Needles & Threads
A weekly spin through the Fray.
You don't know JAG: National Institute of Justice President, Eugene Fidell, quoted in Dan Cullen's War Stories piece on the Air Force rape scandal, writes to refute Cullen's interpretation of his position: Dear Mr. Cullen: Sports Nut Fray: Traditional admirers of Allen Barra knock him around for his All-Star grumble. BarkinJ comes up and in ("Barra has apparently lost his mind.") with a point-by-point rebuttal here. Kardinal offers up some nice field work, too, "in defense of the All-Stars" chosen for Tuesday's game. Joe_JP and CaptainRonVoyage develop drinking games for suffering Mets and Dodgers fans respectively. Fray Editor briefly experimented with CRV's model, but lasted only three-and-a-third. ReadMe Fray: In response to Michael Kinsley's " The Lawsuit Lottery," on medical malpractice…reform…(apologies, Shafer)…medical malpractice do-over…Ben K launches a lively thread with, "Society has a problem differentiating between malice, negligence, simple incompetence, and bad luck." Joe_JP here (Is this the society we signed on to? One in which the state "owes nothing" to those unlucky?), Mitch here (…we have the notion of "social justice" which increasingly has posited that "society" through the government…has a duty to ameliorate bad luck), and bk_in_nj here (Frivolous lawsuits are a real problem but for a subtle reason that is rarely discussed, according to a doctor friend of mine in New Jersey…:the legal machinery that kicks in when a lawsuit is filed) all answer Ben. Poems Fray: Shannpalmer publishes the Frayster Poem o' the Week with " Sequence," a sensual rush. Shann receives a long-deserved star for her ongoing contributions to Poems Fray. Rob_said_that mounts a defense of Patricia Traxler's word choice in her poem, "Luna": "I don't understand why everyone's got this animus against the word 'zaftig' in this poem. I think it shows an unfettered use of language, and is very apt." MaryAnn's objection is its "connotation of comfort, which is not at all in keeping with Traxler's description of a moon on a Mexican night, when she 'knew the damage, yet I stayed.'" Moneybox Fray: Lord_Wakefield thinks that Russ Baker (" Bush's Data Dump") "has a woeful deficit in his own realm if he thinks the Social Security is truly 'funded' in the 'surplus' to any real world extent. And most real economists…realize that the minimum wage fallacy is one of the biggest and grandest of lies in the modern age." Lbnalnoor jousts with Wake on minimum wage here. RugbyHun is a not-so-closeted QVC enthusiast, "QVC has a simple and good plan. It works better than hi-tech internet companies because the technology is old, proven and nearly fool proof." For an elaboration of its attributes, including its "reverse snob appeal," click here. Fighting Words Fray: Though Fraywatch highlighted FW Fray earlier in the week, doodahman gets this blast on Hitchens after the fact: "Hitchens was one of the crowd…who did not sully himself with the sordid lies about Iraq's oh so dangerous stockpile of WMDs. Nope. To him, it was all about 'liberating' Iraqis at the point of US cannon muzzles. Typical Bolshevik morality. Meaning that Hitch is not an evil, murderous pig. He's just a stubborn, besotted simpleton." For the complete transcript, go here. … KA11:35 a.m.
I am writing this on behalf of myself and Professor Scott Silliman. Both of us were quoted or paraphrased in your July 9, 2003 piece, "The Air Force Academy's Show Trial." Prof. Silliman and I understand that it was an opinion piece. Your very next (and last) paragraph, however, conveyed the impression, by using the words "in other words," that we agreed with your view that "it is reasonable to court-martial an innocent man just to send a message to the troops." That sentence materially misstates our views and distorts the comments we made to you in our separate interviews. In fact, any commander who sent to trial a case in which he or she actually believed the accused was innocent would be engaging in reprehensible conduct.
Sincerely,
Eugene R. Fidell
Wednesday, July 9, 2003
Erica Jong enters the Fray in response to Tim Noah's condemnation of both Lillian Ross'self-referential obituary to Katharine Hepburn in the New York Times and her confessional Here But Not Here, in which she spills the goods on her affair with longtime New Yorker editor, William Shawn. While Jong "had the same initial response" as Noah after reading the obit, she takes issue with the wholesale criticism of Ross as an insensitive gossip: You ask: why did Lillian Ross write Here but Not Here? She wrote it because she is a writer. Writers, like painters, use what they have at home. Just as the portrait painter paints his family, so the writer uses the materials she knows best. But beyond the issue of authorial license, Jong asks: If a man can use the details of his most intimate life, why can't a woman? So far as critics who assail Ross for publishing Here But Not Here while Shawn's widow was still alive… I hardly believe they were worried about Cecile Shawn. Mrs. Shawn was just a convenient excuse for the rampant misogyny both female and male critics love to wallow in. For Jong's complete response, click here….KA7:25 p.m.
A.D.D.: After reading Fred Kaplan's piece on the aftermath of the Iraqi war, Zathras has "the odd feeling that [Kaplan] is not really paying attention." What gives Z this impression? Among other observations,
he also attributes postwar violence to Iraqi units bypassed in the drive to Baghdad. This is wrong, and anyone reading the papers will see instantly why it is wrong. Attacks against Americans are coming overwhelmingly in Baghdad itself and in the areas to its north and west that were not in the American line of advance (the mostly Shiite areas that were are comparatively stable). Organized resistance to the allies had collapsed by the time American forces reached Tikrit and Fallujah, as well as some of the Baghdad neighborhoods where our guys are having the hardest time now.
More from Zathras on Kaplan, including "the question of international involvement in Iraq," where "Kaplan likewise focuses relentlessly on only one side of the coin," here.
Kulther introduces this popular analogy:
Well how can you BLAME the Iraqis who're fighting the American OCCUPATION— if Iraq invaded the USA wouldn't YOU be fighting THEM!? It's the SAME THING. Leaving aside the idiocy of that comparison, consider the shaky post-war reconstruction in a similar, but opposite and more reasonable, manner. … For Kulther's rebuttal, click here. JumboBurrito poses the question, "Why would NATO occupy Iraq?" then proceeds to answer it: The question that these recent converts to multilateralism have failed to pose is why France, Germany or Turkey would want to involve themselves in this mess? Now that the Bush admin has made this bed, the US military has to lie in it. TomFitz piles on the administration: "Bush and Rumsfeld gave them all the finger last fall, and the Administration has continued its bellicose behavior towards 'Old Europe' on a lower lever ever since. They are still threatening Germany with base closures." Awards! They Do Nothing But Give Out Awards! Greatest Fascist Dictator—Adolph Hitler: Speaking of Teutonic baseness, Chango assumes the role of Fraywatch's East German judge with the inaugural presentation of The Black Hole Awards. Among the spoils: The Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Award for Illogical Conclusions Biggest Arrogant Bastard/Insufferable Bitch No contest. Doodahman. What an ASSHOLE!!!. This guy makes James Carville look like a Pollyanna! For the full roster of winners, click here. Statuettes in the likeness of Salvador Allende can be picked up from the Awards Office at either the Elizabeth IKEA or in the parking lot of San Dimas High School. … KA 3:00 p.m.
The Fray is filled with lawyers and wannabe lawyers (hard to believe such a thing exists) who have yet to master the rules of logic. I submit, for your consideration, EFriedemann's less than compelling arguments against the decriminalization of sodomy, continuing here.
Apparently, they still teach the term ad nauseum in law school.
Tuesday, July 8, 2003
Casting Call: Fraysters take Christopher Hitchens' Jeffrey Dahmer-Saddam Hussein analogy and run with it. Rob_said_that replies, "Why not add Caligula, Attila, and Vlad the Impaler while you're at it?" Speaking of historical stand-ins, Sissyfuss1 adds:
