Forgive me, but I'm still beating the poor horse. If certain folks were not so self-righteous and preachy and quick to condemn others, I could leave this stuff alone.
From the Advocate in Baton Rouge:
The former madam of a New Orleans brothel who contends U.S. Sen. David Vitter was a frequent customer in the 1990s said Wednesday she is going public to protect the Louisiana Republican.
Jeannette Maier, 48, pleaded guilty in 2002 to running the Canal Street brothel, where men paid up to $300 a visit. Maier didn’t like the way Vitter was being portrayed after he acknowledged Monday that his phone number appeared in the records of an escort service run by the woman dubbed the “D.C. Madam,” she said.
“Here’s a woman trying to bring this man down as only a number,” Maier said. “Just because people visit a whorehouse doesn’t make them a bad person.
“It’s crazy that this is even an issue,” Maier added.
“Ninety-nine percent of the people I slept with were married. So what?”
Maier, who said she didn’t have sex with Vitter, added, “He’s a good man and we’re looking at the man, not his penis.”
Maier’s attorney in the brothel case, Vinny Mosca, isn’t so sure Vitter was a customer of Maier’s business. He issued a statement Wednesday saying Vitter’s name never came up in the federal investigation into the brothel, a statement backed up by U.S. Attorney Jim Letten.
“David Vitter’s name was never picked up on a government wiretap nor is it listed in any transcript or court document as part of the Canal Street brothel case,” Mosca said Wednesday.
How is Maier helping Vitter with her comments?
Has Maier's attorney asked her to cease speaking publically about Sen. Vitter?
With friends like this....
UPDATE: I can't resist a link to Jon Swift's post, David Vitter: Another Victim of Gay Marriage.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Vitter Continued
I don't want to beat this story to death, but here's a little more on Senator Vitter. It seems that he was also a client of the the Canal Street madam in New Orleans.
From the The Advocate in Baton Rouge:
The New Orleans madam, Jeanette Maier, pleaded guilty to running the Canal Street brothel in 2002. In an interview with WDSU-TV in New Orleans on Tuesday, she said the Louisiana Republican was once a client of her high-priced establishment.
“He seemed to be one of the nicest and most honorable men I ever met,” Maier said.
Maier also told The Associated Press that Vitter’s visits weren’t “all about dirty, raunchy, crazy sex.”
“In fact, he just wanted to have somebody listen to him,” she said.
So. Was it just talking to someone at the brothel, with no sex, or was it talking and good, clean sex instead of dirty sex?
The irony writes itself.
Then, from the Times-Picayune in New Orleans:
Jeanette Maier, the madam known for operating a high-end brothel with her mother and daughter, said Tuesday that Sen. David Vitter made occasional visits to her business beginning in the mid-1990s after the two met at a fishing rodeo where she and her prostitutes were hired to entertain local politicians.
After the initial meeting, Maier said she saw Vitter at the bordello and knew him as someone who patronized her call girls. She denied having a personal relationship with him and said he had stopped visiting the establishment by the time it was raided by federal agents in 2001.
Lucky for him that he stopped going there before the raid.
Maier continued:
Maier, 48, spoke openly about Vitter's patronage of the New Orleans brothel in an interview Tuesday as she sat atop the king-size bed in her Gretna home. The bedroom was decorated in a Southwestern motif, and a rosary hung from the headboard. She puffed on a cigarette as she talked.
She said she decided to name Vitter as a client because she was angry that the Washington allegations made him look like a one-dimensional adulterer, when she sees him as a "good man" who has helped the New Orleans area recover from Hurricane Katrina.
"All I wanted to get across when I saw the paper this morning is this b -- -- -- she calls herself a madam -- she's gonna throw this number out without a face, and without telling people what good he's done," Maier said, adding that the allegations would "just piss off his wife and create all this havoc in his life."
'He is honorable'
She said the women who worked in her brothel considered Vitter a decent man.
There you have it: the women at the brothel vouch for him. What can we say against him? I don't know how many dimensions of an adulterer he was, but we know from Ms. Maier that he was definitely not one-dimensional. Thank goodness for that.
From the The Advocate in Baton Rouge:
The New Orleans madam, Jeanette Maier, pleaded guilty to running the Canal Street brothel in 2002. In an interview with WDSU-TV in New Orleans on Tuesday, she said the Louisiana Republican was once a client of her high-priced establishment.
“He seemed to be one of the nicest and most honorable men I ever met,” Maier said.
Maier also told The Associated Press that Vitter’s visits weren’t “all about dirty, raunchy, crazy sex.”
“In fact, he just wanted to have somebody listen to him,” she said.
So. Was it just talking to someone at the brothel, with no sex, or was it talking and good, clean sex instead of dirty sex?
The irony writes itself.
Then, from the Times-Picayune in New Orleans:
Jeanette Maier, the madam known for operating a high-end brothel with her mother and daughter, said Tuesday that Sen. David Vitter made occasional visits to her business beginning in the mid-1990s after the two met at a fishing rodeo where she and her prostitutes were hired to entertain local politicians.
After the initial meeting, Maier said she saw Vitter at the bordello and knew him as someone who patronized her call girls. She denied having a personal relationship with him and said he had stopped visiting the establishment by the time it was raided by federal agents in 2001.
Lucky for him that he stopped going there before the raid.
Maier continued:
Maier, 48, spoke openly about Vitter's patronage of the New Orleans brothel in an interview Tuesday as she sat atop the king-size bed in her Gretna home. The bedroom was decorated in a Southwestern motif, and a rosary hung from the headboard. She puffed on a cigarette as she talked.
She said she decided to name Vitter as a client because she was angry that the Washington allegations made him look like a one-dimensional adulterer, when she sees him as a "good man" who has helped the New Orleans area recover from Hurricane Katrina.
"All I wanted to get across when I saw the paper this morning is this b -- -- -- she calls herself a madam -- she's gonna throw this number out without a face, and without telling people what good he's done," Maier said, adding that the allegations would "just piss off his wife and create all this havoc in his life."
'He is honorable'
She said the women who worked in her brothel considered Vitter a decent man.
There you have it: the women at the brothel vouch for him. What can we say against him? I don't know how many dimensions of an adulterer he was, but we know from Ms. Maier that he was definitely not one-dimensional. Thank goodness for that.
Feast Day Of St. Benedict Of Nursia
St. Benedict was the founder of Western monasticism.
Forgive me, but this post on the saint is a little tongue-in-cheek. This account appears to include more legend than is usual in biographies of the saints. I chose this version of the life of Benedict because it was short, and because I liked his patronage list. I pictured St. Benedict looking much like Brother Causticus, who seems to have abandoned his blog and us, but apparently I am mistaken, because the Benedictine habit is black, as you see in the stained glass above.
Profile
Roman nobility. Twin brother of Saint Scholastica. Studied in Rome, but was dismayed by the lack of discipline and the lackadaisical attitude of his fellow students. Fled to the mountains near Subiaco, living as a hermit in a cave for three years; reported to have been fed by a raven. His virtues caused an abbey to request him to lead them. Founded the monastery at Monte Cassino, where he wrote the Rule of his order. His discipline was such that an attempt was made on his life; some monks tried by poison him, but he blessed the cup and rendered it harmless. He returned to his cave, but continued to attract followers, and eventually established twelve monasteries. Had the ability to read consciences, prophesy, and forestall attacks of the devil. Destroyed pagan statues and altars, drove demons from groves sacred to pagans.
....
Patronage
against nettle rash; against poison; against witchcraft; agricultural workers; cavers; civil engineers; coppersmiths; dying people; erysipelas; Europe; farm workers; farmers; fever; gall stones; Heerdt, Germany; inflammatory diseases; Italian architects; kidney disease; monks; nettle rash; Norcia, Italy; people in religious orders; poison; schoolchildren; servants who have broken their master's belongings; speliologists; spelunkers; temptations; witchcraft
....
Representation
bell; broken cup; broken cup and serpent representing poison; broken utensil; bush; crosier; man in a Benedictine cowl holding Benedict's rule or a rod of discipline; raven
From the Catholic Forum
We owe St. Benedict and the monks of his order and other orders of monks a great deal, as James Keifer says in the Lectionary:
The effect of the monastic movement, both of the Benedictine order and of similar orders that grew out of it, has been enormous. We owe the preservation of the Holy Scriptures and other ancient writings in large measure to the patience and diligence of monastic scribes.
PRAYER
Almighty and everlasting God, whose precepts are the wisdom of a loving Father: Give us grace, following the teaching and example of your servant Benedict, to walk with loving and willing hearts in the school of the Lord's service; let your ears be open to our prayers; and prosper with your blessing the work of our hands; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.
READINGS
Psalm 1 or 34:1-8
Proverbs 2:1-9
Luke 14:27-33
Padre Mickey has a post on St. Benedict that is excellent and quite serious and full of wonderful stories about the saint.
The Queen
Several days ago, I watched the DVD of "The Queen" with Helen Mirren. I live in the movie boonies, and only the most popular movies play at my local cineplex, so I am often forced into home viewing.
It was wonderful. Helen Mirren did not play Queen Elizabeth; she was Queen Elizabeth. The actors who played Tony Blair and Prince Philip were excellent, the one picking up especially on Blair's perkiness and the other on Philip's dour sarcasm. I don't know much about Cherie Blair's personality, but the actress who took her part was quite good. I thought that two who played Charles and the Queen Mum were not quite so believable.
Mirren is a joy to watch. Whatever the role, she is always first-rate.
I did not know beforehand that the whole film was based on the period immediately preceding and in the aftermath of Diana's death. Scenes from real life were interspersed with movie scenes. I remember the world-wide grief, the sea of flowers in front of Buckingham palace. I remember the dismay of the English people that the royal family remained at Balmoral, that the queen made no statement, and that the flag at Buckingham Palace was not flown at half-mast. Finally, after a raft of nasty headlines in the tabloids and then in the mainstream press, Blair convinced the family to go down to London, and the queen made a statement.
The film included the real-life eulogy given by Diana's brother, Charles, the Earl of Spencer, which included these words:
Diana was the very essence of compassion, of duty, of style, of beauty. All over the world she was a symbol of selfless humanity, a standard-bearer for the rights of the truly downtrodden, a very British girl who -- who transcended nationality, someone with a natural nobility who was classless, and who proved in the last year that she needed no royal title to continue to generate her particular brand of magic.
Diana had been stripped of her HRH title when she and Charles divorced.
The movie was altogether an enjoyable experience.
Irony will out. My favorite dialogue from the movie are these words which may not be an exact quote, but are as close as I could remember. The queen's aide is escorting her to her first meeting with Blair after his election, and he is filling her in a little on Blair's background.
Aide: On the one hand, his background is quite Establishment, father a
Conservative, educated at Fettes, where he was tutored by the same man as
the Prince of Wales.
Queen: Well, we'll try not to hold that against him.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The Sanctity Of Marriage
Since folks in the comments are mentioning the present troubles of Senator David Vitter, of Louisiana, I suppose that I should say a few words. For many of us in Louisiana, this is old news, for rumors have been flying about his infidelity for years. Now everyone knows.
According to the Washington Post on July 9, 2007:
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) apologized last night after his telephone number appeared in the phone records of the woman dubbed the "D.C. Madam," making him the first member of Congress to become ensnared in the high-profile case.
The statement containing Vitter's apology said his telephone number was included on phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates dating from before he ran for the Senate in 2004.
So. He's asked forgiveness of his wife, and she has forgiven him, and presumably he's been a good boy since then. That's OK by me. In a few years, he will face the voters again, and we will have to decide whether he will be our senator.
However, Sen. Vitter was a force behind the bill to ban gay marriage, saying earlier, again from the Washington Post:
"I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one," said Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. "I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."
In the opinion of many of those who oppose gay marriage, it would destroy the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, when, in fact, it is such things as infidelity which destroy the sanctity of marriage.
Note also that the good senator made that statement about the prime importance of the issue of gay marriage while portions of New Orleans remained devastated by Katrina and the flood.
UPDATE: For several livelier and more informative posts on David Vitter, you might want to visit the site of my friend Oyster at Your Right Hand Thief.
According to the Washington Post on July 9, 2007:
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) apologized last night after his telephone number appeared in the phone records of the woman dubbed the "D.C. Madam," making him the first member of Congress to become ensnared in the high-profile case.
The statement containing Vitter's apology said his telephone number was included on phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates dating from before he ran for the Senate in 2004.
So. He's asked forgiveness of his wife, and she has forgiven him, and presumably he's been a good boy since then. That's OK by me. In a few years, he will face the voters again, and we will have to decide whether he will be our senator.
However, Sen. Vitter was a force behind the bill to ban gay marriage, saying earlier, again from the Washington Post:
"I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one," said Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. "I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."
In the opinion of many of those who oppose gay marriage, it would destroy the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, when, in fact, it is such things as infidelity which destroy the sanctity of marriage.
Note also that the good senator made that statement about the prime importance of the issue of gay marriage while portions of New Orleans remained devastated by Katrina and the flood.
UPDATE: For several livelier and more informative posts on David Vitter, you might want to visit the site of my friend Oyster at Your Right Hand Thief.
A Discussion From Of Course I Could Be Wrong
MadPriest said...
A disciplined TEC will gain more support and the schismatics will lose support because Americans will see any such move as an attack on America and will side with those being attacked. Other than the loss of status abroad and a few freebie trips that TEC's higher officials enjoy at present there will be little noticeable change in the American Church.
As I keep saying. The primary concern of TEC should not be itself, which is strong enough to weather this storm, but their weaker brethren abroad whose forseeable future is very bleak as they will have to make the decision of leaving the church they love, without any other home to go to, or living a lie.
The truth is, although I am 100% behind TEC's recent policies, their unilateralist decisions are not a sacrifice for Americans but a sacrifice for their supporters throughout the world who had no say in the decisions. That is why I believe TEC has a primary duty to the spiritual welfare of those fellow travelers outside of the States.
Grandmère Mimi said...
So. WWII redux. The Americans to the rescue. But, you know, we tend to run late.
The covenant thing will take time to play out. What do you see as the plan and the timing for the rescue to be undertaken? TEC missions established in England? Do you see a breakaway movement in England?
TEC in the US is not quite so all right as you see it, IMO. I think things are leaning in the direction of those of us who are inclusive, but there will still be a fight, which will take its toll on TEC.
I put up a rather serious post which asked questions about the English Church that you might have been able to answer, but I don't see a comment at my site from you.
Did your wise words appear elsewhere?
MadPriest said...
Mimi
Too damn right you should come to the rescue and with no feelings of righteousness. America started all this, and with their usual isolationist view of the world, have not thought through the effect their actions will have on progressives elsewhere in the world. Your actions are in serious danger of putting gays and their straight supporters, elsewhere in the world, in an even worse position than they were in before. Therefore, TEC has a responsibility that extends beyond its borders.
Jake said...
I didn't particularly want to hear this. But you got through anyway. And you're right.
This has some far-reaching implications. Now I've got to rethink some stuff. And may even have to eat some of my own words.
Other voices have tried to say this before, now that I think about it, but I couldn't, or wouldn't hear it. Maybe it takes a madman to reach another madman?
See also this post by Fr. Jake.
A disciplined TEC will gain more support and the schismatics will lose support because Americans will see any such move as an attack on America and will side with those being attacked. Other than the loss of status abroad and a few freebie trips that TEC's higher officials enjoy at present there will be little noticeable change in the American Church.
As I keep saying. The primary concern of TEC should not be itself, which is strong enough to weather this storm, but their weaker brethren abroad whose forseeable future is very bleak as they will have to make the decision of leaving the church they love, without any other home to go to, or living a lie.
The truth is, although I am 100% behind TEC's recent policies, their unilateralist decisions are not a sacrifice for Americans but a sacrifice for their supporters throughout the world who had no say in the decisions. That is why I believe TEC has a primary duty to the spiritual welfare of those fellow travelers outside of the States.
Grandmère Mimi said...
So. WWII redux. The Americans to the rescue. But, you know, we tend to run late.
The covenant thing will take time to play out. What do you see as the plan and the timing for the rescue to be undertaken? TEC missions established in England? Do you see a breakaway movement in England?
TEC in the US is not quite so all right as you see it, IMO. I think things are leaning in the direction of those of us who are inclusive, but there will still be a fight, which will take its toll on TEC.
I put up a rather serious post which asked questions about the English Church that you might have been able to answer, but I don't see a comment at my site from you.
Did your wise words appear elsewhere?
MadPriest said...
Mimi
Too damn right you should come to the rescue and with no feelings of righteousness. America started all this, and with their usual isolationist view of the world, have not thought through the effect their actions will have on progressives elsewhere in the world. Your actions are in serious danger of putting gays and their straight supporters, elsewhere in the world, in an even worse position than they were in before. Therefore, TEC has a responsibility that extends beyond its borders.
Jake said...
I didn't particularly want to hear this. But you got through anyway. And you're right.
This has some far-reaching implications. Now I've got to rethink some stuff. And may even have to eat some of my own words.
Other voices have tried to say this before, now that I think about it, but I couldn't, or wouldn't hear it. Maybe it takes a madman to reach another madman?
See also this post by Fr. Jake.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Seclusion At An Odd Time
Does it seem strange to anyone but me that Archbishop Williams of Canterbury was in seclusion at Georgetown during the General Synod of his own Church of England?
If Bishop Katherine chose to remain in seclusion somewhere or other during the House of Bishops meeting, I would think it odd, and I would feel somewhat resentful that she was not performing what I think of as her duty as Presiding Bishop.
However, the ways of the English Church are mysterious to me, and perhaps this is quite a normal practice over there.
In the meantime, while the cat's away, the mice have been playing and are up to no good.
From the Church of England's web site:
At the invitation of the Presidents, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez (chair of the Anglican Covenant Design Group) addressed the Synod.
The Bishop of Chichester moved the motion:
‘That this Synod:
(a) affirm its willingness to engage positively with the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007 for a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion;
(b) note that such a process will only be concluded when any definitive text has been duly considered through the synodical processes of the provinces of the Communion; and
(c) invite the Presidents, having consulted the House of Bishops and the Archbishops’ Council, to agree the terms of a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office by the end of the year.’
This was carried unamended.
So. The covenant business moves a step forward - the covenant that we don't need at all, since Jesus Christ gave us the New Covenant of Love, the Two Great Commandments, which contain the whole law and the prophets, and which seems sufficient to me.
From Stephen Bates at The Guardian:
One member, Kevin Ward, representing the northern universities, said: "Gay Anglicans have reason to be suspicious of a covenant. Its sole aim is to punish and discipline dissent ... its whole raison d'etre is one of threat, hardening and solidifying a divisive neo-Anglican communion on a narrower, less tolerant and less joyful basis."
But Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham and one of the covenant's strongest supporters, told the synod: "Our present framework simply isn't working. We need a framework to enable us to live in the house together. We are not being asked to sign a blank cheque. It is a commitment to a way of working together. It simply will not do to live with differences."
John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, leading the synod in the absence of Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is on study leave, called on the synod not to give lukewarm approval to the covenant and promised: "Rowan and I will not sign a document that betrays our church life in this country."
Certain folks whom I respect are saying that the passing of this motion doesn't really mean too much, because the process to carry it forward to a vote by the provinces will be lengthy, and there will be many amendments added that will water it down considerably. But I don't necessarily believe that to be the case, since, at least among the primates, this thing seems to have legs. And what a colossal waste of time, energy, and money!
Fr. Jake asks the question, "Is the proposed Covnant(sic) concept a Gay Expulsion Plan?" I think so. Here's what I said in the comments at his site:
Jake, I like it [naming it the Gay Expulsion Plan], too. Let's move on from euphemisms. The whole exercise is about gay sex, no matter the attempts to disguise that by using other labels.
It's a power grab by certain primates to form a "Curia" who will declare who's in and who's out of the Anglican Communion.
One caution: if the plan succeeds, it may come to be about more than gay expulsion, in that the "Curia" will begin to search out those who do not line up as doctrinally "pure" enough to suit them and begin to weed them out, too.
In their obsessive search for "purity", I wonder who will be found to be sufficiently "pure".
Thanks to Fr. Jake for the links.
If Bishop Katherine chose to remain in seclusion somewhere or other during the House of Bishops meeting, I would think it odd, and I would feel somewhat resentful that she was not performing what I think of as her duty as Presiding Bishop.
However, the ways of the English Church are mysterious to me, and perhaps this is quite a normal practice over there.
In the meantime, while the cat's away, the mice have been playing and are up to no good.
From the Church of England's web site:
At the invitation of the Presidents, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez (chair of the Anglican Covenant Design Group) addressed the Synod.
The Bishop of Chichester moved the motion:
‘That this Synod:
(a) affirm its willingness to engage positively with the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007 for a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion;
(b) note that such a process will only be concluded when any definitive text has been duly considered through the synodical processes of the provinces of the Communion; and
(c) invite the Presidents, having consulted the House of Bishops and the Archbishops’ Council, to agree the terms of a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office by the end of the year.’
This was carried unamended.
So. The covenant business moves a step forward - the covenant that we don't need at all, since Jesus Christ gave us the New Covenant of Love, the Two Great Commandments, which contain the whole law and the prophets, and which seems sufficient to me.
From Stephen Bates at The Guardian:
One member, Kevin Ward, representing the northern universities, said: "Gay Anglicans have reason to be suspicious of a covenant. Its sole aim is to punish and discipline dissent ... its whole raison d'etre is one of threat, hardening and solidifying a divisive neo-Anglican communion on a narrower, less tolerant and less joyful basis."
But Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham and one of the covenant's strongest supporters, told the synod: "Our present framework simply isn't working. We need a framework to enable us to live in the house together. We are not being asked to sign a blank cheque. It is a commitment to a way of working together. It simply will not do to live with differences."
John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, leading the synod in the absence of Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is on study leave, called on the synod not to give lukewarm approval to the covenant and promised: "Rowan and I will not sign a document that betrays our church life in this country."
Certain folks whom I respect are saying that the passing of this motion doesn't really mean too much, because the process to carry it forward to a vote by the provinces will be lengthy, and there will be many amendments added that will water it down considerably. But I don't necessarily believe that to be the case, since, at least among the primates, this thing seems to have legs. And what a colossal waste of time, energy, and money!
Fr. Jake asks the question, "Is the proposed Covnant(sic) concept a Gay Expulsion Plan?" I think so. Here's what I said in the comments at his site:
Jake, I like it [naming it the Gay Expulsion Plan], too. Let's move on from euphemisms. The whole exercise is about gay sex, no matter the attempts to disguise that by using other labels.
It's a power grab by certain primates to form a "Curia" who will declare who's in and who's out of the Anglican Communion.
One caution: if the plan succeeds, it may come to be about more than gay expulsion, in that the "Curia" will begin to search out those who do not line up as doctrinally "pure" enough to suit them and begin to weed them out, too.
In their obsessive search for "purity", I wonder who will be found to be sufficiently "pure".
Thanks to Fr. Jake for the links.
Judge Has Priorities Right
From ABC News:
The state museums didn't open Monday. State parks were closed to visitors at the height of the summer tourism season, and many state services were idle because of a government shutdown that kept about 24,000 workers off the job.
Gov. Ed Rendell shut down the Pennsylvania government late Sunday over a budget stalemate with the Legislature that partly hinges on his energy plan for the state.
....
Gamblers and employees of the state's five slots parlors got a reprieve when a judge granted a request late Sunday by casino owners to remain open, at least until a Tuesday hearing.
It's good to know that there is at least one sensible government official in Pennsylvania.
The state museums didn't open Monday. State parks were closed to visitors at the height of the summer tourism season, and many state services were idle because of a government shutdown that kept about 24,000 workers off the job.
Gov. Ed Rendell shut down the Pennsylvania government late Sunday over a budget stalemate with the Legislature that partly hinges on his energy plan for the state.
....
Gamblers and employees of the state's five slots parlors got a reprieve when a judge granted a request late Sunday by casino owners to remain open, at least until a Tuesday hearing.
It's good to know that there is at least one sensible government official in Pennsylvania.
Good-bye, Bud Handelsman
J. B. Handelsman
From The New Yorker:
The cartoonist J. B. Handelsman—John Bernard at birth, and Bud thereafter—died last week, at the age of eighty-five, leaving a legacy of nearly a thousand New Yorker cartoons (and five covers), published between 1961 and last fall.
I have been reading and enjoying Handelsman's cartoons throughout the whole of his time at the magazine. He was funny, but with a bite.
He wasn’t a polemicist, but his work was concerned with politics and history and the range of our folly, from mere foibles to gross inhumanity. “Sometimes something historical gives you a better perspective,” he said in a 1980 interview. “You can see the latest dumbness as just the end of a long line of dumbnesses that have been taking place for thousands of years."
Depending on your point of view, whether you look at a glass as half-full or half-empty, his words can lead to hope and encouragement or to deep despair. "The latest dumbness" which we see so plainly today, is nothing new, but comes from "a long line of dumbnesses."
He was angry about many things, unfairness and hypocrisy being very near the top of the list. In a cartoon from fifteen years ago, Handelsman drew the Statue of Liberty lifting her torch in one hand and holding a portable phone with the other. Into the phone she says, skeptically, “Well, it all depends. Where are these huddled masses coming from?”
What a mockery we make of the words on the Statue of Liberty today, what hypocrisy, but consider that the cartoon is fifteen years old. Consider that dumbness and hypocrisy are older than history.
Rest in peace, Bud.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Angelina And Brad In The Neighborhood?
More nonsense of great import.
Rumors are flying thick and fast around here that Angelina and Brad will be purchasing property in the country a short distance from me. Let me emphasize that these are only rumors. There's a bit of chatter online, but the sources are not reliable.
I have heard on better authority that they bought a house in the French Quarter in New Orleans.
Neighbors have seen them come and go and can't be more tickled that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have moved into the French Quarter.
"It's great if they're here to stay and to be a part of the community," said Rayna Nielsen, who lives across the street from the early-1830s masonry mansion where the celebrity couple has been spotted in recent weeks.
Angelina and Brad don't seem to be "here to stay" anywhere.
The rumor mill says that they want to ride horses, which would be a bit of a challenge in the French Quarter, so they want a place in the country.
In their life adventure, Angelina seems to be in the driver's seat with Brad as a passenger as they roam the world. His job seems to be to carry the children (once they're born, of course) and provide the occasional sperm for another child, which once the child is born, he will be carrying around, and around, and around. Is it just me, or does anyone else out there think he's looking a little dazed by it all?
The really important question is, if they settle around here and give parties, will I be invited?
Rumors are flying thick and fast around here that Angelina and Brad will be purchasing property in the country a short distance from me. Let me emphasize that these are only rumors. There's a bit of chatter online, but the sources are not reliable.
I have heard on better authority that they bought a house in the French Quarter in New Orleans.
Neighbors have seen them come and go and can't be more tickled that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have moved into the French Quarter.
"It's great if they're here to stay and to be a part of the community," said Rayna Nielsen, who lives across the street from the early-1830s masonry mansion where the celebrity couple has been spotted in recent weeks.
Angelina and Brad don't seem to be "here to stay" anywhere.
The rumor mill says that they want to ride horses, which would be a bit of a challenge in the French Quarter, so they want a place in the country.
In their life adventure, Angelina seems to be in the driver's seat with Brad as a passenger as they roam the world. His job seems to be to carry the children (once they're born, of course) and provide the occasional sperm for another child, which once the child is born, he will be carrying around, and around, and around. Is it just me, or does anyone else out there think he's looking a little dazed by it all?
The really important question is, if they settle around here and give parties, will I be invited?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)