We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
This beauty was parked next to us in the Lincoln Center parking lot tonight. We went in with friends to see the Nederlands Dance Co. on one of their very rare visits to the US, at the David A. Koch Theater. All 3 performances were sold out, unsurprisingly, but we got lucky.
On the drive home, Mrs. BD delivered a fine exposition, on our demand, of what the intentions were of their new choreographer team (splaining that it was less about rhythm and more like talking in movement). Their 20-person troupe is remarkably skilled. Then the topic of Sophie Guillam somehow came up, so after that she waxed eloquent about Sophie Guillam's performance in Sleeping Beauty with the Royal Ballet, which she had taken a BD daughter to see in NYC a few years ago. Our daughter had said to her Mom in the lobby - "Mom - Look! There's a real Princess." Her Mom said "No, sweetie, somebody just dressed up for the opening," and then turned and looked and saw it was Princess Margaret dressed in princess clothes to the nines, jewels, tiara, and a long green gown with a couple of attendants and guards.
Daughter had just thrown a sun dress over her wet bathing suit, rushing from swim team practice, never having combed her wet hair. She certainly felt underdressed. It seems that was an immortal performance because Guillam could do things with Sleeping Beauty that nobody else alive could do. Guillam later switched to modern dance because she became bored with her mastery of Ballet technique and wanted new expressive challenges.
We had a nice seafood supper first at the Atlantic Grill down the street from Lincoln Center.
NYC is always a blast for us, a jolt of vitality, a change of pace.
It's been many years since we have bought either fresh or dried Thyme at the store. It's the easiest herb to grow in full sun and dry, lousy soil, and it comes back after hard freezes and cold winters. An advantage is that the leaves stay on the plant all winter, so you can just go out and scratch the snow off and harvest the sprigs you need. (I just throw the sprigs in with the leaves on, so my cooking often ends up with denuded Thyme sprigs in it.) Cooking with Thyme.
Another advantage is simply the smell it creates in a garden on a hot summer day. 4 or 5 small plants in the Spring will spread all over, only needing a little watering the first year to get started.
Thyme is the ultimate "savoury" flavor, but it's mild enough to make it difficult to over-use. I think it's basic to most stews and soups, Italian or otherwise. My chef friend uses it in muffins and biscuits, and on vegetables. She uses chopped Thyme blossoms on fruit cocktail. It has to be part of any bouquet garni.
Thyme comes in many varieties, some man-made and some wild. Most is Thymus vulgaris - common Thyme, with variants thereof. I assume it has Mediterranean origins. In the Massachusetts Berkshires, we have acres of Creeping Thyme as weeds in the less-fertile meadows, and my Mom always planted it between flagstones. Smells good in the summer when stepping on it, but watch out for the bees.
As a lady with refined sensibilities, Mom was always attentive to the small, charming details of life. There were always small vases of wildflowers around.
It's been far too long since I studied, or used statistics other than to read medical journal articles. Everybody talks about Bayesian Statistics nowadays. They are the new old thing, almost 100 years older than Fisher Statistics (Fisher was an interesting fellow).
In my youth, I learned to be always skeptical about any research results, but I am told that running data through Bayesian methods is a good test of data.
Can somebody explain the concept to me in simple English? I don't intend to use it, just to get the ideas (I can do the math, but I want something conceptual for starters.) Most Liberal Arts students learned basic Stats in college, the p and the t-test, etc., but the Bayesian is new to me.
I think a more interesting question is why so many of the successful people in business are Obama people. Over half of the very wealthy people I know are ardent Democrats, and are people who understand how the real world works. Of course, I do inhabit New England where blue is the cultural color of choice.
And this snippet from Andrew Sullivan, via Jacobson:
The Britain I grew up in was insane. The government owned almost all major manufacturing, from coal to steel to automobiles. Owned. It employed almost every doctor and owned almost every hospital. Almost every university and elementary and high school was government-run. And in the 1970s, you could not help but realize as a young Brit, that you were living in a decaying museum – some horrifying mixture of Eastern European grimness surrounded by the sculptured bric-a-brac of statues and buildings and edifices that spoke of an empire on which the sun had once never set. Now, in contrast, we lived on the dark side of the moon and it was made up of damp, slowly degrading concrete….
Perhaps in future years, her legacy might be better seen as a last, sane defense of the nation-state as the least worst political unit in human civilization. Her deep suspicion of the European project was rooted in memories of the Blitz, but it was also prescient and wise...
I always thought the legal part was the least of it, but we all know well what can happen when government sticks its nose into things. This is pretty good:
If homosexuals and heterosexuals are really “equal” before the law, then logically heterosexual marriage must collapse into being little more than a legal construct as well. Indeed, marriage and family become mere adjuncts of the state after the removal of the de facto conditions that make the traditional family a pre-political institution in the first place. No longer is family something that, in the words of Douglas Farrow, “precedes and exceeds the state.” No longer is the family a hedge against the totalitarian aspirations of the state because no longer is the family prior to the state.
No surprise here. Poodles originated in Germany as duck retrievers for marshes, with the haircut designed to reduce ice build-up. In recent years, some breeders have been selecting them again for hunt instinct instead of show-dog features.
I always say about training poodles (as someone who has trained Labs and Standard Poodles) that the difficulty with Poodles is that they are smarter than people. Labs just want to please you, but Poodles are always looking to negotiate a compromise.
To stay healthy, breeders and vets say Standards need a one-hour off-leash run daily. So does the owner. Another interesting thing about Poodles: they are not into food. They just eat what they need and leave the rest. Nobody has ever seen a fat Poodle. Many humans could take a tip from that, too.
Government is broke, investors and businessmen are wary of the government (I don't believe this stock market, inflated by free $ and foreign $), the labor market is out of kilter, the EU is blowing up, etc. etc. The US is beginning to resemble France. Looks like a mess to me.
I'm happy to report that I am doing fine. I'm taking a date to the Blue Water Grill tonight. I made some fortunate but risky decisions. Now all I need is a good wife.
Reading Buzz Bissinger's confession, My Gucci Addiction, I would have to seriously consider the Bipolar possibility were I his doctor:
In the past few years, I've bought eighty-one leather jackets. Dozens of boots and leather gloves. I've purchased pants that cost $5,000. I own a $22,000 coat. This winter I took a tour of Milan's Fashion Week (all expenses paid by Gucci, in appreciation of my many, many purchases), where I spent tens of thousands more and began to seriously grapple, once and for all, with a compulsion that could cost me more than just my life savings. My name is Buzz Bissinger. I am 58 years old, the best-selling author of 'Friday Night Lights,' father of three, husband. And I am a shopaholic.
Not everybody who does crazy things has a diagnosis, but unless Mr. Bissinger has inherited $100 million, somebody ought to try to stop him before he blows himself up. It does not sound like his wife is likely to do that.
Our friend AVI put up a comment here yesterday to the effect that Leftist forces are far more interested in undermining Western culture than they give a damn about the pawns they use.
What goes on these days at an elite, expensive, private liberal arts college? It's been studied, and parents might not be too pleased by the looniness there.
Students are encouraged to "think critically" about anything that threatens the college's dogmas on diversity, multiculturalism, gender, and sustainability, etc., but, for the most part, not to think critically about those dogmas themselves. That is the problem: such contradictions go unnoticed. And they go unnoticed because at Bowdoin, and places like it, there are precious few people who can point them out.
It all reminds me of a conversation I had with a nice lady last weekend. She was talking about the oppression of Muslim women. I offered the notion that she was not being very multiculturally-tolerant in wanting to impose her Western views on Muslim culture. I asked her whether we should not respect cultural differences.
Somewhat apropos: Islam’s Latest Fatwa Permitting Rape of Non-Muslim Women. Why does Islam seem so preoccupied with the interests in rape, pedophilia, homosexuality, bestiality, religious imperialism, and killing Jews? Surely there must be other, more productive and positive things in life to focus on.
Perhaps the Bowdoin faculty could enlighten me on these points because the only aspects of it which seem to be approved on college campi are the homosexuality and the killing of Israelis.
I can't say I am too thrilled with what the Dem-ruled Connecticut legislature is about to do with firearms. I like to try my best to be law-abiding, but I do not know how many firearms we have around the place any more than I know how many hammers we have. Some are antiques, workable probably and oiled, but not fired for 30 years. Some are probably in closets and drawers we have never opened and in dark corners of the attics which we have never explored.
This place has been inhabited by firearm owners, country men, since 1823. As far as I know, not one of them every shot anybody, even if they deserved it.
My late father-in-law's farm, on which we now blissfully reside in commuting distance to Hartford, always had handguns (old .45 revolvers) in the drawer in the tack room of the barn (in case a horse needed shooting - broken leg, terminal colic, etc) and a .410 leaning on the barn wall for pigeons, Copperheads, and rattlers. He liked pigeon stew, and plenty of them lived in the barn before we tightened it up. (I liked the squab better.)
When he lived here, there was no crime at all. He was a big shot insurance fellow, and a gentleman farmer just as I aspire to be. Math genius actuary-turned executive, but farm-raised. Family tradition. Family farm, now. Third generation here, if we can keep it with the taxes which insist on taxing us as if we were a 60-acre housing development (they term that "taxable at best use". What is "best use"?). Otherwise, some developer will fill it with McMansions on 1/4-acre lots with no woodchucks, no horses, no goat, no meadows, no snakes, no barn pigeons, no barns, no barn cats, and no firearms. Safe and sterile.
Like most states with some creepy urban zones, most firearm crime is done by career crims and sociopathic and drug gangs, but I do not see our wise legislature attending to that at all. There are no dainty female suburban votes in that.
If I were a horny college student today, I think I'd feel more comfortable chasing the townie girls. But that runs up against this advice: Princeton mom: Women have a 'shelf life'. Why that article got so much attention is beyond me, because every gal knows it even if they decide to wait a while.
He called Keller a prophet. (He refers to anyone who speaks difficult, deep Truths as "speaking prophetically.") On the subject of even good things becoming false idols, he used these Keller quotes which I took from an Amazon review:
"The human heart takes good things like a successful career, love, material possessions, even family, and turns them into ultimate things. Our hearts deify them as the center of our lives, because, we think, they can give us significance and security, safety and fulfillment, if we attain them." Thus anything can be an idol and, really, everything has been an idol to one person or another. The great deception of idols is we are prone to think that idols are only bad things. But evil is far more subtle than this. "We think that idols are bad things, but that is almost never the case. The greater the good, the more likely we are to expect that it can satisfy our deepest needs and hopes. Anything can serve as a counterfeit god, especially the very best things in life."
If you happen to be in NYC on a Sunday, you could do worse than to visit his Redeemer Presbyterian Church. (It's a church, ie not a fancy building but a congregation of God-seekers and worshippers.) They have five worship locations in Manhattan.
Pastor Keller usually preaches at their 6 pm service at the Hunter College auditorium.
I am halfway through Helprin's* latest novel, In Sunlight and in Shadow. I've read most of his novels.
It's a love story in New York, but also has been described as a love song to New York. I think he also approached it as a chance to put all of his thoughts about what life is about into the words of his protagonist. Thus sometimes he lapses into "telling" instead of "depicting." His protagonist is Harry Copeland, a Jewish NYC leather goods manufacturer just returned from WW 2 who falls in love with an enormously wealthy and social WASP heiress.
Unlike his (I think) masterpiece, Soldier of the Great War, the new book could have used some vigorous editing but, like all of his stuff, worth the read because he is a very smart and observant fellow who just can't resist throwing all of his thoughts in there.
Helprin has an impressive and interesting bio. He had many adventures in life before settling down to write stories (and political commentary on the side). That's the best way to do it.
I like the detail that he does most of the manual labor on his farm in Virginia.
(* Note: Not to be confused with Mark Halperin, the Time Magazine politico)
I saw a nice lady for consultation a few years ago. She was distraught, wanted help in rebuilding her life and her emotional strength. Her husband, age 54, had, after an evening of good sex with her, informed her that he had realized that he was gay, and needed to leave her to pursue a gay life style because he did not want to deceive her or betray her.
They cried together and held eachother. She cried for two weeks. After that, she began having panic attacks. He moved out, and the legal aspects of the divorce proceedings had been easy and mutually agreeable.
Six months had gone by and she still felt shattered. The reality of her life had been exploded. I told her that grief takes at least a year. Mind you, this was a sophisticated urban woman who had once been in the fashion business and who assured me she could readily identify gay guys at a distance. He had always been a loving, sexy, loyal husband with no hyper-macho ways, and no stereotypical gay interests or mannerisms. Good father, too. He worked in finance.
In the six months apart, she told me that he had seemed to transform himself from an ordinary fellow into a flamboyantly gay man who drinks too much, dyes his hair, spends weekends in Provincetown and weeknights in gay bars. He told her it took him 40 years "to find his inner fag." He says he'll love her forever, support her and the kids, but now has found his real self and feels happier than he ever had.
I thought to myself "That was a real gay marriage." I also wondered whether he was Bipolar, but it didn't matter because it was over and her challenge was to write what I term "a new chapter."
I had seen this a number of times before, in mid-life men and in women too. I can't say I understand it. Nobody really does, but I do understand the grief. Agonizing. I also understand the horror of wondering whether much of one's life has been fraudulently-lived in a fake reality.
In my line of work, I encounter plenty of people who live in fake realities of their own construction, but it's not ordinarily about sexual matters. It's usually about other things. I carry the burden of a thousand stories in my soul, but don't feel sorry for me. It's a privilege, and I get paid to carry them.
(nb: real details of this story are totally altered and combined - fake but true)
In March, our White Throated Sparrows and Juncos begin heading north to their breeding grounds, and our Song Sparrows begin arriving from their winter haunts somewhat further south in the US.
If marriage is primarily a legal contract, then why can't two elderly sisters marry? It might very well be to their advantage, and they may love eachother deeply. Or does marriage have to involve sex? If so, who from the government is going to check to make sure that sex is happening? God knows, the world is full of sexless marriages.
And, yes, what about polygamy? Why not? It's not Christian but it is Old Testament Jewish and it is modern (quietly) Mormon - and Islam. How many wives did David have? I read that Solomon had 200 wives and 800 concubines, or maybe the other way around. I do not know when the Israelites gave up polygamy.
The whole topic becomes more and more absurd and confusing as cultural traditions are undermined. Gays can get married while the heterosexual people are now up to 50% childbirth out of wedlock. Crazy world. It's called cultural change.
Then I noticed this: Kagan ’09: ‘There Is No Constitutional Right To Same-Sex Marriage’. That statement signifies to me that she is an unwise person. The Constitution does not set up government to dole out rights to the people, but rather to protect the mostly-unlimited rights of a free people. But I am repeating myself.
Freedom and privacy require no "penumbra." Back to the US Constitution, the American social contract:
This list of rights should not be read to limit in any way any other rights of the people.
The powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Obamacare is not medical insurance in any real sense of the term "insurance." It is set up to pay your medical bills. It is no freebie, however. It's expensive.
I have two annoyed comments, and a few brief questions:
- Would my hernia repair have cost me $18,000 to the hospital if there were no insurance?
- Obamacare will render my medical insurace plan, an old-fashioned family Major Medical, illegal next year. So I can't keep the insurance I like.
- Will it be illegal for businesses, and rich folks, to self-insure under Obamacare? How would that work? And what about people like me, who like to pay their doctors themselves? Will that be permitted? What if I want to take Granny to Switzerland for herbal treatments for her dementia?
The tragedy of the commons requires that fisheries be managed, somehow. The ways to do it can be debated, but there is no doubt that the conservation measures for Striped Bass have resulted in a remarkable resurgence of their populations (along with cleaner breeding waters in their rivers and bays).
In recent years, factory ships have, in just a few years, stripped the Northeast of our vast schools of Bunker (Menhaden) with the use of helicopter spotters. Those schools are foundational to our big fish.
The fishing industry of the Northeast US cleaned out the George's Bank populations years ago, pretty much emptied out the inshore Cod and Haddock populations, and is headed in the same direction with the Grand Banks. Furthermore, their trawls vacuum the sea bottom of every living thing, leaving a desert behind. Like strip-mining.
While I admire professional fishermen very much for their skills and daring, just as with hunting wild animals there have to be sustainable limits or the Cod would go the way of the buffalo and the Passenger Pigeon.
1. Marriage. Everybody is writing about the gay marriage topic. How is marriage defined? Is the Supreme Court being asked to be a dictionary? To revise the dictionary? That's above their pay grade.
2. Is there a "right" to gay marriage? Isn't that the wrong question? The Federal government was never assigned the power to determine such personal things in a country in which the presumption of local and, most importantly, individual liberty is the centerpiece. We do not have, or need, delimited rights. Government has delimited powers (supposedly). I guess the issue had to become a federal case because marriage is not so much about a relationship, but, maybe unfortunately, about a legal status with many legal implications.
Just as in ancient times, traditional marriage is becoming a thing of the prosperous, educated, and tradition-minded. The solid citizens, the pillars of communities; the stable people with predictable lives.
In my humble view, marriage is, or can be, two separate things: a secular property contract, and a religious covenant. Both are quite serious matters. I happen to believe that it is a difficult and challenging, but rewarding, structure for a good life. Seems to be good for kids too, which should not be surprising.
Making relationships that work is not an easy thing, given how neurotic everybody is. It can be worth the trouble, however.
The author of the NYT op-ed piece is Sarah Conly, an assistant professor of philosophy at Bowdoin College, the author of “Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism.”
I suppose my question to Prof. Conly would be to ask her how she might feel if I were in charge of the coercive paternalism. After all, I am sure I have more real life experience, a better understanding of human nature, more university degrees, and probably more expertise in various areas than she does.
The Liberal Fascists tend to assume that the paternalists would always see the world their way. What if the coercive paternalists were to view the world my way? Then what? Would the Sarah Conlys view it as perhaps oppressive?
I do not just object to the disparagement of the sense of "regular" people, or to the indifference to the freedom that is supposed to be the American heritage - I object to the incredible arrogance which verges on the insane.
Sarah, apply your coercive paternalism to your kids. That's where that instinct belongs. However, I would not be surprised if you send them to a Montessori school.
I am halfway through Helprin's* latest novel, In Sunlight and in Shadow. I've read most of his novels. 
In March, our White Throated Sparrows and Juncos begin heading north to their breeding grounds, and our Song Sparrows begin arriving from their winter haunts somewhat further south in the US. 
If marriage is primarily a legal contract, then why can't two elderly sisters marry? It might very well be to their advantage, and they may love eachother deeply. Or does marriage have to involve sex? If so, who from the government is going to check to make sure that sex is happening? God knows, the world is full of sexless marriages.
