Bill's Notes

My friend Harry makes some interesting comments about the "Tower" post (on his blog and in the comments).

But I'd like to address something else he said. One, that he utterly disagrees with my "Cultural War" post, but that he's concerned that if he comments, I'll edit them or delete them. Then he more broadly takes issue with my editorial policies here on this blog.

*I haven't been commenting there lately because Bill has some policies that I find, well, just plain wrong. He reserves the right to edit his posts at any time for any reason. Well, OK, fine. I have only edited a post substantially for content once. I like to think through my posts before I put them up, and then I think of them as being pretty much set in stone - except for typos, or sometimes grammar.[...]

He also has a policy of deleting comments at any time for any reason. OK, sure, so does everybody else, but usually there is some reason there - I have had comments deleted because they thoroughly undermined points he was trying to make, not for any reason anyone would normally think to delete a comment.

But he has another policy. He reserves the right to edit comments, too. Cut out just pieces of them. I've had that done, too, again, not due to content, but because the point I made was particularly damaging to a point he had made. Combine this with the first policy, and you see that Bill reserves the right to modify both sides of any argument - and that's the part I find wrong. But Bill is an editor by profession. It's what he does. And it's his blog, he can do what he wants.

I have reason for deleting or editing comments, and it's never because a point "undermines" my argument. Actually, I delete or edit comments that are (1) personal attacks, or (2) excessive personal criticism, or (3) not funny attempts to bust my chops.

For example, my ex-girlfriend Jen was a source of ongoing negativity in my life. I'd want to try new things, and she'd usually have a negative statement about my effort. It was annoying. Anyway, one day I bought a chainsaw, and mentioned it on my blog when the thing arrived in the mail. She wrote, in her typical sour way, a comment: "I'll get the artificial limbs ready." Yeah, a little funny. But you know what? It was one of a thousand cuts off-line like that over six years and that takes a toll. It takes psychic effort to try something new, and busting my chops doesn't make new efforts easier. The easiest thing to do is to sit back and make fun of someone willing to try something new. So as one comment, yeah, deleting it is a little unfair. But as a pattern of putting me down when I try something, not so unfair.

To the casual reader, it could look arbitrary. And that's because explaining all this sounds extremely petty. Better to seem arbitrary, right? But since a few people besides Harry have complained, let me explain a little more.

Another example: For quite a while, I had a frequent visitor using this anonymous proxy server. This visitor used a Mac with Operating System 10 (OSX) and started showing up — shockingly — at exactly the same time a certain ex-girlfriend stopped coming here from her home account, the same ex- who had a Mac with OSX.

So I wrote a couple of posts busting her chops. There's a lot more backstory there about her blog and my blog, and basically, she didn't want me to read her blog but wanted to read mine — even while commenting about my blog on her blog that she didn't want me to read. Petty, I know. Real high school shit.

Meanwhile, frequent reader "Jim" (also an old friend) proceeded to decide that I was paranoid and wrote a comment quoting Captain Queeg's "Strawberries" speech. Now, Jim is right that I suffer occasional bouts of paranoia. But in this case, I wasn't being paranoid, so I deleted the comment, and besides, "Jim" didn't realize what an emotional briar patch he'd wandered into. Besides, it's not like I tossed a ship looking for a missing key.

Another example: An unknown, cowardly former coworker at LN used to leave anonymous comments on my blog, and say things that she/he never had the guts to say to my face. She got a few comments deleted.

And finally, Harry: Harry wrote a comment in which he called me tendentious and a practicer of sophistry, and got his comment deleted or edited, I don't remember which. Unfortunately, I had deleted or edited the post before reading what he wrote, so Harry's edited comments ended up seeming a bit out of place in the thread. But he was way too close to a personal attack, so I deleted his post. And the result is one comment thread that seems a little weird. But I think a sophisticated reader will figure it out. Plus, it's a small blog and it's gone into cyberspace now.

Bottom line: Don't want your comment deleted? Don't attack me, or make sure you're funny when you do so. And context matters. You may have wandered into a sore topic and if I explain it at length, I'll end up seeming petty.

Does this make sense?

PS: Harry, if you want to comment on the Culture War post, go ahead. I'm specifically inviting dialogue on that post.

But not me. I'm just the messenger.

The eastern world, it is exploding
Violence flarin’, bullets loadin’
You’re old enough to kill, but not for votin’
You don’t believe in war, but what’s that gun you’re totin’
And even the Jordan River has bodies floatin’

But you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction.

Don’t you understand what I’m tryin’ to say
Can’t you feel the fears I’m feelin’ today?
If the button is pushed, there’s no runnin’ away
There’ll be no one to save, with the world in a grave
[Take a look around ya boy, it's bound to scare ya boy]

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction.

Yeah, my blood’s so mad feels like coagulatin’
I’m sitting here just contemplatin’
I can’t twist the truth, it knows no regulation.
Handful of senators don’t pass legislation
And marches alone can’t bring integration
When human respect is disintegratin’
This whole crazy world is just too frustratin’

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction.

Think of all the hate there is in Red China
Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama
You may leave here for 4 days in space
But when you return, it’s the same old place
The poundin’ of the drums, the pride and disgrace
You can bury your dead, but don’t leave a trace
Hate your next-door neighbor, but don’t forget to say grace
And… tell me over and over and over and over again, my friend
You don’t believe
We’re on the eve
Of destruction
Mm, no no, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction.

Did anyone else notice that yesterday, when the Republicans were in charge, it was raining? And today, with the Democrats in charge, it's a sunny, bright, warm day.

The Democrats made it return to summer. Keep up the good work.

About seven years ago, at an off-site editorial conference, our editorial department was divided up into about five teams of six or seven people each for the "Create a Tower" contest. To refresh your memory, each team has index cards and paper clips and half an hour to build the highest tower. The winning tower was six feet tall. An "observer" watched the teams and reported on what happened.

What happened on my team? We failed to build a tower at all. The observer said something to the effect that "This team was never able to come up with a plan, didn't work together, and ultimately failed to create a tower at all in half an hour. The only person trying to get people to work together and come up with a plan was Bill, but no one was listening to him and finally he just stopped talking and built his own tower." And it was true — I built a tower about three feet tall on my own, about half the six-foot tower that actually won. Perhaps with more time, I actually could've had a shot at winning ...

But anyway, I thought — whew! The observer was spot-on. Not that I'm right and everyone should listen to me. That's not what I'm saying. I mean, I think I'm slightly less accurate than a Magic Eight-Ball or a coin flip. Which is about average for someone with a graduate degree.

No, what I'm saying is the curious habit of other people NOT FRIGGIN' NOTICING THAT I'M THERE and NOT NOTICING I'M TALKING.

Hey, I'm talking here.

Now that we have a House Speaker from San Francisco, I expect nothing less than for the karmic forces that put her in place to usher in the Age of Aquarius.

When the moon is in the Seventh House
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars

This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius
The age of Aquarius.

Harmony and understanding
Sympathy and trust abounding
No more falsehoods or derisions
Golden living dreams of visions
Mystic crystal revelation
And the mind's true liberation
Aquarius!

Let the sunshine, let the sunshine in, the sunshine in
Let the sunshine, let the sunshine in, the sunshine in
Let the sunshine, let the sunshine in, the sunshine in

Oh, let it shine, c'mon
Now everybody just sing along
Let the sun shine in
Open up your heart and let it shine on in
When you are lonely, let it shine on
Got to open up your heart and let it shine on in
And when you feel like you've been mistreated
And your friends turn away
Just open your heart, and shine it on in

Spark it up, bro.

One thing to keep in mind about the elections is that the relevant issue to most people is not that the Dems win or the Repubs win.

What's fueling the political conflict is an underlying culture war. And at heart, this cultural issue comes down to one single area of disagreement, and it permeates almost everything else. That issue is sex.

Judicial activism? First Amendment and censorship? Freedom of religion and theocracy? It's really all about sex.

We Americans are largely agreed on a lot of issues, and our disagreements are usually about whether we should do a little more of something, or a little less of something. Agricultural subsidies? Mebbe a little more, mebbe a little less. National defense contracts? Mebbe a little more, mebbe a little less. Fuel standards? Mebbe more, mebbe less. Or we disagree on tactics ... see the War on Terror, subset, Iraq.

But when it comes to sex, we in the U.S., are deeply divided about this question: Is it anyone's business but your own who you have sex with?

We are so deeply divided on this question that, IMHO, we are simply members of different cultures — might as well be completely different nations. And that's why it makes the conflict so intractable, so difficult and so long-lasting.

Why is the Catholic Church and evangelicals attacked by elites? Ain't for running soup kitchens ... it's because of its teaching on sex deeply offends the elites.

Why was Rick Santorum despised? Because of his opinions on sexual morality. He's called a "woman-hater" and a "homophobe" because he sought to uphold traditional sexual morality.

And the answer to this question is so emotion-laden that, IMHO, it fuels most of the current anger in the political climate.

How you answer that question, I think, determines which cultural camp you're in.

One "culture" answers the question reflexively: "Of course it's none of anyone's business who I have sex with, and that means when, how, with whom, with the usual caveats. I am the arbiter of my own sexual morality, and no one else has any say, as long as I don't break the law. We live in an era of antibiotics and birth control, both of which made most of traditional sexual morality obsolete. I can enjoy sex without consequences and by the way, shut the fuck up. The only limitations are age and consent."

Others respond: "Mebbe you can have sex with no larger consequences, at least for a while, but that sucks as social policy. Excuse the pun, but fuck yeah it matters who you have sex with. Those 'usual' caveats are not little ... they quickly grow into big issues and they determine, largely, how society will come to be organized, for good or ill, and how happy the members of that society will be. And the arguments you use to destroy traditional taboos such as pornography, promiscuity and homosexuality will come back to haunt you when you try to defend against polygamy and sex with children."

And as you can tell, these points of view cannot be easily reconciled. One side is furious with the other -- and it's an anger rooted in fear, fear that the other side will attempt to regulate their sexual behavior. The other side, meanwhile, is concerned about the consequences of unregulated sexual and sex-related (such as abortion and pornography) behavior, particularly as promoted by the media. Hence, the cultural war.

I'm not that concerned with the GOP loss. It's the equivalent of losing the last game of five-game road trip. The pendulum was gonna swing the other way sooner or later, and only the Dems' self-destructiveness prevented it from swinging back sooner. And better they win now than in 2008.

Another good sign: I liked some of the Dems this year. Not just guys like Ed Rendell, but others, like James Webb of Virginia, who was just head-and-shoulders more qualified George Allen.

Webb is a Jacksonian Democrat -- which is what most Americans are, at their core. I certainly am. More guys like Webb and the Dems will be on their way to being responsible adults.

Troubling signs: Too many scions of politicians chosen mostly for their name-brand recognition. Bob Casey, Jr. Tom Kean, Jr. Too much of this shit, for too long. I think the Kennedys started it, or maybe the Adamses. In modern campaigning, branding is important -- and we're seeing families inventing themselves as brands, the biggest being, of course, the Kennedys and the Bushes. Aristocrats suck, no matter what their called.

Via the Corner, Rep. Mike Pence, summarizes the bottom line and what went wrong:

Election day 2006 will be remembered as a turning point in American political history. Twenty-five years after the Reagan Administration came to Washington with a conservative agenda of limited government, the American people chose a different course.

It is the duty of the losing party in a free election to humbly accept defeat and to acknowledge that the people are sovereign in the People's House.

As we examine the results of this election, it is imperative that we listen to the American people and learn the right lessons.

Some will argue that we lost our majority because of scandals at home and challenges abroad. I say, we did not just lose our majority, we lost our way.

While the scandals of the 109th Congress harmed our cause, the greatest scandal in Washington, D.C. is runaway federal spending.

After 1994, we were a majority committed to balanced federal budgets, entitlement reform and advancing the principles of limited government. In recent years, our majority voted to expand the federal government's role in education, entitlements and pursued spending policies that created record deficits and national debt.

This was not in the Contract with America and Republican voters said, "enough is enough." Our opponents will say that the American people rejected our Republican vision. I say the American people didn't quit on the Contract with America, we did. And in so doing, we severed the bonds of trust between our party and millions of our most ardent supporters.

As the 110th Congress convenes next year, Republicans must cordially accept defeat and dedicate ourselves to advancing our cause as the loyal opposition knowing that the only way to retake our natural, governing majority, is to renew our commitment to limited government, national defense, traditional values and reform.

Really.
Mean it.

Here's the full quote, with a few substitutions by me:

Ladies and gentlemen, uh, we've just lost the picture, but what we've seen speaks for itself. The [United States] has apparently been taken over, 'conquered' if you will, by a master race of [Democratic] giant space ants. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the captive Earthmen or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I, for one, welcome our new [Democratic] insect overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.

Don't forget to research the overlord meme.

UPDATE: Great minds this alike. This was via Instapundit.


Might as well steal the image, too:

On winning the election and taking the House and perhaps the Senate.

Before age 40, a man should "get":

20. Baptized. Seriously. It's a sacrament that connects you with the nature of Christ and helps prevent you from growing up a heathen rooting about in the earth for grubs and thinking that a bone through your nose is the height of fashion. If you're Jewish, get Bar-Mitzvahed.

19. Over the idea that "300 before you're 30. Some men accomplish the 300 before 30; they never benefit from it. Well before you get near triple figures, you should have "gotten" clued in that the love of one woman is better than the indiscriminate spreading of your precious body fluids among the heathen.

18. An education. Not necessarily a degree. But you should familiarize yourself with the basics of the thought humans had before you, that you may become a civilized man and not root about in the earth for grubs, brag about 300 before 30, and put a bone through your nose.

17. Good at your job. Note that you first need to get a job. Now, become good at it. Solve one problem at a time until solving these problems become second nature. Ten years of steady work at your profession or trade will eventually make you good at it, and this will give you an enormous sense of accomplishment, even a lifelong one. Failure to master a trade or profession will make you an eternal boy.

16. In the best shape you can. At least once in your lifetime, you should push your body to the limit. You should know just what you're capable of — know in your heart that you can go a long time after you're tired. Whether training for a marathon, biking a "century" (100 miles) or finding out just how much you can bench press, you'll develop a sense of accomplishment if you've at least once gotten in great shape. Try to stay in shape, but don't feel bad if you don't.

On MSNBC this morning is this list of things a woman should get before she's 40. Includes a bunch of stuff that no one can afford, such as a Cadillac Roadster for $78k, and a women's tuxedo for $3,600. Surely there must be a better list of "gets" before 40. I'll propose an alternative list for men in the next post.

Well according to the death clock I have about 29 more years to go. [I could drop seven years off that by taking up smoking again.] It says I'll make it until Aug. 30, 2035. That's only 72. I don't buy it. I put in my father's birthday and he was supposed to have died five years ago. But nope, he's approaching 80 and showing no signs of stopping. So I'm just going to go ahead and start collecting my social security at age 70. I'm gonna need the extra cash that comes with delaying the collection.

If you like mini-golf: Just don't do it at work!

Here. (From The Corner).

Got a 63 out of 48 the first time through, but that was with 18 on the last two holes. Got a 49 out of 48 the last time through; still had trouble on the No. 17 hole. Got a seven.

But overall, not bad for two tries.

Thanks to all the readers all these years. Three plus years of blogging on Powerblogs, and probably four years total of blogging.

To close the loop on the post below, I got stuck in one traffic jam after another yesterday and couldn't get to confession. So I couldn't receive communion. But I went to service, and it was quite wonderful. Got a gift of tears ... and now I feel a lot better.

Don't forget to vote. I'll be voting something along these lines:

Pennsylvania governor: Ed Rendell. I always liked Ed, even though there will be sex scandals in his second term. The GOP candidate, Lynn Swann, is an excellent candidate, but Ed Rendell is a terrific governor and I hope will run for president in 2008. Why not elect governor of a northern state? When's the last time we did that? Oh, FDR. And he worked out pretty well, didn't he?

Pennsylvania senator: Rick Santorum. He's pro-life and is a tireless advocate of the poor, even though he never gets any credit for the latter.

PA congressional and state elections: Probably GOP party line.

*****

The Dems of course have their dander up; in this sixth year of a presidential term, they're looking for the historic big win of the opposition party. It won't be as big as historically, but I think the Dems will pull it off. They've finally ran a shrewd campaign, which was: STFU and let the pendulum swing back. Duh. Only took 'em forever.

IndustrialBlog encourages voting. I will not endorse party-line voting for this election. I look for the following:

1. Pro-life.
2. Economically reasonable, tilting liberal.
3. Fiscal responsibility.
4. Strong national defense and anti-crime policies.
5. Not a card-carrying member of the Culture of Death on social issues.

So get out and vote!

Steve Harrigan gets waterboarded here.

Now will Mark Shea knock it off?