About Me

My photo
This blog is the work of an educated civilian, not of an expert in the fields discussed.

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Various

And Also: I notice a lot of blogs are going into "group mode." I personally don't like some of the people chosen: Jack Balkin's blog, for one, has a few annoying people there now, though (to be fair) some of the extra posts are good. Will the blog multiplexes be selling expensive popcorn? Have "personalized services?" (Who expects that at the movies? Sheesh.) Blogs, the new editorial pages.


Rove: I read a quote from a generally reasonable NY Republican member of Congress calling Joe Wilson a liar in defense of Rove: this is the sort of thing Krugman is talking about (see last entry). At some point, reasonable people -- yeah even politicians -- have to say "enough!"

Anyway, Judge Tatel's concurring opinion in the Judith Miller Grand Jury Case is pretty interesting: a qualified common law argument for press/source privilege with the importance of breaching it factored in. I wonder if those who sneer at privilege would think some member of Congress could force testimony in one of those congressional hearings largely in place for political purposes. Or, a true fishing expedition in a grand jury for a petty crime. Clearly, not an all or nothing matter.

Book: I just finished Religious Revolutionaries: The Rebels Who Shaped American Religion by Robert C. Fuller (good thing: I also just picked up The Historian -- the new best seller opus for those who bit their teeth on Harry Potter books). One thing that stood out besides its definite decision not to say anything bad about any of the people included (come on: some revolutionaries are bad) is its emphasis on spirituality.

A healthy chunk of society do not believe in organized religions as such, but are spiritual (in a broad sense) people. I reckon these are many of the people accused of ignoring the importance of values and such. It is annoying, partly since in some fashion I am mixed in here (though some of the concepts discussed in the book either went over my head or was of the "uh no" variety), since we are talking about some downright morally concerned individuals here.

Clearly, these people have to figure out a way to form into a church or something. The Unitarians, for instance, are supposed to be pretty vague in doctrine, right? Make sure you have certain holy days (you know, other than the first day of baseball and football season), rituals that turn out to be based on superstitions you'd sneer at if people in some third world country did them, and includes going to church once a week (at least in theory), and maybe you wouldn't have these people called anti-religious. Probably not, I know.

Baseball: The Braves/Mets game last night was a pitching duel (a rarity when Glavine is pitching, especially against this team), and the Mets lost on a muffed grounder (hit by one of the Braves many rookies): 2-1. This is said by some to be a "great game." No. It's a horrible game, once in which you bite you nails and see the team lose to hated rivals in the eighth with two outs. Call me not a true fan, but I find such games anti-fun. Oh, and since the Mets are .500 and something like eight games out of first, can we stop hearing an up to date account of their place in the standings? It just is not relevant at this point.

Meanwhile, the Yanks were rocked, but this was expected -- so many people basically counted out the rethread they had out there (actually a pair) against Boston that they surely expected to lose. And, lose they did. But, they won today, so have at least a split. Who know? They can win tomorrow too and almost be tied for first. Their perilous pitching situation makes the next two weeks trouble, but even with a healthy staff, a split at Fenway would have been fine. Let's see if Baltimore can take advantage.