HOME / the breakfast table: An e-mail conversation about the news of the day.

Joseph Britt, Arthur Stock, and Will Vehrs

What Could Rod Paige Have Said Yesterday?

Posted Monday, March 12, 2001, at 5:25 PM ET

Arthur and Joe,

The Nasdaq hasn't recovered, but no one was jumping out of windows in Richmond's financial district this afternoon.

I want to offer my apologies for calling you a "suck-up," Joe. I realize now that that might be construed as bullying. If you have been active in faith-based programs, you might very well unleash two "she bears" to "tare" on me, or, if you've really been studying scripture, a slingshot. At least that's how I interpret Arthur's sermon.

I've tried to be a bit light-hearted here today, but I know there's nothing funny about school shootings or school violence. I have four daughters--one in college, one in high school, and two in elementary school. I want them to be safe. I just don't know if there's a solution to the problem of troubled kids slipping through the cracks and doing terrible things. If guns are as available as everyone says, or the culture is as coarse as advertised, it is amazing that these incidents are relatively rare and are spread randomly through the country, in tough gun law states and lax gun law states. That's absolutely no consolation to the victims, though.

Arthur, I don't know what you wanted Rod Paige to say yesterday. I hate "So's Your Old Man" comebacks, but I don't think the secretary of education in the Clinton administration, Governor Riley, ever appeared on a Sunday talk show. I don't think he knows how the secretary of education can stop school violence any more than Paige does. If you go back and review transcripts from Janet Reno's talk show appearances, I'll bet her answers were just as vacuous as those of John Ashcroft. Why the talk shows think an AG is going to dish out juicy details of investigations or make dramatic pronouncements is beyond me.

My first day as a "Slate writer" is in the books, and it was met with decidedly mixed reviews. I'll keep plugging away, and I'll keep reading the often-enlightening "Fray." See you again early tomorrow morning.

Will

What Could Rod Paige Have Said Yesterday?

Posted Monday, March 12, 2001, at 5:25 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
This week, three "star posters" from "The Fray" (our reader response forum) visit "The Breakfast Table." Joseph Britt is a Wisconsin free-lance writer with over a decade of experience working for state and federal officeholders. Arthur Stock, who uses the cybernym "History Guy," practices law in Philadelphia. Will Vehrs, who posts as "WillV," is a Virginia businessman.
COMMENTS

Reader Comments From The Fray:


[Notes from the Fray Editor: Hey, guys, wotcha doing up there? Is the air different? We're glad to see you haven't forsaken the Fray. The board is jumping: we are having to send out to the icon sweatshop for more stars, checkmarks and Slate signs, as we are using them up so fast. (For an explanation of the symbols, please click here.) And WillV, we have been known to describe the Fray as a dress-down-Friday kind of board, but now we find you don't wear make-up to post here…there's such a thing as too much informality.

Bluto says it's the end of the Fray as we know it: because all the posters will be writing solely to get checks and stars. That'll be the day Bluto. Helen Weber asks whether there are any women star posters. The answer is no, not right now. There are very few star posters (and if you have read the various explanations you know that the star is for the poster, not for individual posts: it recommends someone who has made good posts in the past), and as it happens no woman has been chosen so far. We hope to change that soon.]


Strut that stuff but watch out…

When History Guy announced in this Fray that he was going to propose to Slate a "Breakfast Table" made up of posters on the grounds that most of the BT chatter sent everyone back to bed, I chimed in that it was a terrific idea, since the Fray usually has the most interesting material on Slate. I didn't really think Slate would buy it, but it has and the editors deserve a modest round of applause.

Congratulations, Will, Joe, Arthur. But beware: now that you've been plucked from among the unwashed masses to become card-carrying members of the media elite, agents of the left-wing media conspiracy, lackeys of the right-wing globalist-corporatist masters of the media, uncounted numbers of ordinary folks who have their piece to say already are drawing a bead on you. By week's end, you may feel like an Afghan statue after the Taliban artillery have passed by.

--Publius

(To reply, click here .)

[Tuesday notes from the Fray Editor: History Guy's sister, we salute you. The Mendelsohns of blessed memory would be proud of you. Jennifer Mendelsohn , as WillV says, came into the Fray and said this "Can I viciously flame one of you for no reason? Anyone wanna get married?" Amber is proposing some more unholy alliance with Zeitguy. She also called for more viciousness in the Fray here (ever agreeable, Fray posters called each other names). She is obviously a trouble-causer, argumentative and high maintenance. Just the kind of poster we like, in fact, welcome Amber!

This "Breakfast Table" certainly worked the magic in The Fray. The enigmatic Dola, a sadly-missed poster, re-appeared. There was endless discussion of women posters, for example here: a subject we have never seen mentioned before but which is now a hot topic. There were absolutely stellar discussions, for example on military training and campaign finance, here, and on estate tax, here. The "Breakfast Table" participants did not disdain their spiritual home: they are to be congratulated for answering critics and friends and encouraging discussions in the most good-humored way.

We're just mentioning this: there is a very very bad taste set of jokes about military training accidents here: don't read if you are easily shocked or a Yankees fan.]


Full disclosure here: Arthur Stock is my brother. And though I would be stretching the point to say, as does the junior Senator from New York, that my brother "saddens me," I must say about this stance on the inheritance tax: enough! I am certainly as knee-jerk a liberal as anyone else in my family (who can forget mom's explanation in the voting both: "you can vote for whomever you like, but if you pull the Republican lever your arm will fall off?"), but must you be quite so adamant? Did our loving parents sweat and toil their 3-day-a-week jobs as professors so their hard-earned money could buy oversized berets for an armed service with astonishingly poor aim? I think not. I offer constructive advice: if you find the law unjust, just hand over your share of the inheritance to me. I'll take care of it. You're welcome to pay my taxes on it. As the junior Senator of New York would surely deny saying: That's what family is for!"

--Lil sis

(To reply, click
here .)

[Final notes from the Fray Editor: Arthur Stock really got quite enough exposure this week, but we can't resist his leftovers post, here (and after all, he is a friend of both Marty Peretz and Scott Shuger, apparently). The idea of the peasants with pitchforks representing the Fray will amuse us in some long working day ahead.

This has been a great "Breakfast Table" and a fabulous Fray, interaction at its finest, and more stars, checks and icons than you could shake a stick at. Well done all round: for this week you all deserved gold stars. (You're not getting them, but that's another matter. Oh, except for WillV…)]


A wonderful conversation, easily the equal to anything we've seen from the "pros".

One thing that is particularly heartening to me is that although these three fellows claim to have different political affiliations and tendencies; their thoughts, suggestions, and exchanges abound with common sense and good-faith. Given the posturing that is common among professional pundits, and given the histrionics of the average webboard poster, this week's "Breakfast Table" is far and away better than anything I might have expected. This reflects well on the participants, of course, but it also says something complimentary about Slate's editorial staff.

Good job

--Keith M. Ellis

(To reply, click here.)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
Very superstitious.90/091113_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on unemployment.50/091113_TC.jpg
Follow the leaper.1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg