Censorship, Stupidity, Viruses and Immune Systems...

"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas," The One Un-American Act." Nieman Reports, vol. 7, no. 1 (Jan. 1953): p. 20.

There has been an annoying spat of censorship events at various schools recently. The most recent was twitted about by He With His Finger On The Pulse Of All Things Biblio, M. Lieberman of BookPatrol. The story revolves around a teen poetry anthology (POETRY...being read by TEENS. Holy crap) called Paint Me Like I Am:

Paint Me Like I Am is a collection of poems by teens who have taken part in writing programs run by a national nonprofit organization called WritersCorps. To read the words of these young people is to hear the diverse voices of teenagers everywhere.

Unfortunately, "[t]o read the words of these young people" has apparently offended ONE mother of a teen who complained of the Superintendent of the Vineland, NJ school her son attends. Sup. Charles Ottinger read the offending poem and said "in no way, shape or form" should the book be allowed on school shelves. The principle did an interesting, though also egregious, thing in that rather than complying with the Super's order to pull the book, he TORE OUT THE TWO PAGES that contained the offending poem so the rest of the book could be shelved for student use. [Side note, while I appreciate the Solomonetic approach of splitting the proverbial book...tearing pages out is a rather lame solution. You are *still* censoring the book *AND* you have mutilated the book itself.] The poem, which I have tragically failed to find in full online, is apparently laden with "bad words" and written from the point of view of a drunken abusive step-father...arguably not a "happy, shiny people" piece.

I am tired of the Lowest Common Denominator being allowed to define and direct our schools and libraries (and government, but that is another rant). One person complains about a given book [or books] and FAR too many schools/libraries are willing to just roll over and pull the material. Sometimes it is because the administrator is of an equally small mind but more often than not, I wager, it is because it is just not seen as a fight worth having. I suggest that it is a fight worth having...to fail in this fight is to guarantee the ascendance of mediocrity and the rule of the narrowest mind. 

Children do not need to be protected from challenging material, they need *context*. They do not need to be told they are not able/old enough/mature enough to read certain things, they need the intellectual guidance to *understand* the material as written. To refuse the exposure doesn't "protect" a child, it denies from the child a necessary skillset for adult life...the ability to read, absorb, contemplate and embody challenging ideas...in all their forms. 

A virus analogy is quite apt. It is well established that our over-use of certain antibiotics in children has lead to not only to the evolution of drug-resistant bugs but, far more dangerous, the impairment of kids/young adults immune systems to be able to fight common bugs. Kids *need* to get sick...because it is by exposure/illness that the body builds antibodies to fight future infections. We make kids *more* susceptible to *serious* illness by denying them the ability to get sick now and again and, thereby, allowing them to build up antibodies.

Reading...the exposure to the ideas embodied in books...works on the mind in much the same way. The more you read, the greater your ability to comprehend complex/difficult/challenging material in all forms. Context is the critical variable...obviously there is a burden put upon parents (and teacher, etc) to help kids understand the things they read, *especially* when that material upsets or troubles them. But is is through that process of getting upset and resolving those feelings that a child *learns*. Denying children challenging material is simply to deny them the ability to learn.

Children are not infants. They do not need to be protected from the likes of the Brothers Grimm; the racism of Huckleberry Finn or the violence of Lord of the Flies or the language in Of Mice and Men. They need context. They need to be able to read these things and talk about them...with parents, teachers and peers. They embody the things they read and it makes them stronger...and smarter...and able to process bigger, more complex challenges down the road.

Treating kids like they need to be protected from any thought or idea that might challenge/offend/frighten them serves *no* purpose but to impair their ability to rationally analyze the data that bombards them every day. Dumbing down our books and, worse, dumbing down our libraries does nothing but dumb down our children. They deserve better. They *need* better.

At a time when the world is becoming more complex and arguably more dangerous, there are far too many people doing all they can to impair the next generation's ability to analyze and rationalize. Dogmatically held positions are held sacrosanct and those that dare challenge them with logical analysis are dismissed as "elitist". We need kids to read more...to be exposed to more...to build up the intellectual capacity to combat the myopic worldview that is becoming far too prevalent. 

It's 215am...I am confident I should read the above and edit out 1/2 or so...but I wont. I'm tired. It is all Brian Cassidy's fault, for telling me to blog my rant after I had twitted about it. If you are interested, see the ALA's Censorship in the Schools resources and definitely bookmark Blogging Censorship. In the end, I'm with Oscar Wilde:

There is no such thing as a moral book or an immoral book. Books are well written or badly written. That is all.

Inaugural D.C. Spring Antiques Show shares the space with...

...another inaugural event. It turns out our event will be right where that first dance took place. In a very nice bit of PR, the promoter of the upcoming DC Spring Antiques Show sent out the following today:

Excitement is in the air as history unfolds at the Washington D.C. Convention Center.

In just six weeks you will be part of history at the Inaugural D.C. Spring Antiques Show at the Washington D.C. Convention Center!

WASHINGTON - JANUARY 20: President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama attend the Neighborhood Inaugural Ball at the Washington Convention Center on January 20, 2009 in Washington, DC. Obama became the first African-American to be elected to the office of President in the history of the United States.
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) *** Local Caption *** Barack Obama;Michelle Obama)

That the POTUS is a geek pleases me to no end...

There is a bookish hook here somewhere. Our President will get to keep his crackberry, after a fashion. It appears he will be switching hardware, most likely to General Dynamic's Sectera Edge, a hybrid PDA that has been approved by the NSA for "Top Secret" voice communication and "Secret" email and web sites. 

It is a little bit clunky looking, but is pretty much the geekiest crypto-toy on the market. Security does not come cheaply, as this phone runs just shy of $3500...and apparently the car-jack adds at least another $100 [Note to self: stop whining about cost of iPhone toys.]. 

I, for one, am pleased the POTUS gets to keep his connectivity...while complying with the Presidential Records Act and keeping the folks at NSA, etc. happy. I can not imagine being unplugged and isolated...and am pleased to have a President who was apparently similarly twitchy about it... I wonder if it will take e-books...

8 Minutes on Prop. 8 (with a soft biblo hook)

Lawrence Lessig is one of my minor heroes. He is a brilliant and creative lawyer (not nearly as common a combination as it should be). He founded Stanford's Center for Internet and Society, is a driving force for both the Software Freedom Law Center and the Creative Commons and is a past board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. He has also written several outstanding books (see particularly Code and Future of Ideas) and blogs. His brain-time and musings are most often aimed at technology in its many facets...but he has been annoyed, of late, by what he has seen in the oppostion to Prop 8 in California. His annoyance resulted in an extremely well honed analysis...as he is wont..8 Minutes on 8. Enjoy.

You Can Vote However You LIke...

This has been getting a bit of play in the last 24 hours or so...and it is well deserved. Kids are from the Ron Clark Academy...lyrics (quoted below) are a parody of TI's "Whatever You Like". It is outstanding. Not at all bookish at all...but too good not to applaud.

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah

(McCain supporters)
McCain's the best candidate
With Palin as his running mate
They'll fight for gun rights, pro life,
The conservative right
Our future is bright
Better economy in site
And all the world will feel our military might

(Obama supporters)
But McCain and Bush are real close right
They vote alike and keep it tight
Obama's new, he's younger too
The Middle Class he will help you
He'll bring a change, he's got the brains
McCain and Bush are just the same
You are to blame, Iraq's a shame
Four more years would be insane

Lower your Taxes - you know Obama Won't
PROTECT THE LOWER CLASS - You know McCain won't!
Have enough experience - you know that they don't
STOP GLOBAL WARMING - you know that you won't

I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA
Stick with McCain and you're going to have some drama
We need it
HE'LL BRING IT
He'll be it
YOU'LL SEE IT
We'll do it
GET TO IT
Let's move it
DO IT!

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like
You can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

I'm talking big pipe lines, and low gas prices
Below $2.00 that would be nice

But to do it right we gotta start today
Finding renewable ways that are here to stay

I want Obama
FORGET OBAMA,
Stick wit McCain you gone have some drama
MORE WAR IN IRAQ
Iran he will attack
CAN'T BRING OUR TROOPS BACK
We gotta vote Barack!

Obama on the left
McCain on the right
We can talk politics all night
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

Democratic left
Republican right
November 4th we decide
And you can vote however you like, I said
You can vote however you like, yeah

If you are not completely appalled...

you are not paying attention. One of my more favorite quotations and an apt slogan on a political T-Shirt. It is captured, as such, in Judy Seigel's "[Read My T-Shirt] for President... a true history of the political front - and back."

Meeting and chatting...at length...with Judy was one of the better bits of the NY fair I attended last weekend. A photographer, writer and the founding editor of the "leading alternative photography journal", I do not think I am understating it when I say she is a force of nature.. We ended up talking a bit of politics and she told me about the book she had written on the t-shirt politics of the Bush years. I told her I would have to track a copy down as such things amuse me. She said not to worry about it. I just received not one but two copies in the post...signed even. I haven't had time to read it, but have flipped through for some favorites and all are there save one. I predict I will have good fun looking at these with the boys in a few years.
[there should be an image of the cover, but blogger seem disinclined to import images at the moment...I'll try to update later.]

Since when did being well-read and intellectually sophisticated become an anathema?

I watched the debate last night and was more or less pleased with all parties. Gwen was her usually sharp and focused self. Biden kept himself reigned in and exuded the deep knowledge and competence he is known for (and avoided any significant gaffes, that he is also known for). Palin spoke in more or less diagram-able sentences and certainly nailed her talking points, to her credit (and ignoring the much lower bar that was apparently set for her...). It was interesting and I do not feel like I *completely* wasted 2 hours of my life. That said, it further irritated an increasingly sensitive issue for me...

I am *really* tired of "faux-folksy" and the snide condescension being directed at the well-read and...you know..."smart folk". I know the practice(s) has waxed and waned for a long time, but in recent years, it has been rolled out as a major mantra for a small segment of society...to the profound detriment of the whole. The most recent wave was triggered by the "ya'll just don't understand" anti-intellectualism of our Yale College and Harvard Business School educated president. He has spoken with pride of his "C" average at Yale (a genuine feat, as mediocrity must be strived for at the Ivies), of his self-professed dis-inclination to read and has spoken, repeatedly, with contempt for those "ivory tower intellectuals" (cf. Yale, HBS above). He seems to take pleasure in his inability to pronounce certain words and/or speak in complete sentences.

Last night's debate demonstrated that the next generation of national figures are embracing this trend...at least those who don't bring much, you know, education, sophistication, depth and/or knowledge to the table. I really do not think it unreasonable to have national political figures speak in complete sentences and avoid bogus terms of art. I do not want a national figure saying "Doggone it," "You guys," and/or "Darn right". I do not want "you" to be "ya,"... dropping the "g" from any "...ing" word is just sloppy and is it REALLY too much to ask to expect such folk to be able to correctly pronounce "nuclear"? [N.B. I also have an issue with Eye-ran and Eye-raq...but this might be more that it *really* annoys me when my name is pronounced Eye-an. Iraq, Iran, Ian. It is really not that tricky).

If I hear one more person say, "I like her, she sounds just like the girls down at the lunch counter" [this and a close second version heard on various programs this morning], I'm going to start twitching uncontrollably. I also heard more than one iteration of "she's common folk". I do not want "common folk" as the VP (or, god forbid, President). I do not want someone who "talks like the girls at the lunch counter". These are NOT selling points. I find it profoundly disturbing that some people seem to think it is a good thing.

I *want* a Pres/VP to be *smarter* than I am. I want them to have a *more* sophisticated world view than I do. I want them to be able to control their tendencies toward snarky condescension, because they are "better" than that (and me ). I know they are human and I am comfortable with slips...to err is human and all. I am not expecting "perfect" humans, but I do not think it is unreasonable to expect articulate, intelligent and intellectually questing humans. I simply do not understand why people would want national leaders who are anything less.

Thomas Jefferson [and H.L. Mencken] is credited with saying “The government you elect is government you deserve.” It is seldom mentioned by all these "strict constructionist" that voting in this country was restricted (by the oft mentioned Founding Fathers) to young country's equivalent of landed gentry...only educated, land-owning men need apply (though exceptions were routinely made for land-owning widows...). It made a good deal of sense then...and perhaps now. The idea was to vest the vote in those who could make calculated, ration decisions and had a vested interest in "success". I am being facetious, of course...more or less.

And I will not even start on the issue/idea of a national figure who actively investigated removing books from a public library because s/he did not agree with their content. It does not matter as to the success or failure of such an effort...that anyone would consider such a thing should *preclude* office-holding (and library use) for life.

We are suffering, I think, from the "dilemma of the lowest-common-denominator". We seem to have moved away from national figures trying to educate "the masses", of trying to "raise up" their knowledge base. Rather, they "speak the language of the people"...and increasingly such speech is directed toward the *slowest* person in the proverbial room. I know I am an elitist. I know I think reading more, listening more, thinking more and striving to comprehend more is *better* than apathy, ignorance and/or the conscious embracing of mediocrity. It is undoubtedly a flaw. Again, I would just much prefer to have politicians *smarter* than I (and most others) am... [N.B. though, clearly, not smart enough to realize what a thankless, masochistic job national politics is...]. This is not a liberal or conservative issue, there are people from all sides pandering to the lowest-common-denominator...to their, and the country's, great diservice.

Then again, doggone it...ya know, I'm probably wrong. The world is changin' and I should just stop worryin' my pretty little head 'bout it. I think I'll just disconnect myself. [N.B. Slightly updated to clean up some ugly grammar/typo issues...I should probably proofread as I spew...]

The Conservative Case for Obama (with a lit. connection)

Wick Allison served on the board of Buckley's National Review and was its Publisher for a time. He is an old-school conservative, publisher and author of a handful of books (only one of which I own, Condemned to Repeat). As Editor in Chief of D Magazine, he has just written the most eloquent and concise conservative case for Obama I have seen. As a pragmatist who tries to loath everyone equally, he has summarized most of my feelings far better than I could have done. I have quoted it in its entirety below. It is a must read:

A Conservative for Obama
My party has slipped its moorings. It’s time for a true pragmatist to lead the country.
By Wick Allison, Editor in Chief

THE MORE I LISTEN TO AND READ ABOUT “the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate,” the more I like him. Barack Obama strikes a chord with me like no political figure since Ronald Reagan. To explain why, I need to explain why I am a conservative and what it means to me.

In 1964, at the age of 16, I organized the Dallas County Youth for Goldwater. My senior thesis at the University of Texas was on the conservative intellectual revival in America. Twenty years later, I was invited by William F. Buckley Jr. to join the board of National Review. I later became its publisher.

Conservatism to me is less a political philosophy than a stance, a recognition of the fallibility of man and of man’s institutions. Conservatives respect the past not for its antiquity but because it represents, as G.K. Chesterton said, the democracy of the dead; it gives the benefit of the doubt to customs and laws tried and tested in the crucible of time. Conservatives are skeptical of abstract theories and utopian schemes, doubtful that government is wiser than its citizens, and always ready to test any political program against actual results.

Liberalism always seemed to me to be a system of “oughts.” We ought to do this or that because it’s the right thing to do, regardless of whether it works or not. It is a doctrine based on intentions, not results, on feeling good rather than doing good.

But today it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don’t work. The Bush tax cuts—a solution for which there was no real problem and which he refused to end even when the nation went to war—led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Facing this, John McCain pumps his “conservative” credentials by proposing even bigger tax cuts. Meanwhile, a movement that once fought for limited government has presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy using conservatism as a mask.

Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world “safe for democracy.” It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,” a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.

This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.

Barack Obama is not my ideal candidate for president. (In fact, I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses.) But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.

Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.

“Every great cause,” Eric Hoffer wrote, “begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” As a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.

"Profligacy", to save you the look-up is, "Recklessly wasteful; wildly extravagant [particularly regarding spending]. I don't often have to look up new words...my wife will be *too* pleased with this one...

On torture and waxing...and C. Hitchens' stunt writing...

Shortly after reading Morford's tight description of "stunt writing" ["smart-but-sheltered writer goes on peculiar adventure, often outside his/her comfort zone, then writes about it"] I happened upon a very funny (to read) article on RADAR. The article basically compares Christopher Hitchens' rather horrific article on Waterboarding with his rather horrific article on getting his crotch waxed. I wish I was making this up. From the article:

• "Arms already lost to me, I wasn't able to flail as I was pushed onto a sloping board and positioned with my head lower than my heart. (That's the main point: the angle can be slight or steep.) Then my legs were lashed together so that the board and I were one single and trussed unit."—Hitchens on being waterboarded

• "You have to spread your knees as far apart as they will go, while keeping your feet together. In this "wide stance" position, which is disconcertingly like waiting to have your Pampers changed, you are painted with hot wax, to which strips are successively attached and then torn away."—Hitchens on getting a Brazilian

• "Brave men and women were introduced to the sorts of barbarism that they might expect to meet at the hands of a lawless foe who disregarded the Geneva Conventions."—On being waterboarded

• "The combined effect was like being tortured for information that you do not possess, with intervals for a (incidentally very costly) sandpaper handjob."—On getting a Brazilian

• "The inhalation brought the damp cloths tight against my nostrils, as if a huge, wet paw had been suddenly and annihilatingly clamped over my face."—On being waterboarded

• "The thing is that, in order to rip, you have to grip. A point of leverage is required: a place that can be firmly gripped and pulled while the skin is tautened."On getting a Brazilian

• "The team who agreed to give me a hard time in the woods of North Carolina belong to a highly honorable group. This group regards itself as out on the front line in defense of a society that is too spoiled and too ungrateful to appreciate those solid, underpaid volunteers who guard us while we sleep."On being waterboarded

• "The businesslike Senhora Padilha daubed away, took a purchase on the only available handhold, and then wrenched and wrenched again."—On getting a Brazilian

• "I am somewhat proud of my ability to 'keep my head,' as the saying goes, and to maintain presence of mind under trying circumstances. I was completely convinced that, when the water pressure had become intolerable, I had firmly uttered the pre-determined code word that would cause it to cease. But my interrogator told me that, rather to his surprise, I had not spoken a word."—On being waterboarded

• "I swear that several times she soothingly said that I was being a brave little boy ... Meanwhile, everything in the general area was fighting to retract itself inside my body."—On getting a Brazilian

• "If waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture."—On being waterboarded

• "I had no idea it would be so excruciating."—On getting a Brazilian

I wonder if he cried out, "OH GOD, PLEASE MAKE IT STOP" during either...probably not, I guess...

Original articles can be found here:
On the Limits of Self-Improvement (Vanity Fair, 2007)
Believe Me, It's Torture (Vanity Fair, 2008)

American Library Association on Intellectual Freedom and Censorship...

First, two quotations from the site (and a bonus):

“If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.” ( John Stuart Mill, On Liberty)

“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition: for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. ” (Thomas Paine, Dissertation On First Principles Of Government)

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin, circa February 17, 1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly)

The ALA has a very good, concise Q&A on Intellectual Freedom and Censorship. Given one of the canditate's overt actions in this area, I strongly recommend it for all...

Ducking flying pigs...

So my mother, the librarian, discovered DailyKos some time ago. First she read it for fun, then she started to post occasionally. Now she is emerging as a force of nature. I am quoting her most recent post here because I like it and because she is my mom. I am so proud:

CHEERS to last week’s Democratic convention, which I remember as joyous, celebratory, and informative. Yes, of course there was plenty of criticism of the other side, but nothing like what I heard last night.....

JEERS to the Republican convention last night, which was mean-spirited and vicious. Special JEERS to Guiliano, who was at his toxic worst.

JEERS to the fresh-faced little "mom" from Alaska, who combined high school commencement delivery with divisive, sarcastic nastiness. We can take the gloves off now. She obviously wants to play tough and her paltry record is fair game.

CHEERS to community organizers, who do, in fact, have "actual responsibilities." CHEERS to the poor, who receive their help. JEERS to the Republicans, who show their usual contempt for the common man.

We’ve seen their new little attack dog now. She’ll be repeating this line of cheap shots and sarcasm all over the country for the next two months. She has to – it’s all they’ve got. They’re wrong on the issues.

JEERS to Palin for her jibe at reading prisoners their rights, and to the crowd that roared to their feet when she did. So much for the Geneva Conventions, I guess.

More JEERS to Palin for her abstinence-only stance, and for using her line-item veto to eliminate help for unwed mothers in Alaska. Did I say that yesterday? Good.

CHEERS to Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who said afterwards that she’s heard local politicians deliver speeches well before; that doesn’t mean it’s their turn to run the country.

JEERS to the PC police, who object to Harry Reid calling Palin ‘shrill.’ It’s a perfectly good adjective, people. When you deliver a tirade, you might be called "shrill." Deal with it. (BTW, Rudi was also shrill.)

So, about sexism. First, McCain selects a woman – out of nowhere – as his VP. Arguably a very sexist act. Then last night we see buttons saying "Hottest VP from the coolest state." Just don’t talk to us about sexism, you dorks.

JEERS to Palin’s sarcastic reference to the "Washington elite." News flash to you, Gov. Palin, senators are part of that elite (think McCain). And don’t worry, you’re not going to become part of that "Washington elite." No chance.

JEERS to all bogus, folksy language. I’m sick and tired of hearing about "folks" and "moms." Time to hurl.

CHEERS to John McCain because he needs it. Good luck with the speech tonight, John. You’re only being compared to the most gifted, inspiring politician to emerge in decades. Think about the 85,000 people in Denver and the rest of everybody in the country who listened to Obama on TV last week, and take a deep, quavering breath. Blink a few times. Smile.

OK, I realize I’m being mean-spirited too. Oh well. Tough.

CHEERS to the Rep. convention being over tomorrow night, so we can get on with the business of Obama/Biden thrashing McCain/Palin. Yes. We. Can.

CHEERS to Yes we can – as opposed to Drill, baby drill.

CHEERS to BiPM for being consistently funny, telling, and interesting, and for enabling our rants, and to CSM and everybody else iM and to all of YOU.

CHEERS to the Pooties of the Earth!

*Librarians for Obama* / "You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." Ray Bradbury

by stonepier on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 04:41:49 AM PDT

Admittedly, my mother talking about "pooties" makes me twitch...but otherwise, she rocks.

Then and Now...sarcasm and facetiousness for fun...

As we all know, the spin docs are very dizzy at moment...no one has more fun that catching what comes out of both sides of their mouths more the J. Stewart:

On a slightly related note, I never thought I was a single issue voter. However, I have just discovered that if you try to ban books from public libraries I will not vote for you. Ever. No matter what...

Offered without comment:

Per the NYTimes:

Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.

Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin’s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. “They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,” Ms. Kilkenny said.

The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to “resist all efforts at censorship,” Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.

In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were “rhetorical.”

All right...I guess I lied. I wanted to post this without comment, but I can not. The idea that any politician would go into a public library and seek to have removed any books...for any reason...is beyond contempt. There are many reasons I think she is/was a poor choice as running-mate...this issue states to me that she is not fit to hold any office (including that of the PTA).

On other fronts, I am back in Portland, unpacking and will post a wrap-up of Baltimore shortly...

Pretty much the best political cartoon I've seen in a bit...

Paris Hilton enters the Presidential race...

Wow. Genuinely funny. As most of you probably know, McCain & Co. chose to paint Obamarama as a faux celebrity by painting him as another Paris Hilton (ignoring, of course, her father and grandfather's rather extensive support of the RNC). Paris has responded. I am not a fan, but must say my opinion has gone up a lot... Not bookish...but too good to miss.

Interesting look at the politics of bookdealers...

HuffPost is offering an interesting tool to look at campaign donations to various parties/candidates. Fundrace2008 taps into the public records database of campaign giving...and they have just created the ability to track donations by profession.

If you search (as above) "bookseller", you find that 234 people (with some duplication of names) have donated approximately $185,000. Is it surprising that $175,000 went to Obamarama and Co. and only $10,000 to the Republicans (and much/most of that to Ron Paul)?

It does not aggregate related "occupations", so you get different lists if you search "rare book dealer" or "bookdealer" or "book dealer" or "book seller", etc. Enjoy.

Thanks to Tom Congalton of Between the Covers Rare Books for the heads-up on this.

Yet another reason to loath politicians...

So, as many of you know, Congress recently changed its tune and passed a bill granting immunity to telecoms that turn over customer data to the federal agents without warrants. In March of this year, Congress (in a far too rare show of spine/respect for the Constitution) 220 Dems voted against telecom amnesty as embodied in the Whitehouse's spy bill. This week, 94 of them voted to approve the functionally identical bill.

Maplight.org done a bit of digging and discovered that between March of this year and June, those who switched their votes received on average 40% more in contributions from telecom interests than those who did not switch their positions. See also, here, here and ranting geeks here. Personally, I think the Fourth Amendment is a fair bit more important than the Second (which did quite well this past week)...but what do I know...

Science, theology and stupidity running amok in LA...

Apparently, everything is Louisiana is going so well that the Senate and House can waste time, money and...you know...their children's intellectual future on yet another "let's teach creationism as if it were a scientific theory" bill. The republican governor (interestingly, a Hindu turned Catholic), is expected to sign the bill into law. The ACLU and an untold number of other rational organizations will then attempt to save LA from its own stupidity.

I know I have ranted about ID before (see, e.g., here, here or here) and will do my best to avoid doing so again. But. Errr. Ahhh. SERIOUSLY! What the hell is going through these people's collective heads? This is a state whose students score 44th and 46th nationally in Reading and Math, 50th in Advance Placement exams, and is second highest in the nation for the number of children living below the poverty line. Yet rather than spend time/money/effort trying to dig its schools...and students...out of the mire, they spend their time trying to further muddying their already murky educational waters. Twits.

England, rather recently, issued new guidelines to teachers on creationism and ID. They included a wonderful passage on what makes and does not make a "scientific theory":

The use of the word 'theory' can mislead those not familiar with science as a subject discipline because it is different from the everyday meaning of being little more than a 'hunch'. In science the meaning is much less tentative and indicates that there is a substantial amount of supporting evidence, underpinned by principles and explanations accepted by the international scientific community...Creationism and intelligent design are sometimes claimed to be scientific theories. This is not the case as they have no underpinning scientific principles, or explanations, and are not accepted by the science community as a whole.

There is something about the very carefully premediated effort to repackage/promote theology as a scientific construct that I just find wildly offensive...to both theology *and* science. I am have too much to do to rail about this today...and it annoys me too much. Please see the "About FSM" et seq. for an enjoyable analysis of the logic flaws and do not miss the Open Letter to the Kansas School Board. Admittedly, I am fond of sarcasm...it is so much more pleasant than screaming and whacking people with boards...

Also, though published some time ago in the renowned scholarly source, The Onion, please also see "Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory".

Does Obama cares more about the US economy than McCain?

Non-book, but interesting: Politico is running an article on the two campaigns' financial condition...and Obama's commanding lead pretty much across the board. The article notes the following figures:

Obama spent $75 million on television advertising, and McCain spent $11 million...

The Big O clearly cares more about the US economy, pouring a stunning sum into the coffers of various US business, which in turn trickles all the way down to the countless cups of Starbucks coffee that drives all media companies at this point. The two teams will undoubtedly blow through $500MM...*not* counting what the DNC/RNC and various interest groups will throw on the fire.

Think how many books could have been purchased...

On a slightly related note, for those who like a strong injection of tech with their politics, there are some interesting blathering over at /. Personally, I have a hard time getting beyond McCain's opposition to net-neutrality and support for warrant-less surveillance. - Enjoy.

Michelle Obama: Funny and Truthy

For the record, I do not recall any of my law school professors being this...er...lovely. From last night's Colbert Report:

[N.B. Nothing bookish here...but I wager she will write one in the not too distant future...it is, thus, proto-bookish.]

Revenge of unintended consequences...

Mix technology (in this case, stock footage and the web) with politics and what do you get? Further proof the Ed Tenner was right with his rather brilliant book, Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences. Great read...very funny video.

Addendum rant: Sex, violence and forfeiting civil liberties...

Ok, I'm still annoyed and have found solace in the intellectual arms (and humor) of Henry Rollins. I offer for your enjoyment two of the gems from the past: his Letter to the FCC (sex bad, violence good) [N.B. there are some bad words used in these clips...if such offends you, go elsewhere]


This one is Henry feeling a bit annoyed about the assault on civil liberties that has been a major theme of the White House for the past several years.



I don't know about you...but I feel better after listening to Henry. Remember, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin)

Annoyed by stupidity today.... [Warning: Rant]

We have Congress about to cave on yet another fear-mongering attack on privacy and on the Constitution (and a simultaneous broadening/gutting of FISA), Bernanke is poised to cut rates yet again in an attempt to stave off a recession and the House has approved contempt citations against Bush minions amid teeth gnashing...but what is getting the most focus by the press: Jane Fonda said the word "Cunt" on the Today show.

Fonda, 70, is part of the the 10th Anniversary performance of "The Vagina Monologues." She is reading a monologue *titled* "Cunt" and said the name of the piece on air. That the piece revolves around de-mystification of its subject matter and female empowerment and getting *beyond* pejorative linguistic associations appears to have been COMPLETELY LOST on Meredith and the Today Show folks. They issued a public "apology" for the "remark" and people have been blathering about it ever since.

Mind you, according to that fount of knowledge Wikipedia

the Vagina Monologues has been translated into 45 different languages and performed in over 119 countries. Celebrities who have starred in the play include: Jane Fonda, Whoopi Goldberg, Idina Menzel, Glenn Close, Susan Sarandon and Oprah Winfrey. Ensler [the author] was awarded the Obie Award in 1996 for ‘Best New Play’ and in 1999 was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship Award in Playwriting. She has also received the Berrilla-Kerr Award for Playwriting, the Elliot Norton Award for Outstanding Solo Performance, and the Jury Award for Theater at the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival.

What the hell is going on in this country when no one apologizes for the ongoing rape of our Constitution over the last 7 years or so but public apologies are required for stating the title of a monologue. No one seems to be apologizing for fiscal mis-management that my great-grandchildren will still be dealing with...but people are prostrating themselves to make amends for the "damage" done by a word. Truly, this country is doomed if we can't do any better than this in vetting the wheat from the chaff as to what actually MATTERS in this country.

[Mind you, it is an offensive word and one that I generally avoid. However, it is the nature of its burden and weighted meaning that *gives* it such power in this context....the irony of the apology is sadly rich...]

ADDENDUM: Apparently, this catastrophic embarrassment to the core of the American ideal has also fallen to the wayside... While it is clear that "dirty words" trump government sponsored torture, recessions, undermining the 4th Amendment and nearly all other minor issues....*nothing* beats a mass shooting at a college. The US media pigs will be feeding at NIU's trough for days. I guess I should be thankful that international news streams are so easy to follow these days (CNN's front page is focused on the shooting with supporting tales of a 10 year old who shot his sister over chips and Valentine's Day "moolah"....BBC's lead story is "

Bush defends US record on Darfur" and Hezbollah's current threat to Israel, etc....you know, news). It is really bloody sad that the best source for news *about* this country come from *outside* this country....except of course for the violent or prurient, that we do better than anyone. I'm going to bed, maybe it will be better tomorrow....or at least I'll be less annoyed.

Happy Birthday Charles Darwin

Today is Darwin's 199th birthday. Only 365 days to plan for his big one next year.

I wonder if Mike "I don't believe in evolution" Huckabee is celebrating...

Morning, heading out and Obamerama...

Good morning campers. I feel human again. It is quite shocking. I slept well and long. The water pressure here is such that it can be adjusted to "painful" (something that I wish I could do at home). Breakfast was, as promised, a treat. Great coffee, fresh pastries (the little wild blueberry and mandarin orange danishes were amazing), wild mushroom quiche, sausage and a sort of french toast strata just scratches the surface. It was very good.

We were joined at breakfast by one of Suzanne's classmates from HBS. VC, investment banking, smelt breeding research and the book trade makes for fun and strange conversation.

I checked email before heading off to do some booking hunting and found a message from a friend who is doing some work with/for the Obama campaign. I clicked the link included in his missive and was brought to the page clipped above. It is a very good sign, I think, when support for your campaign is such that it manages to overwhelm your rather robust ecomm servers. Doubly interesting that basically at the same time Hillary is having to loan her campaign $5MM, Obamerama's campaign has raised over $7MM. It is going to be a fun few more weeks...

No bookish connection, just a great speech...

After nearly eight years of a leader who can not speak in complete sentences (or pronounce simple words), I am sorely tempted to support Obomerama simply because listening to him speak does not set my teeth on edge. This was a great speech. If you have not listened to it, here is what a politician *should* be able to do...speak well, clearly and on point.

Chaos at W#@$ette leads to a new blog and...

our first foray into web advertising. I have enjoyed and followed Wonkette (sorry, no link, still annoyed) from the early days when it was, you know, still Ana Marie Cox's baby. She basically sold it/moved on and it became part of Gawker Media's clot of blogs.

'ette was notable for its *very* snarky and "insider" DC/politico news. Funny, on point and on pulse with a serious love of the loathsome nature of DC and its resident political sleazebags and their minions. You know, the way news should be...

Anyway, they blew through a fair number of writers post-Ana (all male...at 'ette...urgh). Then the frequent poster, Anonymous Lobbyist, came "out" and revealed herself as Megan Carpentier and let us know that she had quite the lobbying gig and would be full time at 'ette. I had dropped back to check it about once every two days or so until Megan began writing...'ette was back. Sharp, funny, profane and just "back". Hell, Megan literally waterboarded a co-worker for our pleasure and amusement...and then destroyed the tape (luckily, there was a secret camera).

I was back to checking it at least twice a day and clicking through on many/most of the posts (i.e. generating money for the site). Then Ken Layne "came back" to 'ette and, in short order, fired the only 'ette at 'ette (it was not a gender thing, apparently, but a style thing....Megan wanted 'ette to be 'ette and Ken apparently wants it to be back in the "snooze" period). There was much gnashing of teeth (notably here) and much outpouring of support for Megan.

About two days ago or so, Megan, Greg Wasserstrom (also recently axed at 'ette) and Hunter Walker (of Gridskipper) founded a new snarky political blog, Cynics' Party ("Exposing hypocrisy, Espousing Profanity since January 24, 2008."). They are off to a great start from a content standpoint...but the off the blocks GoogleAds monetizing resulted in a horrifying amount of Ann Coulter (care, don't say it out loud or an angle looses its wings) and Newt Gingrich newsletter appeals (clearly a deep and disturbing flaw in AdWords).

Late yesterday they redesigned in a way the pushed AdWords "down" the page and added their own support ads. In support of their new venture (and in response to their *very* competitive pricing), I decided to run a wee banner ad on the site. It is our first online buy. How knows, with a bit of luck, it will drawn a new client or two...hope springs...er...eternal. Best of luck to Megan, Greg and Hunter.

Politics in America...

Ok, I admit, it is early Monday morning and my defenses are down...but I would have less contempt for the political process (such as it is) if all national election material was executed with this amount of creativity, humor and...er...silliness.

I know I've been silent of late. Things have been crazy busy (new collection and 67 lots from a recent auction to be catalogued and writing projects that I could not duck). I'll catch up soon...thank you for the snarky messages.