■ Some Proverbs are insightful and wise, but Proverbs
19:26 is just belaboring the obvious:
26 Whoever robs their father and drives out their mother
is a child who brings shame and disgrace.
Yeah, the kid should not have done that. Next?
■ @kevinNR reads a
WaPo article and hits the ceiling about The
Myth of the Idle Rich:
The Republican tax plan may be kind of dumb, but if it were
three times as dumb as it is, it would only be half as dumb as
the Washington Post’s analysis of it.
Catherine Rampell, the scrappy young self-described Princeton
who handles the class-war beat for the Post’s opinion
pages, offers up a truly batty take on the Republican tax plan:
that it too strongly favors “passive” income in the interests of
those who spend their days — here comes the avalanche of
banality — “yachting and
charity-balling . . . popping bottles of
champagne and hunting endangered wildlife.” All of the usual
clichés make an appearance: “passive owners of capital” vs.
“workers,” “those who work and those who don’t,” etc. The
New York Times isn’t the only newspaper getting carried
away with celebrating the centenary of the Bolshevik Revolution,
Ms Rampell's article is
should you want to expose yourself to the dumbness.
■ Our Google LFOD alarm bell rang for a Concord Monitor
opinion piece by "editor emeritus" Mike Pride: The
ongoing perversion of the Second Amendment. Ooh, perversion!
But it's really bad, an argument that has all the logical coherence
of a pachinko machine.
Pride starts by telling the story of Howard B. Unruh, who
strolled the streets of his Camden, N. J. neighborhood with a
Luger, killing 13 and wounding 3. This was in 1949.
Reporters of the day looked into the details of Unruh's life to try
to find his motivation.
And Pride notes that reporters find themselves doing the same thing today, nearly
70 years later. In fact, everything's the same! Including:
And one other certainty in the pattern: “Now is not the time to discuss gun control.”
And one more certainty: others taking advantage of cheap
emotionalism, fear, and virtue-signalling to "discuss" gun control
anyway. Pride doesn't mention that, in spite of the fact that he's
doing exactly that.
But Pride finally, kind of, gets around to his point:
If the subject comes up, those who resist the idea of banning
private ownership of military-style assault weapons are ever-ready
with the bromides. Guns don’t kill people, etc. I’m sure that if any
of them are reading this piece, they’re thinking: Aha, in your
opening paragraphs Mr. Unruh packed only a Luger when he went on his
shooting spree. Or hey, the New York mass murderer a few days ago
drove a rented truck. What are we s’posed to do – ban trucks?
So Pride advocates "banning
private ownership of military-style assault weapons". He doesn't
argue for that, however. Instead he takes on the opponents of
this idea, with their conveniently-imagined responses.
(The "s'posed" is a nice touch: Pride imagines people who might
object to a ban as being unable to pronounce words properly. Easy to
dismiss those slack-jawed yokels.)
He does, however, brush up against a real argument. The targets of
his proposed prohibition, "military-style assault weapons", despite
recent headlines, are used in a vanishingly small percentage of
And there's another point that Pride ignores, and may not be aware
There's nothing important that distinguishes "military-style assault
other semi-automatic weapons other than cosmetic features that seem
scary to some: pistol grips, detachable magazines, flash supressors,
etc. (The clue here is "military-style"; we're talking style
Anyway, back to Pride:
But there is only one point to my writing this: It is time – way
past time – for this country to stand up against the perversion of
the Second Amendment by the Supreme Court and Congress and the
moneyed power of the National Rifle Association.
Pride, of course, finds "perversion" in thinking the Second
Amendment means what it says. He doesn't bother in making a legal
argument. He doesn't have to, because to disagree is simple
"perversion". So there.
But the LFOD? Ah, there it is, at the end:
Military veterans and responsible gun owners know this better than
anyone. In the Live Free or Die state, they should be first to stand
up for what is right. If they did, perhaps Democrats would regain
their backbone on this life-and-death issue and sensible
Republicans, a sadly shrinking lot, would also see the light.
No, the LFOD invocation makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in this paragraph.
■ We're coming up on the 60th anniversary of The Music Man, and
Mark Steyn's song of the week is: "Till
There Was You". I liked this:
Meanwhile, four thousand miles away from River City, in Liverpool, a
young lad called Paul McCartney was just getting into rock'n'roll.
But his cousin, Bett Robbins, was into Peggy Lee and, on her
occasional babysitting nights with Paul and his brother, it was Bett
who controlled the Dansette. Paul ended up developing quite a taste
for Peggy Lee, as did John Lennon, who couldn't stand Sinatra but
thought Peg was a different kettle of fish. In 1961, her single of
"Till There Was You" was a modest hit on the British charts, and
Paul thought it was just another great Peggy Lee record. I sat next
to him once at a British songwriters' get-together and, in an effort
to avoid more problematic conversational topics such as "Mull Of
Kintyre" or "Wonderful Christmas Time", I asked him about "Till
There Was You". He said he'd had no idea until years later that it
was from The Music Man, but he liked the simplicity of the
song and of Peg's arrangement. And so, when the Beatles auditioned
for Decca Records a few months later, "Till There Was You" was one
of the numbers they offered. They didn't get a contract, but they
kept the song in the act at the Star Club in Hamburg.
My face hurts after watching some movies, simply because
I'm smiling all the way through them.
The Music Man is one of those movies. (Another is Singin'
in the Rain.)
Although, as an Iowa native, I'm partial to "Iowa Stubborn":
So, what the heck, you're welcome,
Glad to have you with us.
Even though we may not ever mention it again.
■ And our tweet du jour:
The teacher has nice handwriting, but
doesn't have a lot of room
for complaint here.