Thursday, January 31. 2013
Wodehouse's Bertie and Jeeves novels are surely the most delightful, amusing, innocent, and refreshing fiction ever written in graceful, wry English.
Christopher Buckley reviews Wodehouse's life and writing: Yours Ever, Plum: The Letters and Life of P.G. Wodehouse. For a man who sought little but serenity, the presence of his wife and his dogs, and books, he had an eventful life.
From one of his letters:
“I sometimes feel,” Wodehouse wrote Townend in 1933, “as if I were a case of infantilism. I seem mentally so exactly as I was then [at school]. All my ideas and ideals are the same. I still think the Bedford [cricket] match is the most important thing in the world.”
A few random quotes from the books:
As a rule, you see, I'm not lugged into Family Rows. On the occasions when Aunt is calling Aunt like mastodons bellowing across primeval swamps and Uncle James's letter about Cousin Mabel's peculiar behaviour is being shot round the family circle ('Please read this carefully and send it on Jane') the clan has a tendency to ignore me. It's one of the advantages I get from being a bachelor - and, according to my nearest and dearest, practically a half-witted bachelor at that.
It was my Uncle George who discovered that alcohol was a food well in advance of modern medical thought.
I turned to Aunt Agatha, whose demeanour was now rather like that of one who, picking daisies on the railway, has just caught the down express in the small of the back.
Jeeves lugged my purple socks out of the drawer as if he were a vegetarian fishing a caterpillar out of his salad.
I once got engaged to his daughter Honoria, a ghastly dynamic exhibit who read Nietzsche and had a laugh like waves breaking on a stern and rockbound coast.
Anybody can talk me round. If I were in a Trappist monastery, the first thing that would happen would be that some smooth performer would lure me into some frightful idiocy against my better judgment by means of the deaf-and-dumb language.
In a marathon session yesterday, politicians allowed people from Newtown and various other lobbying organizations to state their views about guns. Several of the more emotionally compelling statements made the press and have been forced on an unsuspecting public, as a means to push harsher gun control laws. One statement in particular struck me as I watched the news this morning. Susie Ehrens, whose daughter survived the attack, made the following plea:
“We stop being the world’s greatest country when we allow our most vulnerable citizens to be slaughtered because we might offend people by taking away their guns. We stop being something to be proud of when we love our guns more than we love our children.”
It is heartfelt sentiment with a strong statement. I have no doubt many people, many parents in particular, were moved closer to supporting gun control as a result. Certainly, it is a statement which hit me hard - do I really love guns more than I love children? So much so that I'm willing to let children die just because I support the freedom to bear arms?
Of course not. After thinking about this statement, I believed a response was needed. Mainly because it is factually inaccurate, at least in terms of how it describes me, and it is logically flawed, in general.
Continue reading "Guns and Emotions"
He begins:
In 1997, at the age of 27, I washed up at my parents’ house, done with school, and out of money. All I had to my name was and three humanities degrees, (B.A. Rhetoric, M.A. Literature, M.F.A Creative Writing) and a dog.
It was a dark time, both figuratively and literally because my parents had downsized since I’d first gone away for college and the only room for me in the new house was the basement. When I snapped the lights off at night, the blackness was total, roughly reflective of both my spirit and my prospects. In bed, I would wave my hand in front of my face, unable to make out even the faintest image. If you want to take that as a metaphor for my employment prospects, so be it.
Wednesday, January 30. 2013
 It's a month or two early to post about bird migration, particularly passerine migration, here in the northern hemisphere, but I did find this excellent review of the most recent science on the topic:
Birds that migrate at night enter a state of sleepless mania and gorge on foods by day, behaviors mediated by their biological clocks
Photo is our common Black and White Warbler, who will be passing through here, on the Atlantic Flyway, in May.
I am confused today by all I have been reading about illegal immigration. Being somewhat Yankee-biased, I tend to feel that the US needs no immigrants from anywhere anymore. Just spend a weekend in NYC and then tell me we need more foreigners around. Half the people you see were born elsewhere, and have no clue what America is all about. They are just using us, trying to get on one gravy train or another. Call me a xenophobe. I don't mind, because I like foreigners - in their own countries and in their own cultures. I do not want my culture changed, or to feel like a stranger in my own country. It's mine, and it is not open to the general global public.
All the Russians too. Sheesh. Unpleasant, loud people without manners and Soviet-style (ie, no) morals. Legal too, I assume, which means they went through the process. They may have to take a test, but there is no civility test. Those lovely Russki girls are silky sociopaths, well-trained in the Soviet system to ignore law and civilization and to follow the money. The turbaned Sikh cab drivers from Whereizitstan are far more pleasant and dignified, but what the heck? We have unemployed college grads who could drive cabs and could probably figure out how to find JFK airport from the Plaza Hotel.
Most nations do not permit any. Just try emigrating to Japan, France, Britain, Sweden, Russia, or Mexico from the US. Can't be done. As we say here, "Don't be lazy, people. Fix your own darn homeland."
I read this one this afternoon: Did The President Make Sense Today For Some Reason?
Tuesday, January 29. 2013
From The Customer Is Always Right?:
"One important implication of our analysis is that for many institutions, demand-side market pressure may not compel investment in academic quality, but rather in consumption amenities," write the authors, three University of Michigan scholars.
Monday, January 28. 2013
I am opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants, partly because it is indeed a crime and we are a nation of law (why begin citizenship as a Federal criminal when there are legal ways to do it?), and partly because I have seen what five-ten year hoops and expenses legal immigrants to the US need to go through, such as physicians from Canada and the UK, and programming geniuses from Singapore. Also, because I believe that vast numbers of immigrants cannot be assimilated. (Case in point: Mexifornia. Case in point: Europistan. Case in point: Dearborn, MI.) And, lastly, people have no idea how impossible it is for an American to emigrate to Mexico. Many American citizens and retirees would like to, if they could. Puerto Vallarta. Cabo. Basically, they have made it illegal to do so. Mexico is hell on immigrants. They want none of them.
This piece by Skerry reviews some of the history that may make Mexican illegals a somewhat different case. From Splitting the Difference on Illegal Immigration:
Toward the end of the 19th century — when the United States first began to impose meaningful restrictions on immigration — we carved out exemptions for our neighbors in the Western Hemisphere, especially Mexico. Mexicans were effectively exempted from the 1885 prohibition on contract labor that marked the first major federal restriction on immigration. When head taxes and other entrance fees were imposed on immigrants in 1907, Mexicans were again given a pass. And when the United States first implemented a literacy test for immigrants (conducted in their native languages) in 1917, Mexicans were specifically exempted from this policy as well.
Most notably, when in the 1920s the U.S. assigned discriminatory, racially motivated quotas that varied among the most common countries of origin, no such limits were imposed on nations in the Western Hemisphere. This substantial carve-out reflected concessions to agricultural employers. But it was also a nod to business interests eager to keep markets open, as well as to the foreign-policy establishment, which worried about offending our neighbors.
It is worth reading. In the end, I suppose, my sentiment is that I would prefer that people who live in crappy countries do what they can to improve them. My blessed and brave ancestors did that here, for me. Half the world would invade the US were they able to do so. If you want to come here, why not try to make your place like ours? We have enough people already, and terrible unemployment with grandiose PhDs working as restaurant waiters. Nothing wrong with educated wait staff, but it's probably not what they envisioned in their Obama Economy.
Bear in mind that I very much enjoy the legal Mexican and Colombian immigrants around here. Great people, family people, ambitious and entrepreneurial, and wonderful restaurants too. They are doing many jobs which unemployed Americans, with their sense of entitlement, spurn. However, it is true that they frequently prefer cash which, as an honest taxpayer, I resent. Not entirely assimilated into American values, know nothing about our history or traditions or even why we are a special place. Willing to work hard, though. It's more about money than political freedom because neither Mexico nor Colombia are totalitarian or oppressive states.
Except for Boston, New England doesn't have the hispanic drug gangs and crims that California has. Most of our crims here are home-grown.
h/t Willisms. Large, interesting chart is below the fold -
Regardless of that info, I'll keep repeating my gun mantra: Government should focus on disarming the bad guys, not the good guys. Begin with Chicago. Disarming the good guys only creates more helpless victims: Milwaukee Sheriff goes national with message to arm yourself.
Police rarely prevent crime. They cannot be everywhere. Their main job is to find crims after the crime. Your own job is to prevent crime against you and your family.
Continue reading "Chart of gun facts for America"
Sunday, January 27. 2013
 Customer Service: A Practical Approach.
We get paid for a thing, a service, or a thing plus a service. Most jobs entail some degree of customer service, whether the customer is a client, a buyer in a shop, or a boss. Yes, a boss is a customer, pays you for your service to him or her. This simple textbook might open your eyes to seemingly-obvious things you have been doing wrong to interfere with good business and good business relationships.
It's a lesson in humility. As I said last time, this course is about things many of us think we're too smart to need to learn.
Recap of prior postings in this course this semester:
Life Basics 101, Book #1. Are you really too hip to read this book?
Saturday, January 26. 2013
 I have gotten deep into The Leopard, and I can report that I think (for what it's worth) that it is a masterpiece of modern literature. No, of literature. I've read a lot of books. I have not seen the movie with Burt Lancaster and Claudia Cardinale, but I don't need to.
It is sensual in imagery, poetically-written. Guiseppe di Lampedusa finished it shortly before he died, but, sadly, could never get it published.
The story is set in Sicily in the 1860s, during the time when Garibaldi's forces were constructing the nation of Italy, including the invasion and annexation of Sicily. It's a vivid portrait of Sicily which, even today, seems Italian in name only.
Lampedusa warned readers to keep track of the Prince's dog, Bendico.
While trying to research the rich Macaroni Pie the prince served as a primi (with chicken liver and hard-boiled eggs etc. in it), I stumbled onto this piece about the book and the food described in it.
What are you cooking today?
I'm doing the cooking today and not doing Mommys of America cheap 'n easy - I am making Julia Child's Boeuf Bourguignon for the kids. I browned the meat, carrots and pearl onions (doubled the amount of onions because I love them) and prepped the lardons last night. Also threw in some porcinis because I hate a meat stew without them, and a couple of dashes of ground clove. I do it the French way - large chunks of meat (2 1/2" or 3" x 3" - they shrink) and large chunks of carrot. It's meant to be about the stewed meat. I used a Chianti Classico because I had a glass last night and an open bottle, but should have used a Cab I think. Why not a Burgundy, as the name says? I don't know. I used a 3-pound chuck roast instead of venison, and cut it into large hunks. I don't know why I used the pearl onions because big old onions work just as well, or better.
Then it all goes into the big new crock pot for 7 or 8 hours, adding the pearl onions near the end. Since we old folks are going out to dinner tonight with friends, I hope the kids appreciate my efforts and will leave us some leftovers. I'll have egg noodles for it. They are the best thing for beef stews.
The only real hassle with Julia's recipe is having to drain the stew and reduce the sauce instead of just ladling it out of the pot. Worth the trouble, though.
But this is a post on lardons. Or was. While catching up on the subject of lardons, I noticed this country-style French bread: Fougasse de Foix. Baked into it is Gruyere cheese, creme fraiche, and lardons. How good does that sound?
Friday, January 25. 2013
In arguments about government intervention and control, it is usual for the Leftists and statists to produce straw men with whom to debate. There is a lot of space between government intrusion and life in the jungle. Lots of space. None of us Libertarian/Conservatives want no elected government, but we do want to be left alone. We have morals and we have brains. I always thought that a function of government was to provide the basic conditions (eg protection from foreign invasions, etc) so that we can go it alone in life. Americans are not raised to be Euroweenies, but we gather plenty of resources to help us get along in life, and give us avenues in which to do good deeds, which have nothing to do with government: friends, family, neighborhoods, churches, organizations, business affiliations, etc. All the things which so impressed de Toqueville about the American spirit.
From The "acting alone" fallacy:
The private sector isn't just a bunch of people "acting alone." As Matt Welch pointed out in his critique of the speech, making and selling an object as basic as a pencil is such a complex endeavor that it takes lots of different specialists. No one person has the knowledge to accomplish that seemingly simple task; that's how decentralized knowledge is in society. And with a truly complex product, like a computer or movie, the need for people to work together is even greater still. The private sector isn't fundamentally about everyone being secluded and isolated from each other; it typically involves many people working together. Government regulation often rules out the options people would otherwise want to pursue that would let them work together more. The idea that you're "alone" unless you're being directed by the government strikes me as dehumanizing and almost abusive. So I resist this scare tactic of presenting the government as the alternative to being "alone."
 We have posted in the (ancient) past about what Greek temples and sculpture looked like when they were built. Vividly-painted.
Smithsonian used chemistry to recreate Aphrodite removing her nightie.
It's a Roman copy of a Greek sculpture, but "what difference does it make"?
No doubt about it. The press has abandoned their function. Ace's We Must Do Something About The Media:
What we are witnessing is the full and seamless fusion of media power with government power.
The media used to hide it a bit, in their actions; they would temper their scorn of conservatism, throw them a bone now and again just to prove they were capable of such a thing.
No longer. The media no longer hides it in their actions. They are fully fused with the Obama Administration and DNC. The only way in which they do hide it is by simply lying when confronted about it: They'll issue a snide denial, then go about doing precisely what it is they were accused of doing.
Thursday, January 24. 2013
Ed Glaeser has a fine essay up, The GOP and the City - Conservative policies have greatly benefited urbanites. Why won’t Republicans seek their votes?
I doubt that even Rudy Giuliani, to whom a generation of New Yorkers owe gratitude, could have won NYC in a national election. As Glaeser notes,
The Republicans’ abandonment of the city is good neither for their party nor for urban America. The GOP clearly needs a heftier percentage of the urban vote, but winning it by means of fiscal pandering or redistribution isn’t the way to go—partly because such a strategy would cost rural and suburban votes and partly because it would be wrong. A better approach is to offer the good ideas that cities desperately need. Republicans have plenty.
Why is that, when Republicans have demonstrated effective answers to urban issues in the cities in which they have had influence while most deep blue cities are either dying or drowning in red ink?
 By 1880, New England had been almost completely deforested. Moose, Wolf, Black Bear, and Wild Turkey were gone or limited to tiny habitat islands. Deer were rare. Then profitable farming moved west to the rich plains of Ohio and Indiana. Good-bye to rocky New England.
With reforestation, Moose and Wild Turkey have rebounded, and Beaver, Bear, and White-Tailed Deer have become pests in some areas. So have the highly-adaptable coyotes, who moved into wolf territory (coyotes were never native to the Northeast) and are now considered pests in New England with generous hunting and trapping seasons for eastern coyotes, coydogs, and coy-wolves if any.
Those critters are all Wolf food, including coyotes. Maybe not the bears.
The new coyotes of the Northeast are larger than those of Western US and Canada, may have a few wolf genes, and a large male is easily mistaken for Wolf or German Shepherd.
There is only one species of Wolf in the world - Canis lupus. The species has - or had - a global reach, with all of its various subspecies (subspecies means races - of which the domesticated Dog is one. The Grey Wolf and the Eastern Wolf are probably the same subspecies, but there is much controversy about wolf subspecies genetics).
All domestic dogs in the world were genetically engineered from the Eurasian Grey Wolf subspecies, including African domestic dogs, beginning around 14,000 years ago. Wolves - dogs - were domesticated before any other animal but your average wild wolf cannot be civilized, even if raised from birth by man. Humans must have found the rare wolf individuals with civilizable genetic flaws as in photo below:
North America's Grey Wolf was an immigrant across the Bering Strait from Siberia and, along with the Cougar, were the dominant predators across the entire US and subarctic Canada.
Dominant predators require large ranges of undeveloped land, preferably without roads and cars. The Cougars will have a tough time repopulating the Northeast, but the Wolves can come down from Quebec. In dribs and drabs, they have been doing so. Probably lone wolves. Visual reports are not reliable, but DNA testing is so the animal has to be shot or trapped to be tested to distinguish the animal from a coydog, a coy-wolf, etc. I don't know why coyotes and wolves can interbreed if they are separate species.
There are no records of confirmed Wolf breeding or pack-forming yet in New England, but these occurences would not be surprising, and would be welcome to many. Wolves remain common enough in Canada to have popular hunting seasons for them. Wolves leave people alone, unlike foolish Cougars who sometimes confuse a jogger with a deer and eat them up.
Here's one report from the Adirondacks
About wolves in Maine
Some reports re wolves in New England
Wednesday, January 23. 2013
The government now is on track to control medical care. What next? Michael Lind has just two items on his wish list: Voting rights for felons, and universal government child care.
However, we know that Leviathan's hunger for money and control is never sated. If you imagine that there is ever "enough," just ask a Leftist where the endpoint should be, the point at which government's task is complete.
There will always be a list, the job will never be done, and, still, utopia will never arrive because dystopia always arrives first.
Related: Gerard found that One Cosmos has reviewed Our Logophobic President, with his sarcasm button turned on. One sample:
"A great nation must protect its people from life's worst hazards and misfortune."
Hmm. Does that include protection from the most devastating hazard and misfortune of them all, the tyrannical and intrusive state?
Because if the 20th century taught us one lesson, it is that there is nothing more destructive than the all-wise and all-powerful state predicated on the fantasy that it will protect its citizens from all of life's unavoidable exigencies. I mean, just protect me from domestic and foreign enemies, okay? And stop violating with the Constitution. Then we'll talk.
What are life's worst hazards, anyway? Probably the same they've always been: war. Famine. Disease. Poverty. So, why don't we cure hunger by imitating the Soviet Union and putting the state in charge of food production and distribution? While we're at it, why doesn't the federal government create millions of pretend jobs and lavish its worthless employees with absurdly generous wages and benefits?
Oh, right. I guess Obama noticed how effectively that model is working here in California
 Prof. of Philosophy and Law (NYU) Thomas Nagel's classic short essay What Is It Like To Be a Bat? (1974) is a fairly deep reflection on mind and consciousness. Take an extra Adderal before studying it. One key quote:
At the present time the status of physicalism is similar to that which the hypothesis that matter is energy would have had if uttered by a pre-Socratic philosopher. We do not have the beginnings of a conception of how it might be true. In order to understand the hypothesis that a mental event is a physical event, we require more than an understanding of the word 'is'. The idea of how a mental and a physical term might refer to the same thing is lacking, and the usual analogies with theoretical identification in other fields fail to supply it. They fail because if we construe the reference of mental terms to physical events on the usual model, we either get a reappearance of separate subjective events as the effects through which mental reference to physical events is secured, or else we get a false account of how mental terms refer (for example, a causal behaviorist one).
He is certainly one of the most provocative and interesting philosophers around today.
Prof. Nagel has a new book out: Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False . One graf from the review by Orr at NYRB:
In Mind and Cosmos, Nagel continues his attacks on reductionism. Though the book is brief its claims are big. Nagel insists that the mind-body problem “is not just a local problem” but “invades our understanding of the entire cosmos and its history.” If what he calls “materialist naturalism” or just “materialism” can’t explain consciousness, then it can’t fully account for life since consciousness is a feature of life. And if it can’t explain life, then it can’t fully account for the chemical and physical universe since life is a feature of that universe. Subjective experience is not, to Nagel, some detail that materialist science can hand-wave away. It’s a deal breaker. Nagel believes that any future science that grapples seriously with the mind-body problem will be one that is radically reconceived.
Epistomology becomes a whirl, or a whirlpool. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." I'll put Nagel's new book on my 2013 reading list, which continously expands. Too many books, too little time.
Tuesday, January 22. 2013
As I have mentioned here before, I don't know how it is possible to run a complex household effectively without two or more adults in it. We know that marriage has seen a marked decline in the lower socioeconomic strata, thus contributing to a vicious circle of poverty, malfunction and dependency. From what I have read, marriage is still going strong in the middle and upper-middle strata. I suspect that is because middle class people desire a coherent, orderly, busy life which is enriching to everybody in the family - and one reason why divorce is so traumatic: it's not just about money, it's about structure.
From Exodus from Marriage:
“The scale of marital breakdown in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent and seems unique,” the distinguished historian Lawrence Stone said a few years ago. “At no time in history, with the possible exception of Imperial Rome, has the institution of marriage been more problematic than it is today.”
Monday, January 21. 2013
It's a very sad story, and it is due, in part but not entirely, to the Obama economy in my opinion because nobody is hiring anybody right now, and neither are we:
The belief that education is both good in and of itself, and also, is practically a guarantee of a good job, was never entirely true. But now it's clearly false in many fields, and insiders who blind themselves to this reality are doing naive kids a great wrong. Increasingly, getting the extra degree may actually decrease peoples' chances of finding jobs, partners, and satisfying lives, because of the debt and time that are poured into them.
What we really need around here are more good plumbers and electricians who do not abuse drugs. We have plenty of skilled, reliable masons, all clean-cut Mexican immigrants. In today's economic mess, it's time for people to get creative and to start their own businesses. Necessity is the mother of invention. Just make sure you don't hire more than 49 employees (same as they do in France). After 49, you get in deep government issues which nobody can comprehend but you just know you will make some error somewhere.
Sunday, January 20. 2013
 This sentimental series could keep going on, but this is enough for now. I hope Moms are still cooking these simple, filling things for their kids, because kids (and Dads) appreciate them and the homey, loving, and pedestrian nature of the food.
Man cannot live on take-out alone. Even if Mom has no talent in the kitchen, hot and home-made (even with the help of Campbell's Cream of Mushroom Soup) means a lot, says a lot.
Here's Moussaka. Very quick and easy to make. I've had it with ground beef, lamb, venison, even African antelope. All plenty good enough.
That's what Maggie's Mom's Home Cookin' is all about - good enough, loving enough, and cheap enough for a hungry, growing family.
(I deliberately left out many good Mom items which take more time to prepare - like Lasagna - or cost more - like ribeye steaks. And a good roast chicken can be got at Costco for $3.99. I left out Stuffed Cabbage and Shrimp and Grits, but I'll add them to the summary post.)
Saturday, January 19. 2013
 It's not an Italian dish (it's an invention of Italian-Americans, poor immigrants from southern Italy who found they could afford meat in America), and it gives adults heartburn, but American kids seem to love it and it's easy to make.
I loved it as a kid, but now I feel it's an unpleasant meal. At least, we have evolved beyond Chef Boyardee. Here's Easiest Spaghetti and Meatballs.
One genuine Italian touch: Crazy Martha says to throw the drained pasta into the meat and sauce in the saucepan. That's the right way to do it. Pasta in the sauce, not the sauce on top of the pasta.
Friday, January 18. 2013
 Black Bean Soup. Good stuff. I like it with a big spoonful of mashed potatoes in the middle of the bowl. Don't be afraid to use instant mashed taters for it: it's cheap and easy, consistent with our theme.
Red Beans and Rice. It doesn't really need the ham hocks as long as you use some bacon. I lived on this when I was in college. I miss it. Need to make some.
Each of these dishes is not harmed by some hot sauce or hot pepper flakes.
We went after the eating fish (Spanish Mackeral), not the big game fish. More practical.
It's like a zoo. With the Humpback Whales all around peering at your boat, the Frigatebirds stealing your bait, and the Sea Lions stealing either your bait or your catch, it was a bit of an obstacle course. But how bad is that?
When you go, make sure to sup at our friend Roberto's shrimp joint, and at Mi Casa for traditional Mexican food and jollity. Good fun. To cook the fish you catch, bring them to Solomon's Landing and ask them to make some wonderful dishes with it for suppertime. They will amaze you.
Wednesday, January 16. 2013
 It's the best use of an inexpensive chuck roast or round. Pot Roast can be terrible dry mystery meat, or it can be OK. Pot Roast never looks very appealing, and should taste better than the pile of grey, well-overcooked meat looks.
Either way, it gets the family well-fed and meated-up. Kids need meat to grow their brains. I like this recipe because it has lots of my favorite root vegetables in it, parsnips, turnips.
Pot Roast is not a roast, it's braised. I call it Braised Beef and it has to be cooked until fork-tender.
Here's a basic one: Beef Pot Roast Recipe
Here's Alton Brown's version which we have made and is uniquely tangy.
A (tomato-free) Italian version: Stracotto
Seems like a good thing for crock pot cooking.
|
