invites responses from shocked laugh­ter to appalled fury. They do not do the con­ser­v­a­tive move­ment proud and no one is stop­ping them.
    And I mean it: you are bet­ter than that.

  23. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    Here’s a story, about the arrest of Pro­fes­sor Henry Louis Gates, that made me wince, and then wince again

    http://​www​.msnbc​.msn​.com/​i​d​/​3​2​0​1​0​9​8​5​/​n​s​/​u​s​_​n​e​w​s​-​r​a​c​e​_​a​n​d​_​e​t​h​n​icity/

    an excerpt:

    Cam­bridge police say they responded to the well-maintained two-story home near cam­pus after a woman reported see­ing “two black males with back­packs on the porch,” with one “wedg­ing his shoul­der into the door as if he was try­ing to force entry.“
    The woman, Lucia Whalen, is the cir­cu­la­tion and fundrais­ing man­ager at Har­vard Mag­a­zine, a news and alumni mag­a­zine affil­i­ated with the school. The magazine’s offices are down the street from Gates’ home. By the time police arrived, Gates was already inside.

    and

    Gates said he turned over his driver’s license and Har­vard ID — both with his pho­tos — and repeat­edly asked for the name and badge num­ber of the offi­cer, who refused. He said he then fol­lowed the offi­cer as he left his house onto his front porch, where he was hand­cuffed in front of other offi­cers, Gates said in a state­ment released by his attor­ney, fel­low Har­vard scholar Charles Ogle­tree, on a Web site Gates over­sees, The​Root​.com. He was arrested on a dis­or­derly con­duct charge after police said he “exhib­ited loud and tumul­tuous behavior.”

    I hate sto­ries like this. It seems clear to me that the police offi­cer lost his or her tem­per, and then made the arrest. If the pro­fes­sor lost his tem­per (and became “tumultuous”) — still, HE was HOME! He had every right to become angry.….but here we go

  24. Rana said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:34 pm

    Off to the gym for death squats. Why do I bother? I’m still fat.

    So you can kick the shit out of any­one who gives you grief? That’s always a good rea­son for doing squats. *grin*

    As for Lileks and his doom-and-gloom about the awful, awful Sev­en­ties — I was a kid then, and I think that they were pretty darn great. The Eight­ies, on the other hand…

  25. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:50 pm

    Yeah, the Sev­en­ties were great. You know, the fash­ion and all.

    Actu­ally, I agree, Rana. Grow­ing up in the Sev­en­ties rocked. Lit­er­ally and figuratively.

  26. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 1:53 pm

    Sue, it’s been over a half-hour since you told Mark that he was bet­ter than that. I’m start­ing to give up hope and think that he really isn’t bet­ter than that … but he is pretty funny!

  27. jcburns said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    Nah, he’s exactly that good. As good as Bill O’Reilly is when he disses Cronkite.

  28. moe99 said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    Some­how, Danny, that just still does not make up for Pat Buchanan being beamed into mil­lions of homes, night after night. He’s the mod­ern day equiv­a­lent to the fas­cist right wing priest on the radio prior to WW2.

  29. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:16 pm

    I actu­ally caught a bit of Mr. Bill last night. He didn’t diss Conkrite at all. Both he and Bernie Gold­berg, who worked with Wal­ter for about a decade, agreed that Wal­ter was a gem. You can read the talk­ing points here. In the sub­se­quent dis­cus­sion, they both lauded Conkrite as the pro­fes­sional that he was.

    EDIT: “Beamed,” Moe? He’s on cable, not broad­cast. And one can always change the chan­nel. And one def­i­nitely doesn’t have to send 20-30k to his “cause.”

  30. Scout said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    Rachel Mad­dow is a rare polit­i­cal com­men­ta­tor in that she has no appar­ent detrac­tors. It’s like nobody even wants to try and tan­gle with that level of smart.

    The Van­ity Fair edit of La Palin’s what­ev­er­the­hellthatmess­was is bril­liant. Oh, and the 27 minute Twit­ter opus — clas­sic! I would love to turn away from the train­wreck that is Palin, but as long as there are peo­ple who actu­ally believe she is just folks and thereby qual­i­fied to hold national office, she needs to be called out for every sin­gle dum­b­ass thing she says or does.

  31. ROgirl said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    After Pat Buchanan gave a speech at a Repub­li­can con­ven­tion in the 90’s call­ing for a reli­gious war against the Clin­ton agenda, Molly Ivins wrote that it sounded bet­ter in the orig­i­nal Ger­man. That speech pretty much ended his pres­i­den­tial aspirations.

  32. nancy said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    “Yes, Mario, there is a cul­ture war going on in this country…”

    I remem­ber it well.

  33. mark said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    Sue

    I googled the Ralph Peters inci­dent to which you are appar­ently refer­ring. Pretty out­ra­geous. But what’s your point? I’ve never heard of the guy, but I’ll assume he’s con­sid­ered con­ser­v­a­tive. Am I sup­posed to worry that his think­ing will be assumed to be my think­ing and spend my time say­ing ‘not true’ or to try ‘stop­ping him’, what­ever that means?

    If I spend my day search­ing for the most recent bit of insan­ity from Max­ine Waters, Rev. Wright, Al Gore, Keith Olber­man, etc., and post about it with dumb con­clu­sions about the state of lib­eral think­ing, what does it accom­plish other than the draw­ing of a false con­clu­sion? There are major, con­tro­ver­sial issues being debated these days, most at the behest of our new pres­i­dent. While most here were quite excited about his elec­tion, the con­ver­sa­tion seems to be the same Cheney, Palin, Lim­baugh ridicule.

    I guess I just find it puz­zling. The crowd here is brighter and bet­ter edu­cated than most places. But, yes, what passes for the dis­cus­sion of ideas (at least the polit­i­cal ones) seems too often to be just ridi­cul­ing peo­ple who dare to espouse ideas.

  34. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 2:57 pm

    Or, like with jc, ridi­cul­ing peo­ple for some­thing they didn’t do.

  35. LAMary said on July 21st, 2009 at 3:25 pm

    Here’s an enlight­en­ing polit­i­cal state­ment from Sen­a­tor Jim Demint:
    On a Fri­day con­fer­ence call with con­ser­v­a­tive activists deal­ing with health care reform, in what is sure to become a ral­ly­ing point for the White House, Sen. Jim DeMint said “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Water­loo. It will break him.”

  36. Dexter said on July 21st, 2009 at 3:31 pm

    Attn: MichaelG:
    Tour de France— Lance Arm­strong knows he’s past the time when he could accel­er­ate with the fastest rid­ers, but his stand-up sprint to catch Chase 1 in today’s stage was thrilling. Alberto Con­ta­dor is “The Man” on Team Astana, but it looks like Arm­strong isn’t ready to col­lect water bot­tles from the team car just yet.
    They’re in the French Alps now, and it appears the in-team rivalry for the mail­lot jaune is back on.

  37. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 3:48 pm

    So who does speak for you, mark? Where are your ideas formed, where do you research your opin­ions? If you are not a Fox News guy, what rea­soned source do you use for the process that brings you to your con­clu­sions? You demon­strate your higher think­ing by group­ing the peo­ple on this site into exactly the kind of bunch you claim we are feel­ing supe­rior to. I surely hope you are not feel­ing … smug right now.
    Fox News spe­cial­izes in help­ing its view­ers draw false (or incom­plete, or pre­ma­ture) con­clu­sions, and their view­er­ship is huge com­pared to the MSNBCs of cable. Do they speak for all con­ser­v­a­tives? I doubt it, but it would be very fool­ish for any­one to dis­count their influ­ence. Laugh at it, yes, but not dis­count it.
    And to answer your prob­a­ble ques­tion: why, the Daily Show, of course. And what­ever freakylib­blog comes to mind. I try not to disappoint.

  38. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 3:50 pm

    Well, they gotta give the man respect, Dex. Not only does he have 7 mel­low john­nies, he also recently had a col­lar bone bro­ken in four places and he just had a child with his girl­friend about a month or so ago.

    He has prob­a­bly trained the least amount this year and after being away from rac­ing for 3 years, that makes a dif­fer­ence. The pop­u­lar thought is that he will be back next year, per­haps with his own team and that with enough train­ing, he may be back to bet­ter rac­ing form.

  39. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 3:55 pm

    Assum­ing the dope-cops don’t bag him

  40. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:17 pm

    Hmm, yeah, one never knows. But they have got­ten bet­ter about that. This tour, both Arm­strong and Con­ta­dor are get­ting tested before break­fast and before din­ner each day.

    EDIT: He did say some­thing inter­est­ing regard­ing how the French are more inclined to like the roman­tic idea of an odds-overcoming sec­ond place fin­isher over that of a great cham­pion. What­ever it is, they seem to have warmed to him.

  41. LAMary said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    I doubt if his girl­friend giv­ing birth was that tough on him.

  42. mark said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:18 pm

    Sue,

    For TV, I’ve almost given up on it since I don’t have access to the BBC cur­rently. Recently I dis­cov­ered CNBC, which is now my default sta­tion until at least 5:00 pm. They are the only news source I have found that didn’t give cov­er­age to the MJ death/funeral silli­ness and never turns the lat­est miss­ing 8 year-old blonde girl inci­dent into an edge-of-your seat national story. I have no use for the hype and shout­ing of Han­nity, Beck and Olberman.

    I read lots of things. On the con­ser­v­a­tive side, Drudge report is pretty timely and gives lots of links I can fol­low or ignore. I like Mark Steyn at the Cor­ner for his writ­ing on demo­graph­ics, which I think is an under­es­ti­mated issue. I get e-mail updates from a dozen or so for­eign pol­icy sites that a State Depart­ment buddy alerted me to.

    I like Col­bert and the Daily show, but only when I stum­ble on to them. A host of econ­o­mists, includ­ing Krug­man and Samuel­son. The Wall Street Jour­nal is reli­ably good and conservative.

    Yes, the talk­ing heads have influ­ence, and if I was run­ning a polit­i­cal cam­paign I’d pay more atten­tion to them. I know they are doing a good job attack­ing Obama’s health­care propoal.

    And no, I’m not feel­ing smug. Just puz­zled. I have a lot of con­ser­v­a­tive friends and I can hon­estly say since the elec­tion we’ve spent lit­tle time dis­cussing Palin or Lim­baugh and none at all talk­ing about Edward’s love child or Char­lie Rangel’s tax prob­lems. Obama has sucked all the air out of the room, which is impres­sive. His sup­port is falling, which is inevitable given he’s vig­or­ously pur­su­ing his promised change.

    The main ques­tion is have the peo­ple become suf­fi­ciently skep­ti­cal of the ‘urgency of now’ stuff. Despite cam­paign and inau­gural day promises of trans­parency and all leg­is­la­tion posted on the inter­net for 5 days before a vote, he’s push­ing a third gigan­tic piece of leg­is­la­tion to be voted on before even those vot­ing can read it. I think that and the spend­ing is wear­ing thin.

    And the for­eign pol­icy side, while get­ting lit­tle press, is pretty fas­ci­nat­ing to me. My friends who work in the area are giv­ing Hillary Clin­ton huge praise for her work as Sec­re­tary. One remark I found inter­est­ing: “Well, first, she gen­uinely likes peo­ple, which is impor­tant and not nec­es­sar­ily true of her imme­di­ate pre­de­ces­sors. Sec­ond, she either enjoys or doesn’t mind travel. The vis­its are impor­tant and a big change from the last admin­is­tra­tion. And third, Condi Rice pretty much only wanted to talk about Rus­sia, which she knows, or Iraq. The rest of the world was ready to talk about some­thing else.”

  43. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:22 pm

    Mary, he only has one tes­ti­cle. The whole expe­ri­ence could have been very drain­ing … so to say.

  44. nancy said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    I thought Lance was ster­ile fol­low­ing radi­a­tion and chemo for tes­tic­u­lar can­cer, and his chil­dren, by all the women in his life, were cre­ated from semen he deposited before under­go­ing treatment.

  45. Danny said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:31 pm

    I think you’re right, but it made for a bet­ter joke my way. I wish I did not know that fact. I can never un-know it.

  46. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:43 pm

    I much pre­fer mark#42. Thanks for com­ing back.

  47. brian stouder said on July 21st, 2009 at 4:51 pm

    I much pre­fer mark#42.

    Me, too. Mark#33 made my head spin, a lit­tle; sorta disorienting — 

    I googled the Ralph Peters inci­dent to which you are appar­ently refer­ring. Pretty out­ra­geous. But what’s your point? I’ve never heard of the guy, but I’ll assume he’s con­sid­ered con­ser­v­a­tive. Am I sup­posed to worry that his think­ing will be assumed to be my think­ing and spend my time say­ing ‘not true’ or to try ‘stop­ping him’, what­ever that means?

    What is this remind­ing me of? What echoes are ring­ing in my ears?

    Hmmmm.…

    It strikes me as sim­i­lar to an exer­cise we recently engaged in, wherein some obscure fel­low stand­ing near a polling place with a baton was pre­sented to us as indica­tive of some huge, unre­ported and unad­dressed crim­i­nal con­spir­acy, or something.

    Yeah, that’s it! The Attor­ney Gen­eral him­self was involved, as evi­denced by his lack of action on the mat­ter, yes? And the silence in the media, and/or our very own lack of aware­ness of that “story” only high­lighted their (and our own) com­plic­ity, yes?

    Ahh — well, never mind.

  48. Sue said on July 21st, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    Actu­ally, I’d like an update on that, Brian. I couldn’t find any more infor­ma­tion beyond what we dis­cussed and the fact that the US Com­mis­sion on Civil Rights wrote that let­ter makes me want to get to the bot­tom of it. No, I don’t believe in con­spir­a­cies (too easy) but the Obama DoJ has so far dis­ap­pointed me on some basic stuff.
    Any reli­able infor­ma­tion out there, anyone?

  49. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 6:56 pm

    Who do y’all think the most cur­rent friend of Mitch Albom is meet­ing in heaven? I’d say Patrick McCabe, that wrote Butcher Boy, or Shane McGowan, but nei­ther is dead yet that I’ve heard about.

    Maybe WB Yeats can explain to him how it’s a whole new Rose and Cross World and a glo­ri­ous Golden Dawn to walk into. Or, Shaw, and yer dreary unbringin’ was pre­or­dained by bas­tard Cap­i­tal­ists that were too obsessed with pos­ses­sions to see the Utopian Way. Some inter­na­tional fut­bol star that stepped on a hand and made a dan­ger­ous play that molded your sad but some­how mean­ing­ful life.

    I used to like Mitch Albom when I knew noth­ing about him but that he was a sar­donic coun­ter­point to the hys­ter­i­cal (and I really mean the woman part) Mike Lupica slot on The Sports Reporters. But then there was best-sellerdom and the hand-wringing over Barry Bonds, who allegedly betrayed the life­time com­mitt­ment of these lit­tle wee­nies to beloved sport.

    Nobody’s proved Barry took steroids. (Nobody’s even alleged proof that Manny was try­ing any­thing but deal­ing with erec­tile dys­func­tion.) Not only that, but nobody has proved steroids have much effec­tive­ness in any sport but weightlift­ing and field events. It’s safe to say, no mat­ter what any naysay­ers say, steroids have absolutely noth­ing to do with hit­ting a baseball.

    file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Owner/Desktop/steroids%20NOFX.htm

    and please scroll down.

    So is Mitch a facile writer that’s got an ear for manip­u­lat­ing peo­ple. Hell, yeah. I sus­pect the manip­u­la­tion is what Nancy finds par­tic­u­larly offen­sive. Frank McCourt told sto­ries in lyri­cal prose about his life, so I sup­pose he was a valu­able mem­oirist. Peo­ple think Proust was a genius (yeah, prob­a­bly). McCourt was Irish so he did it in about 600 pp. where it took a French guy thousands.

    Mitch Albom isn’t going to meet any of these guys in heaven. He’s going to wake up from a dream of Wynona Ryder car­ress­ing his bat­tered wimp frame to find Richard Sim­mons, RuPaul, Billy Mays, and that guy in the ques­tion mark suit giv­ing him a 900 num­ber to call now. Ephemera heaven.

    On the tour, watch Ver­sus. Lance already said he can’t accel­er­ate like the young guys. If he can grind tomor­row and some­how catch up, he’s for­mi­da­ble, but he’s prob­a­bly going to pull a Tom Watson.

    The Health Care Debate: Sup­pose you didn’t know any­thing about it. Like you didn’t know that gov­ern­ment costs and fund­ing didn’t really have any­thing to do with it and it was about the per­cent­age of the GNP being devoured by seri­ous care being rationed 95% in favor of rich peo­ple right now. Or, the cur­rent US fed­eral deficit result­ing from putting the cost of the Iraq inva­sion on the cuff instead of the fed­eral bud­get for eight years and being accounted for hon­estly now. Or the tril­lion spent on not being able to shoot down any­thing with mis­sile defense unless you flew a gigan­tic weather bal­loon behind the tar­get. Or, how much of the deficit comes from purely and idi­ot­i­cally Laf­fer­esqe ideas about cut­ting high-end taxes when those taxes were lower under Clin­ton than when Rea­gan or HW was President?

    When Bush was Pres­i­dent, Repub­li­can , and some Demo­c­ra­tic, zombie-whores for the Frist Fam­ily and a con­sor­tium of health care providers that don’t give a shit about any­body but prof­its, and the fam­ily mem­bers they can read­ily pay for, leg­is­lated a pro­hi­bi­tion against the fed­eral gov­ern­ment could nego­ti­ate phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal costs. Who was this intended to ben­e­fit? Americans?

    This is all left­over hang­over from Lee Atwa­ter and Kom­mis­sar Karl Rove. The idea is to make these idiot red­necks think they’re one of us, and it’s so vir­u­lently racist it’s a whole lot like Nazism. Ever see The Boy in the Striped Paja­mas? What the Repub­li­cans want to do isn’t much dif­fer­ent. In the movie, it was a guy that thought he had to be a heart­less Nazi for his fam­ily to survive.

    Health care now? My dad went to work for Kaiser-Permanente some­time in the late 50s. He’d been inves­ti­gated by the FBI, because he was a favorite stu­dent of Dr. Katie Dodd. She was a remark­able woman, and since we lived in her house, she was sort of another grandma to me. She believed in treatin every­body. Made her a pinko. What the hell is wrong with people?

    If you’re a con­ser­v­a­tive, does that mean you have a bib­li­cal objec­tion to tak­ing care of the least of my chil­dren? That’s What Jesus Would Do, you idiots.

    My dad was a pro­fes­sor at Uni­ver­sity of Arkansas. He had a gifted stu­dent that was a black woman. He made these peo­ple deal with her when the baby was due. Does Chuck Grass­ley think she should have waited on a fed­eral appoint­ment. My dad didn’t. He car­ried her into the OR and told every­body to get the hell out of the way.

    This entire health care dis­cus­sion? Are you ass­holes kid­ding. It’s the United States. We take care of our own, even if some scum­bag Repub­li­cans thing its some sort of political…Waterloo? Really. Look. Peo­ple that read Nancy Nall are gen­er­ally fairly intel­li­gent. This debate has degen­er­ated into Repub­li­cans say­ing fuck every­one if we can break the Nig­ger. I’m sorry if that’s offen­sive but holy shit, that’s what they said and that’s what they meant.

    They tried the Sher­rif Bart. He fnnessed them. He’s a lot god­damn stu­pider than they are. They say things like Chuck Grass­ley think­ing we could all get cov­ered if we got elected. You all know Chuck Grass­ley said some­thing spec­tac­u­larly stu­pid. Chuck said you get his health care plan if you go to work for the gov­ern­ment. No you don’t. As spec­tac­u­larly obnox­iousas what this ass­hole said was, it did not come close. All of his staff works for the gov­ern­ment. They don’t have his insur­ance coverage.

    In the grand scheme of how rich and enti­tled peo­ple live in a dif­fer­ent world, Nobody liv­ing in Appalachia ar liv­ing on urban streets does. Repub­li­cans think they’re the butt of jokes about lib­er­als. No joke, y’all.

  50. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    No shit. Bah dah Bah dah. Every­thing I think you know is some bullshit.

  51. Dave K. said on July 21st, 2009 at 7:39 pm

    Thank you, Cal­iban. Per­haps your best post ever. Cham­ber of Com­merce has pledged $100 mil­lion to defeat HB 3200, and peo­ple are dying because they can­not afford proper health care. Like Cal­iban says, this is no joke! One of the loud­est, most per­sis­tent argu­ments against the pro­posed health care plan is that increased costs will put every­one out of busi­ness. Think about it. If every­one is in and no one is out, there will be no com­pet­i­tive dis­ad­van­tage. You bet­ter believe that with­out a pub­lic option for cov­er­age there will be fewer peo­ple who can afford cov­er­age, higher costs for those who can, and prof­its that con­tinue to soar for the insur­ance indus­try giants.
    EDIT: That is, Cal­iban at #49, not #50. Shit must have started kickin’ in about 7:38!?

  52. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 7:45 pm

    Nancy, you actu­ally find this jerk offen­sive. Because you actully write bet­ter than he does. Well you do write bet­ter. So do half these dum­b­assses that think your a good writer. I think you’re enter­tain­ing. And a decent writer. Actu­ally, ok/

  53. Catherine said on July 21st, 2009 at 7:48 pm

    Now i have a men­tal image of Jesus say­ing, “take care of the least of my chil­dren… you idiots.” Pag­ing Jeff tmmo!

  54. LAMary said on July 21st, 2009 at 8:04 pm

    I find the idea of sen­a­tor say­ing he will “break” the pres­i­dent very sad. It’s ok to hold oppos­ing views or to want to defeat the oppos­ing polit­i­cal party, but to break the pres­i­dent? As much as I had no use for George Bush, I did not wish that for him. I never wished to see him destroyed and I don’t remem­ber any sen­a­tor wish­ing that either.

  55. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 8:04 pm

    Nancy thinks she actu­ally saw Iggy. I saw him and he wasn’t Scott Richard. This is some­thing about SRC and Per­se­cu­tion Smith.

  56. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 8:08 pm

    Why don’t peo­ple get behind? These ass­holes pulled this garbage on national TV abut 2 lbs. of ham How is it that there’s any­body dumb enough to buy that sort of shit? The Plumber is that stupid.

  57. caliban said on July 21st, 2009 at 8:23 pm

    LAMary. The deal is are Amer­i­cans so stu­pid not to under­stand there are Rwpub­li­cans they can’t see don;t care about any­body that isn’t bet­ter than they are and cov­ered by Big Insur­ance. These [eople think­there is some­thing wrong with the gov­ern­ment using its size to nego­ti­ate a price for meds. Does some­body find some­thing wrong with that? Repub­li­cans seem to think drug com­pa­nies should just tell us what drugs should cost. Does this make any sense? Tell you what. They used our cash to develop the drugs in the first place. Repub­li­can health care says they should tell us what the drugs ought to cost.

    These are absolute facts. And they payed spec­tac­u­lar amounts of money to solid­ify their posi­tion. So are you idiots or do you think for your­selves. And seri­ously, if there’s a gov­ern­ment option or a mediocre pri­vate choice, they claim we should all have a choice. If they can’t com­pete, they should just shut the hell up.

  58. beb said on July 21st, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    Wow. Cal­iban @49 was bril­liant, insight­ful and well orga­nized. Then @50 and on he becomes rude, insult­ing and crazed. It’s like two dif­fer­ent peo­ple blog­ging under the same handle.

    The thing about the guy on Fox News wish­ing for the death of an Amer­i­can sol­dier isn’t that he is or isn’t a famous per­son, but that the hosts of the show lis­tened to him say all this and didn’t remon­strate. They have a national TV show (even if it is only cable). They have a respon­si­bil­ity not to pro­mote crazy, hate­ful speech.

    The thing about Rev Wright is that as an activist dur­ing the Civil Rights war dur­ing the 60s he saw a lot of insti­tu­tion injus­tice in this coun­try. Like that Har­vard pro­fes­sor arrested for try­ing to enter his own house. When he was cry­ing “God­damn Amer­ica” it wasn’t because he hated our coun­try but to empha­sis how far Amer­ica has fal­l­end from the goal of “life, lib­erty and jus­tice for all.” That’s a lot dif­fer­ent from Pat Buchanan claim­ing that white men — and only white men — built this country.

  59. coozledad said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:09 pm

    I’ve been try­ing to fig­ure out which ideas the right pro­moted dur­ing the pre­vi­ous eight years. I sup­pose it’s a source of end­less dis­com­fort for those who believed in the Per­ma­nent Major­ity, if you accept Adding­ton and Cheney’s notion of the immutable power of the exec­u­tive, which is a skulk­ing per­ver­sion of King James (though not the Bible):“A good King will frame all his actions to be accord­ing to the law, yet he is not bound thereto but of his own good will.“
    Among other things, the absence of evi­dence of good will tended to mil­i­tate against the “piss­ing on most people’s shoes” pol­icy objec­tives of the pre­vi­ous White House occupants.

  60. MichaelG said on July 21st, 2009 at 11:26 pm

    Thanks, Dex­ter. VS comes on with cov­er­age of the Tour here at zero dark thirty in the AM, at some time dur­ing the day and then again at 5:00 PM. I’ve been watch­ing the five o’clock ver­sion with Roll and Hum­mer dur­ing the week. Roll is great. Hum­mer has a way to go. On week­ends I have been get­ting up early to watch Liggett and Sher­win who are the best of them all. Great per­for­mance today by Arm­strong sand­bag­ging the shit out of the field. Con­ta­dor has to be think­ing. Lance is the mas­ter of the psych.

    Caliban’s com­ments were right on the mark.

    As a timely item, I touched the health care world today at Kaiser. Sat­ur­day I bumped a chef’s knife off the counter and it fell on my foot. This AM I finally called Kaiser at about 6:00. They gave me an appoint­ment for 10:00. Not with my reg­u­lar doc but with a Dr. Patel. I didn’t care. I just wanted to see a doc. I sort of had vague expec­ta­tions about a Dr. Patel. I was a lit­tle off. I was called at about 10:05. Dr. Patel turned out to be an extremely attrac­tive young lady, a con­fi­dent kid of about thirty. Clearly born, raised and edu­cated in this coun­try. She was very pro­fes­sional but with an easy, relaxed, per­son­able and con­fi­dence inspir­ing man­ner way beyond what one would expect from one of her age. Her lec­ture about my not com­ing in on Sat­ur­day for stitches was light and well done with­out patron­iz­ing or hec­tor­ing me.

    “Sun­day, Mon­day, Tues­day” she said pop­ping fin­gers at me one by one with a smile on her face “That’s three days. You know you should have come in.” She knew I knew and didn’t rub it in. She did the foot and then the whole thing became a ses­sion about my blood pres­sure which has jumped all of a sud­den. She even had a sense of humor and was very gen­tle in her blood pres­sure spiel. I was extremely favor­able impressed. Did I men­tion she was a babe?

    Then I went over to the phar­macy across the court­yard where my new blood pres­sure pills were already wait­ing for me. No wait­ing. I had a con­sul­ta­tion with the phar­ma­cist. She was a very young Viet­namese woman whose name I for­get, also clearly born, raised and edu­cated in this coun­try. She was happy to take a good ten min­utes with me to dis­cuss the med­ica­tion, side effects, alter­na­tives, results, etc. She answered all my ques­tions and pro­vided infor­ma­tion in a pro­fes­sional but per­son­able fash­ion, again with no hint of con­de­scen­sion. Alto­gether it was an excel­lent encounter with the health care estab­lish­ment. I have noth­ing but the high­est praise for the way I was treated today. The whole thing left me twenty co-pay bucks out of pocket. Things can work for those of us lucky enough to have good cov­er­age. There’s no mys­tery here. Just a good system.

  61. Catherine said on July 22nd, 2009 at 12:16 am

  62. Dexter said on July 22nd, 2009 at 1:50 am

    MichaelG: I admit that when lance announced in Sep­tem­ber that he was going to France in July, I thought it was a bad idea…that he had no chance , and then the bro­ken col­lar­bone threat­ened his TDF come­back.
    Two days ago he con­ceded that he would now be work­ing for Alberto Con­ta­dor, that Albert was clearly the Team Astana leader.
    And then yesterday…Paul, Phil, and me the TV watcher all thought it was over for sure for Arm­strong as he dropped way back, even trail­ing Andy Schleck. Then, it was as if Lance was shot from a can­non, blow­ing Andy Schleck off the road and rejoin­ing Chase 1 .
    Then came the state­ment that he could no longer accel­er­ate , he couldn’t win this year, that it was essen­tially over.
    Now, no one in cycling believes that Lance’s age (37 and a half yrs.) will be what pre­vents him from win­ning this year. The pro­claimed jovial atmos­phere that Team Astana now can enjoy was just a smoke­screen. Sand­bag­ging is indeed the same word I was using yes­ter­day as I dis­cussed my view­point with friends.
    Today and tomor­row are key: If some­how Alberto cracks just a lit­tle, Lance can over­take him. Things shouldn’t change today on this upcom­ing up-and-down stage, but by Thursday’s end, we’ll know who will win on the Champs-Elysee on Sunday.

  63. Jenflex said on July 22nd, 2009 at 9:12 am

    Cather­ine,
    I loved that NYT arti­cle as well…it’s the only piece of thought­ful polit­i­cal dis­cus­sion I’ve been able to have with my aging-and-increasingly-curmudgeonly father.

    His take? If you could extend your soon-to-end life 6 months by raid­ing your kid’s $54K col­lege fund for the drug, would you do it?

    To me, we have GOT to fig­ure out a way to get over this notion that some­where there is an end­lessly deep pocket. (Mark, DON’T go off on gov­ern­ment spend­ing here, ‘kay?)

  64. MichaelG said on July 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 am

    Lance is noth­ing if not enter­tain­ing. He does great inter­views too. Saturday’s climb is, they say, sup­posed to be a big deal as well. I’m cer­tainly enjoy­ing the show.

  65. Jim S said on July 22nd, 2009 at 10:08 am

    Note also that Mitch writes that Frank “clam­ored up on stage.” It’s “clambered.”

  66. brian stouder said on July 22nd, 2009 at 10:40 am

    Mitch writes that Frank “clam­ored up on stage.” It’s “clambered.”

    Unless ol’ Frank had an epilep­tic fit, or was oth­er­wise in a rau­cous mood up there, on the stage

  67. beb said on July 22nd, 2009 at 10:45 am

    The thing about the arrest of Prof Gates is that the call to the police came from “a neigh­bor.” What does it say about that neigh­bor that he didn’t know that the owner of that house was a black guy, or had some idea of what he looked like? What kind of neigh­bor is that?

  68. moe99 said on July 22nd, 2009 at 11:03 am

    Beb, the caller was a woman:

    The woman, Lucia Whalen, is the cir­cu­la­tion and fundrais­ing man­ager at Har­vard Mag­a­zine, a news and alumni mag­a­zine affil­i­ated with the school. The magazine’s offices are down the street from Gates’ home. By the time police arrived, Gates was already inside.

    http://​www​.msnbc​.msn​.com/​i​d​/​3​2​0​1​0​9​8​5​/​n​s​/​u​s​_​n​e​w​s​-​r​a​c​e​_​a​n​d​_​e​t​h​nicity

  69. brian stouder said on July 22nd, 2009 at 11:13 am

    I have no prob­lem with the neigh­bor. Regard­less whether you know what your neigh­bor looks like, some­one mak­ing a forced entry into a home could be domes­tic vio­lence, or what­ever else.

    But once the cops show up, it seems to me, the bur­den of being extra care­ful should be upon the police. Mak­ing an arrest of an (under­stand­ably) agi­tated home-owner, from his or her own home, for being “tumul­tuous” strikes me as wrong from the get-go.

    Whether the racial com­po­nent of this is THE dri­ver might be arguable, but it can­not (and cer­tainly will not) be dismissed.