text:
« Choose Your Poison | Main | There hasn't been nearly enough freaking out, apparently »
We shall deplore them on the beaches....
I don't know, I keep seeing the NYTimes home page "% chance of winning the election" graphic ticking up for Trump. A few weeks ago it was a 91% chance that Hillary would win, now it's down to 74% at last look, and recent polls show Trump tied! I keep thinking at some point there will be klaxons and air raid sirens and emergencies declared and bunkers prepared and panic in the streets. At a minimum, I would hope the mythical #Nevertrumper beasts will hold their noses and urine and vote for Clinton, you don't have to tell anybody (really!).
Meanwhile, how about a Nats-Cubs NLCS? Please? And is a Cubs World Series win worth a Trump Presidency? Okay probably not - but odds seem equally likely right now.
Also, too, can we start paying NCAA athletes now?
At least football is in full swing. Starting to edge over into bread and circuses territory though.
Open thread, dude.
UPDATE: Thank goodness no food is grown in California.
Thanks, cleek. Bad on me for conflating the very specific remark with an earlier discussion of Vance's "hillbilly" demographic.
Posted by: sapient | September 25, 2016 at 06:56 PM
HRC included "half of" He, Trump's supporters in the Basket of Deplorables. None of the pearl-clutching, salt-smelling, couch-diving pundits bothered to ask which half. So of course it's possible she meant the ones inclined to volunteer for the military, and not the ones clinging to racism, homophobia, and Medicare all at the same time.
Incidentally, Snarki need not have reached for the 2nd Law. You'd think some god, sometime, might have clued his chosen people into the existence of microbes, electricity, or Antarctica.
we have the pitch-perfect caricature image of liberals looking down on "backwards provincials" who they none-the-less expect to offer up their children's lives and limbs in order to achieve their assorted foreign policy preferences, while the liberals' own children almost universally wouldn't dream of serving - and even less so in the enlisted ranks and/or an infantry branch
Of course, the same caricature applies to "chicken hawk" conservatives. Who likewise wouldn't dream of having their children among those who fight and die in the wars they love.
"Of course, the same caricature applies to "chicken hawk" conservatives. Who likewise wouldn't dream of having their children among those who fight and die in the wars they love. "
But would not look down on those who serve? Which is an almost universal Democratic view.
Wait for it..... in my experience.
Chicken hawks don't speak derisively about those who serve. But they definitely do look down on those who didn't manage to avoid serving....in my experience. Trump's comments about McCain were anomalous only because he said it in public.
Not my experience at all.
Roger Angell writes eloquently about his prospective vote for Hillary, but also Trump's cluelessness about military service.
Wow, thanks Marty, for clearing that up. I guess I'm not a Democrat after all, what with all the service members that I somehow keep forgetting to look down on.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | September 25, 2016 at 09:19 PM
You do know, Marty, that Joe Biden's son was in the military before he died, and that Tim Kaine's son is serving. Also Mike Pence's son, so Democratic politicians aren't alone, but please.
Not drunk anymore.
1. I think "chicken hawk" may mean something different in Europe, at any rate in my youth it was used to describe a paedophile (which was not a word often used as far as I recall), particularly a predatory homosexual male paedophile. However, I can see the point of using it this way, in fact it's rather good.
2. Marty, if you look at the top of this blog, you will see a special section about Andy Olmsted, who served, fought and died. Last time I looked, there were hundreds or thousands of comments, presumably many from Democrats, none of whom looked down on him for serving. What are you talking about?
Posted by: Girl from the North Country | September 25, 2016 at 10:04 PM
Hope you remedy that for the debate. Thanks for caring.
Sapient, as we say in England, fine words butter no parsnips. My caring doesn't help, your canvassing, and donating and arguing does. I've said it before: more power to you.
And now, to quote Pepys, "And so to bed."
know what else is unseemly? reflexive Democrat bashing is unseemly.
Reflexive deference to Democrats is also unseemly. It's the reflexive part that makes it unseemly, not the action itself.
As to your and sapient's fine parsing of what Clinton's "is" was, I don't think that degree of nuance is really going to matter to Schrödinger's deplorables. It's still feeding into well-rehearsed stereotypes of condescending liberal elites looking down on "the real Americans" or however that demographic identifies itself in cliches. You can rationalize this 'til your teeth fall out, but it's not for nothing that Clinton took a lot of flak for that soundbite. It was meant to be red meat for her supporters and insulting to her opponents, and even if you carefully stipulate that it only meant half of the opposition... among the non-basket-dwellers (who really, honestly can't be sure they're not viewed as a deplorable), how many of their friends, neighbors, and relatives are breezily and vaguely being dismissed as beyond the pale? Do you really honestly think that goes over well with anyone, especially when it's ambiguous (which it is, because there are a wide range of understandings about what each side means by those specific deplorable categories) whether they mean you too?
It was viewed as a sweeping condemnation meant to tar very broad swathes of Trump's constituency... and rightly so, as it's pretty damned obvious it was never meant as the narrow, limited, very precise statement it's being spun as. Whether or not it made an accurate condemnation is, alas, beside the point if we're talking about the impact of the phrase... which I daresay we were. And isn't one of your preferred criticisms of me that I put too much stock into what I want statements to say rather than considering the actual impact that making the statements has?
I've encountered chicken hawks who look down on servicemembers, but they do so in their own unique way (in my experience): military service is a grand and noble calling, but my family can do more good for the country in other roles. I.e., it's an admirable vocation for the lowborn.
Posted by: Nombrilisme Vide | September 25, 2016 at 10:35 PM
GftNC, in current American use, "chicken hawk" is someone who is enthused about using military force early and often -- i.e. a hawk. But who never was willing to serve, and go in harms way, himself. And doesn't have family doing so either.
In short, he doesn't mind risk and loss, as long as he and his aren't the ones at risk.
your and sapient's fine parsing of what Clinton's "is" was
Still waiting for your apparent refusal to acknowledge that Bill Clinton was in a basket of some sort.
I.e., it's an admirable vocation for the lowborn.
A lowborn, like Bill?
My father was a many, many, many decorated war hero, who was absent fighting one of his wars when I was a pre-teen. So please go f ....
sapient, if you think after all the times you've picked one single marginal sentence out of my comments, you have any credibility when dictating that one or another of your marginal red herrings (which is a generous description of this'un) simply must be addressed... how did you put it? "What are you smoking?"
And as to your decision to take deep personal insult at an orthogonally-relevant description of a sentiment I've encountered in others... well, that description of what you're doing pretty much says everything needing said about that.
*sentence out of my comments to respond to...
Yet, again, NV, not sure what you're trying to say because, honestly, you really aren't very coherent.
My point, which you refuse to (can't?) refute, is that you carry on and on about the white disenfranchised, but you can't actually engage on the possibility that Democratic presidents (including one of their own, Bill Clinton) have brought huge economic benefits to the demographic you claim to champion.
Also, in new news, millions are climbing out of poverty under Obama. Must be Reflexive deference to Democrats.
Reflexive deference to Democrats who, time after time, if we had a reality-based conversation, prove to be able to deliver a better world.
NV: ... well-rehearsed stereotypes of condescending liberal elites ...
Please try to remember that people who are NOT racist, homophobic, poorly-educated, or impoverished are also God's creatures, with feelings which can be hurt by the contempt that Real Murkins hold them in.
"Stereotypes of condescending liberal elites" are "well-rehearsed" all right, but who do you suppose has been doing all that stereotyping and rehearsing?
Some of He, Trump's supporters ARE deplorable. If ALL of them think the basket fits THEM, then maybe Hillary was being conservative (if you'll pardon the expression) about the "half" part.
Posted by: Tony P. | September 26, 2016 at 12:25 AM
I am trying to not be the tone police here, and I love quick back and forth when everyone is playing off each other. One of my dreams is to be in the same time zone as Unfogged (as well as having the requisite quick wit that would let me participate) But when folks are angry with each other, it really helps to slow the pace down. And yes, an edit button would be nice, but I'm behind on everything else and everytime I try to do something like that, I break something and spend a week trying to fix what I broke and then give up and re-do everything so that it works but a lot shittier than before.
To try and have a bit more of a discussion rather than random insults, I'll try to lay out my positions in the probably futile hope that we can discuss issues rather than snipe.
I think this started off with Libya. IMO Obama was a very reluctant participant, and my impression was that the US was dragged into this by Sarkozy and France. I'm not sure if Obama's comments were reported much in the US
http://www.france24.com/en/20160311-obama-cameron-sarkozy-libya-mess-gaddafi-france-uk
and this was pretty bizarre
https://news.vice.com/article/libyan-oil-gold-and-qaddafi-the-strange-email-sidney-blumenthal-sent-hillary-clinton-in-2011
If you feel Obama has a lot of room to act, you may condemn him, but I tend to think that he actually has a lot less room to manoeuvre than people give him credit.
As far as Saudi Arabia, I mentioned SA as the main point of leverage in regard to Syria, as well as the deep ties SA has with the US. From the previous link, I pull this graf
In December 1992, Cowboys coach Jimmy Johnson was unimpressed that Bandar was a Saudi royal and a friend of President George H.W. Bush. During the team's season finale game at Texas Stadium, Jones brought Bandar to the sidelines during the game and had him come to the locker room afterward.
Johnson was about to take the Cowboys to their first Super Bowl appearance in 15 years and was irate that Jones brought an outsider to the inner sanctum.
Unmoved, Jones later commented, "The Cowboys cannot have a Super Bowl season without Prince Bandar."
We then went to Syria (I think). If anything, you see the same dynamic, with the added fillup of having to deal with Russia. Precisely how one deals with Russia when they seem to have inserted themselves into our domestic political process, I don't know. One could argue that the US has inserted itself plenty of times into other countries (That's been John Pilger's point) and I wouldn't deny it, but generally, the status quo wants to keep the status quo.
This all gets tied up into Hillary. I view both Obama and Clinton as having a lot more strictures on their action than folks acknowledge. I don't want to get into a battle of which is worse, racism or sexism, but it is hard to imagine a woman doing what Obama did, coming on as an unknown keynote speaker in 2004 and winning the presidency 4 years later. I kind of feel that the only way a woman was going to be nominated is if she had the kind of experience and background that Hillary has. That kind of long experience comes with a price.
I feel like it is similar to the recent picture with Bush and Michelle Obama is 'burning up the internet' as they say, and I see there are some who are upset that people like the picture. I'm a bit baffled by it. First of all, it is pretty clear that Bush was in over his head as president (if the huggee was Cheney, I'd understand the reaction) and the speech he delivered at the National Museum of African American History and Culture was great.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/09/24/read-george-w-bushs-speech-at-the-african-american-museum-13-years-after-signing-the-bill-to-build-it/
People are free to draw whatever lesson they would like from that.
I imagine that this comment is going to sink as the debate is coming up soon, but I did want to try and explain my take and suggest that taking a bit longer might be a bit better.
troll smarter.
It was viewed as a sweeping condemnation meant to tar very broad swathes of Trump's constituency... and rightly so,
and polling backs it up.
when your zeal to bash Clinton has put you on the side of racists and xenophobes, you might want to rethink some things.
"when your zeal to bash Clinton has put you on the side of racists and xenophobes, you might want to rethink some things."
IOW: "where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?"
A wonderful quote that ties together all kinds of deplorable stuff.
Posted by: Snarki, child of Loki | September 26, 2016 at 09:03 AM
The current odds are rather concerning...
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
Posted by: Nigel | September 26, 2016 at 09:57 AM
Marty says it ain't so.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/millions-in-us-climb-out-of-poverty-at-long-last/ar-BBwDtuU
And yet it is Hillary who lies every time her lips move.
Posted by: Countme-In | September 26, 2016 at 10:24 AM
LJ, I think that summed things up rather well.
It is a bit amusing how omnipotent some people feel a President is. Sometimes his own people, when he is failing to do all of the things they are sure he could do if only he would. And sometimes by the other side, when he is failing to do something that they think he should -- even if he was elected on a platform of not doing that.
The fact is that the President is both imensely powerful and severely constrained. At least, if he cares at all about the nation he is leading. I can't think of a President in the past century (I'm less knowledgeable before that) who didn't care about his country. And kinda bummed out at the possibility that we might get one soon.
Count, from the report:
Real median household income in 2015 was 1.6 percent lower than in 2007, the year before the most recent recession, and 2.4 percent lower than the median household income peak that occurred in 1999. The difference between the 1.6 percent change and the 2.4 percent change was not statistically significant.
Although it is nice to see real compensation going up a little after 6 flat years, which follow 50 years of steadily increasing real compensation:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/COMPRNFB
Lies, damn lies. and statistics
LJ, excellent comment, pretty much all of which seems to me right on the money.
WJ, thanks. I had sort of worked the new meaning out by context, and actually thought it pretty good.
Nigel, re FiveThirtyEight prediction/odds: Jesus F*cking Christ! (I am trying to abide by ObWi's non-swearing convention, but it is hard, particularly in this response). This has pushed my anxiety levels up so high I am considering acting on your previous comment, and recording the debate rather than watching it live, a) so I can fast forward and b) so that Tuesday is more bearable.
Bloody hell! (As we say here when horrified and completely at a loss).
cleek, it's depressing to see how quick you are to recognize and decry dog whistles that aren't directed at you for what they are.
Clinton is horrible for reasons that have nothing to do with this. This is mostly about how and why her supporters are degrading public discourse. Notably, they didn't reserve their condescension for "deplorables". They couldn't wait to roll it out against the DFHs during the Democratic primary. You throw it at me over and over and over. Etc. It's used as a first recourse against all political opponents. And all it does is stroke egos and foster resentment. I find "anti-elitist" snobbery and condescension in the age-old American anti-intellectual tradition to be tiresome and toxic, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to inflame stereotypes out of petty spite.
You derided my comments as "reflexively bashing Democrats", but it seems to be lost on you that the DLC is not the Democratic Party. It seems to pass right over your head that criticizing Clinton for her horrid policy preferences does not mean I'm anti-Democrat. I full well understand the appeal of that conclusion, but I've been a Democrat since I first registered as an adult. Disagreeing with you does not "put me on the side of racists and xenophobes". This isn't binary, and it's really unproductive when you try over and over again to simplify it to that so you can score easy points.
I'm keenly aware of this. I grew up in the rural Midwest. I did a term as enlisted personnel in the Army. I'm verbose and articulate even when I don't have to be. I am painfully aware of this. I've also seen how much civic discourse is set back by balkanizing and the oh-so-satisfying demonization and ridiculing of your opponents. It's all well and good for the likes of cleek to state that when she declared a plurality of those supporting Trump (who, since some people need the obvious spoonfed to them constantly, is in fact thoroughly deplorable) are beyond the pale, she was being narrow and specific. That sounds about as credible Trump's post hoc explanations about how he wasn't mocking Kovaleski. It was a tribal dog whistle, and a pretty damned low-pitch one at that. It was meant to remind Clinton's supporters that "the other side" are the devil, while still leaving the weaselly loophole of "oh, I wasn't talking about YOU, just, you know, the deplorables". Liberals have their own clear (but sometimes mutually unintelligible) of what it means to be "racist", or "homophobic", or "sexist", or "xenophobic", or "Islamaphobic" (as an aside, lemme note that cleek's assertion that Clinton wasn't calling out potential enlistees rings very false when you look at how common some of those preceding deplorabilities are among servicemembers - there definitely is an appearance of her suggesting that they cannot be allowed to have a seat at the political table, but dying for her foreign policy is A-okay). However, they don't always communicate them well. And conservatives certainly don't repeat the meanings ascribed to them clearly or even cleanly; a lot of distortion is introduced, some certainly willfully, and you often end up with people who without malice assume the liberal POV declares that merely being politically opposed to a liberal taints you with one deplorability or another. And then we have those lovely, lovely liberals who view this all as a team sport, and do use language as a bludgeon. And the end result? Clinton's much-defended basket remark is nothing more than tribal name-calling, even if she used a lot of words instead of a few. And the public discourse deteriorates apace...
...criticizing Clinton for her horrid policy preferences does not mean I'm anti-Democrat.
right. doing it once wouldn't mean that.
I don't know. Our on-line conversations in some remote corner of South Blogistan aren't likely to sway the election. Bash away here if anywhere, I say.
which follow 50 years of steadily increasing real compensation
say, when did that trend break?
"If you feel Obama has a lot of room to act, you may condemn him, but I tend to think that he actually has a lot less room to manoeuvre than people give him credit."
I actually agree with much of this. When I read the interview Jeffrey Goldberg did with him in the Atlantic last spring, I got the distinct impression he felt constrained to do more intervening than he really wanted to do. But the constraints on our foreign policy are often domestic. If he is a secret noninterventionist and actually, by American standards, he sort of is, he gets crucified for it. The complaints about Syria are that he didn't intervene, when in reality Syria is suffering from massive intervention by both Assad's allies and his enemies. Why anyone would think more intervention by us would help escapes me, when our allies the FSA fight literally side by side with Al Qaeda. Why Americans think after decades of intervention that we could intervene against Assad and calibrate it so that Al Qaeda or some other group of jihadis doesn't triumph--well, it escapes me. If I went around saying that we should solve the I-P conflict by arming Hamas while making sure that none of the weapons got to Islamic Jihad because those guys are extremists, most Americans would think this insane, but it's probably less insane than what our serious folk think makes sense. Still insane, I hasten to agree.
I've ranted more about Yemen lately because that's where we are doing the most damage in the most shameful way, but the Israel-Palestine issue is another one where domestic constraints determine the policy more than the big bad world outside. We couldn't solve the problem, but we make it worse because both of our political parties feel it necessary to suck up to Israel, to satisfy different constituents. Israel is a special case, but there are always going to be people at home whose opinions or interests are going to have a huge effect on what Presidents do, because most Americans are not going to be single issue voters.
Clinton is more hawkish than Obama. That comes through in every article I've ever read. So personalities also make a difference. There is a growing, relatively quiet revolt in Congress over our support for the Saudis--presumably they too know about whatever arguments there may be for helping them commit war crimes and they find them unconvincing. One way we can change the constraints on our Presidents is by protesting their actions and getting enough people to agree with us so that the pressures on them change.
On the level of personalities, I get heated because of the constant Orwellian BS that permeates political discussion in the US. Britain is also full of liars in government, it seems, but they also put out a report on Iraq and another on Libya that was far more honest than what we get here and the BBC apparently did a major story on starvation in Yemen. You can talk about constraints on action, which again I think are at least 50 percent domestic, and that still doesn't excuse the way our country has refused to look squarely in the face at what we are helping the Saudis do. That's changing, slowly, but why should it be slow at all? Is that big bad world outside forcing us to ignore our own actions? If we are supplying the Saudis so they can kill children in Yemen to keep the Iran deal going, then spell it out for everyone to hear. And explain exactly how that works and why it can't be changed. And why this is different from when other countries support terrorists or war criminals.
Posted by: Donald Johnson | September 26, 2016 at 02:08 PM
LJ--on the Libya Blumenthal email thing, that's often mentioned by Clinton critics on this subject.
I didn't mention it because I figured the mere mention of the word "email" anywhere near the word "Clinton" would inflame the thread more. But no, I don't think that humanitarian considerations were the main reason for the intervention. They rarely are at any time. This is a reason for criticizing more. It's all very well to say that Obama or other Presidents are under various constraints. Exactly the sort of thing most lefties would say and this is why one should criticize the actions and question the official pleasing storylines. Living in a democracy, we are supposed to be able to change some of the constraints they operate under, which again I don't think lie solely outside the borders of the US.
...because L and N are indistinguishable, interchangeable, and yet miraculously also indivisible. The DLC tragically left us in 2011, yet the DLC will on forever as the DNC! I gotcha...
I gotcha...
clearly not.
for example: up until the following phrase, i haven't mentioned the DLC or the DNC here.
Clinton is horrible for reasons that have nothing to do with this. This is mostly about how and why her supporters are degrading public discourse. Notably, they didn't reserve their condescension for "deplorables".
NV, you can make a case for her and her supporters failing to elevate public discourse. But given what Trump and his supporters have been saying for the last year plus, it seems a stretch to say that Clinton is the one degrading public discourse.
it seems a stretch to say that Clinton is the one degrading public discourse.
calling a racist a racist is a deplorable act.
Sapient, when you say this--
"My father was a many, many, many decorated war hero, who was absent fighting one of his wars when I was a pre-teen. So please go f ...."
You are misunderstanding what NV said, which was clear enough. He said "low born" in reference to how some liberals regard lower class whites who end up in the military. (Clinton, btw, is a poor counterexample here, as someone born poor who did not end up in the military.)
Vance has an anecdote about this that he experienced in Yale. From my POV, we in America seem to go to extremes--we either act like we reverence everyone in the military as a hero or we have snide lefties who think of them as babykillers, though generally not in public, I don't think. I see it occasionally online. My own father who was in WWII and saw some combat, seemed to find the reverential attitude idiotic, but he also would have thought the opposite attitude idiotic. He had me read "The Rising Sun" when I was a child, to get the Japanese viewpoint of WWII. Since we are trading "father as war vet" stories, something I started way upthread.
NV was in the military too, if I recall correctly.
As for siding with racists and so forth, uh, no. The point being made by people like Vance is that we need to try to pull the country back together to some degree and it can't be done if we all sink to the same level together. You can criticize bigotry without labeling people as baskets of deplorables. But if we want to go that way, then there are some deplorables in the liberal basket.
Of course not. It's calling a group racist when any, even one, of its members are not that is deplorable. ;-)
cleek, cleek, cleek. You didn't HAVE to mention that opposing your preferred faction w/in the Democratic Party has implications about relations and conflicts between the party's right and left wings. The fact that you suggest that criticizing Clinton more than once is attacking the party as a whole gets it across quite clearly.
wj:
I have ZERO influence among the toxic alt-right standard-bearers rallying to press ever deeper into the gutter on the right. I have ever-so-infinitesimally-more-than-zero influence among those on the left. Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
You can criticize bigotry without labeling people as baskets of deplorables.
and Clinton's phrasing of that was ... ok, deplorable. but the sentiment (half of Trump's supporters are one or more of the follow: racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc.) is supported by polling data. Trump supporters themselves provided the data! they are, by their own admission, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc.. and they're closing in on making him the President. the most deplorable man ever to get a major party nomination is very close to being able to start putting the Executive Branch into the service of his bigotry.
so, to spend more than five seconds thinking about Clinton's phrasing seems absurd. unless, of course, bashing Clinton is the point.
You didn't HAVE to mention that opposing your preferred faction w/in the Democratic Party has implications about relations and conflicts between the party's right and left wings.
my 'preferred faction' is the one that doesn't spend its time doing the GOP's work for it - because implications.
The Atlantic has a piece on Yemen. Here is the paragraph summarizing some unnamed official's view of the American policy--
"A U.S. official who briefs the White House on regional national security matters summed up the Obama administration's prevailing attitude. Yemen was already a "complete shit show" before the war, he argued, echoing Obama's use of a phrase he is said to use privately to describe Libya. The Houthis are a nasty militia who deserve no favors and Yemen would be a "shit show" whatever the United States does. So why further degrade a sometimes-unpleasant, but necessary relationship with the Saudis to produce the same end result?"
Speaking of deplorables, why not sell billions of dollars to a murderous regime? That was a point made by some racist to Will Campbell in the book "Brother to a Dragonfly". Who were the deplorables here, the rednecks in the South or the liberals in Vietnam? It's a great big basket with room for everyone.
wj, it's not deplorable. It's counterproductive for anything but raising morale and inspiring a nasty tribal esprit de corps on your own side, and even that comes at a price.
Although I'd note that it's not "if even one is not a racist" - it's making ambiguous statements that you haughtily proclaim clearly are calling out only the bad people while managing to leave the matter of who the bad people are very much open to each listener's interpretation.
DJ, yes, that was clearly stated. Although I actually had right-wingers in mind when I wrote the particular comment you refer to (although in retrospect, I have seen that attitude on the left more than once). IIRC, it was drawn from an exchange on some defense forum I wandered onto from FB, where a patriotic right-wing 1%er was arguing with a middle-class leftist on the necessity of intervention, scoffed at their perspective, cited military service as the highest calling of a citizen, and dismissed them as unpatriotic and irrelevant as someone who had never served nor had family serve. Their response to the obvious counter-question? A statement that they'd grown up in a period when there was no call to serve... and their children hadn't because they could obviously contribute more to the nation in the private sector. It was somewhat glorious in its sheer unwavering and unselfconscious deplorability...
and Clinton's phrasing of that was ... ok, deplorable.
In fact, one could argue that by giving such a sweeping, derisive, condescending soundbite to the press... she was doing the GOP's work for it. Hmm.
More pandering to deplorables--
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/03/hillary_clinton_s_aipac_speech_was_a_symphony_of_craven_delusional_pandering.html
Should we be calling out some members of the Clinton coalition as deplorable? Seriously, I could go either way. If we don't limit ourselves to condemning bigotry, but want to label whole swathes of people as bigots, then let's not just do it when convenient, or the whole thing starts to look fake.
said "low born" in reference to how some liberals regard lower class whites who end up in the military.
I'm sure "some liberals" have all kinds of prejudices and wrong headed attitudes. I don't think that, in any way, is the attitude of most people, and I've certainly never heard it from someone representing themselves as a Democrat, either a policy maker or a government official.
From my POV, we in America seem to go to extremes--we either act like we reverence everyone in the military as a hero or we have snide lefties who think of them as babykillers, though generally not in public, I don't think.
The only example of the "snide lefties" that I can think of in my experience is that during the Vietnam war, there was a certain number of people who were hoping that there would be a massive movement to resist the draft, and that people who weren't part of that were enabling the war. Since Vietnam, I have not heard of anyone who derides people in the service. Maybe there are a few.
We have an all-volunteer military. I was looking for demographics about who serves, and came across a Heritage Foundation study (and I'm not a fan of the Heritage Foundation, which is why I'm linking to an article discussing it). Although there may be some flaws in the study, I doubt that it's all wrong - it's just not true that only low income people bear the brunt of our fighting forces.
You want me to put this another way, cleek? Since I know the system is going to spit up either Clinton or Trump on 4 November, I want Clinton to beat Trump by a single vote, and I want her to do it knowing that most votes she got were cast with fingers firmly clenched over their noses. Not gonna happen, but it's what I want. What I absolutely, positively don't want is Clinton rallying the GOP base and helping them with their GOTV efforts for down-ballot elections.
can we deplore this?
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nazi-flag-trump-pennsylvania-bloomsburg-fair
I want Clinton to beat Trump by a single vote
if we're going to keep you from having to suffer under a Trump Presidency which you won't help prevent, then the rest of us would appreciate it if you would make our job easier not harder.
kthxbye.
Oh, but cleek... are you saying what it looks like you're saying? I'm going to contribute just as much for or against Trump on 3 November as you are, unless you're out there getting one or more Trumpers to vote-swap with you while planning on voting Clinton anyway. So that only leaves my Internet rhetoric. And yours. Which, I will say again, is doing the GOP's work for it.
No problem. Not so sure about "confiscating" his stuff though.
The only example of the "snide lefties" that I can think of in my experience is that during the Vietnam war, there was a certain number of people who were hoping that there would be a massive movement to resist the draft, and that people who weren't part of that were enabling the war.
Raises hand. Yep, I recall that saying, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
Logically, it seems to have the same structure as "if you are criticizing Hillary, you are aiding the GOP."
Well, now I feel better about my misspent youth. :)
I'm going to contribute just as much for or against Trump on 3 November as you are
are you saying you're going to vote for Clinton? because, the last i remember this question coming up, you said that you might not be up to it.
if you've hopped off that fence, i hereby happily retract my last comment.
The soldiers are heroes in the abstract and when individuals can be used as positive examples by politicians (truthfulness is not a prerequisite there). Once they lose their usefulness they get treated as dirt (penny-pinching about care for veterans, banning images of coffins brought back home etc.). And should they violate the official narrative, dirt gets far more favourable treatment.
In my experience it tends to be the Right that considers soldiers primarily as "Menschenmaterial" (which btw won the competion for un-word of the century in Germany). There is also the quite different traditional treatment of officers* compared to the common soldier. Not to see the grunts as scum is a comparatively new development and, in the US, seems not to have been replaced by hero worship before WW2.
*by tradition lieutenant and above
An election is NOT about "bringing together" two or more "tribes". It is a way to decide which "tribe" will prevail, without resorting to gun play.
There is a "tribe" in this country that wants the Eisenhower era back except with much lower taxes on the rich and Johnson's Medicare thrown in.
There is another "tribe" that approves of Brown v Board, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Loving v Virginia, Row v Wade, etc., and recognizes that a habitable planet requires Detroit to evolve past the V-8 engine and coal miners (the few that are left now that picks and shovels are not the main implements of coal mining) to be redeployed to less gruesome work even if they pride themselves on being as manly as their grandfathers.
The latter tribe is, I grant you, better-educated and less-despairing than the former. And therefore you can insist, if you like, that this latter tribe has the greater obligation to be mature and conciliatory.
Which it IS, goddamit, but that means squat if the former tribe prevails in the election.
Maturity and conciliation are for governing. Mobilizing your own tribe is one of the things you have to do in order to GET to govern.
if only trump were speaking for people who want ike + a lower top marginal rate, plus medicare.
I mentioned my current plans in this very thread last night, but you must have wandered in after that. I have a despairing relative who isn't happy with either of the choices, but whose politics make them happier with the idea of GOP high court nominees than Democratic ones, opening the opportunity for us to vote swap. We both refrain from holding our noses; they don't vote for Trump, and I don't vote for Clinton. So no, my decision hasn't changed, but none-the-less the impact of my choices on the poll tallies for the two leading candidates will be just as large (and just as small) as yours shall be, even if it means, horror of horrors, third-party voting will likely also ensue.
TP -
That's all well and good so long as it doesn't have short-term effects like mobilizing the other tribe... and that particular brand of rhetoric has shown time and again that it's perfect for doing so.
That's always a strategic risk: does this or that tactic mobilize the opposite tribe more than your own?
But note please: it's a risk that BOTH tribal leaders face.
Whelp, saw my first "I'm a Deplorable!" yardsign today. In retrospect, I'm kinda surprised it took this long.
In retrospect, I'm kinda surprised it took this long.
Well, it must be in the wind for deplorable people to own up to their true values as, in other news, Duterte embraces Hitler as his role model.
Must be Hillary's fault.
sapient, the current "Humans never migrated out of Africa" thread is a lot more germane to this conversation than is comfortable...
I'd say we're a couple of weeks away from those hopeless romantics among us who decry political correctness, otherwise known as simple common courtesy taken sometimes to silly lengths, placing signs in their yard for Trump that say "Gas the Jews! Vote for Trump!" or "Zyclon B! WHAT is the antidote to Obamacare? Vote Trump/Pence for your Jeopardy win"
There will be followup ads featuring corrupt Republican Trump-lover Sheldon Adelson fat shaming liberal American Jews and their silly, neurotic obsessions about a little poison gas wafting through the casino ventilation systems. I mean, he'll vent, if you want real difficulties, like I have to put up with, try getting a permit from unelected bureaucrats to place slot machines in and around the Lincoln Monument and replace Lincoln's eyeballs with cherries. Talk about your Nazis!"
"Vote Donald Trump, I tell you, and let freedom ring. Low wages AND jackpots for America!"
One thing else. Why is it so hard for Trump to tolerate a Miss Universe who weighs more than a Miss America? The universe is a whole lot bigger than America and certainly the former's total mass weighs more than America (unless you count Newt Gingrich's fat ass; have you taken a gander at that filth from the back lately? Maybe America thinks IT weighs more than the universe, I don't know. I've heard it claimed by C-Span callers on the right-wing line) so why shouldn't the former's beauty queen be a fuller-sized lady than these hollow-cheeked, skeletal wraithes who vie for Miss America?
Posted by: Countme-In | September 30, 2016 at 01:46 PM
I kind of enjoyed writing that comment, but not enough to read it twice.
I like it when I get a four-second jump on whatever shit is going to come out of Gingrich's mouth next:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gingrich-alicia-machado-is-the-new-benghazi
A novel turn on vote-swapping:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeb-bush-no-one-vote
Jeb, the time to stay home and not vote was during the Republican primary. Too late now.
Besides, if YOU were running citizen Jeb, you'd be exhorting the Republican vote willy-nilly while simultaneously conniving with your Republican surrogate hit men in Texas to prevent liberal minorities from exercising their voting franchise.
Only a Bush would conclude that the absence of the name Bush on a Presidential ballot is reason to stay home.
Asshole.
For my Friday finale, this is, I don't know what:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/288546-poll-libertarian-johnson-beating-trump-clinton-among-active-duty-troops
General Spitshine: Mr. President, excuse me, Gary, man, Russian troops have landed on Chappaquiddick. What are your orders?
Gary, man: When they reach American shores, wake me.
General Upchuck: But, shit, man, Mr President, NORAD confirms Putin, in league with ISIS, has launched intercontinental nuclear missiles from a city in Syria ....
Gary: Chuck, first off, I am the Dude, so call me the Dude, O.K? Now, what is a, did you call it ... a Syria?
Upchuck: Dude, if we don't act now, we're going to have mushroom ...
The Dude: Mushrooms? What is the downside exactly?
Spitshine: Aleppo is the city. Shall we send our troops in, who voted for you, by the way .... Dude.
The Dude: That name sounds vaguely familiar, though Chappaquiddick sounds like the more sinister place. Send them, you say, to someplace I couldn't find even if it was growing on my stoned ass? Those troops you refer to voted for me so I wouldn't send them anyplace because it's too expensive and we'd have to get rid of Medicare to balance the expense ...
General Buttkisser: ... and remember, the sun is expanding so what's the difference, right Dude? It's bound to get us anyhoo.
The Dude: This is exactly the kind of righteous advice I decided to cut your pay in half for. Let's do a bong.
Interesting, though, that so much of the military doesn't seem to buy the liberal conception of Clinton as a military adventuress willing to project American force, for good or ill.
The Republican Party runs one hell of an illegal hacking operation. The killing is going to have run deep and bloody to cleanse this country of its internal enemies.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/dos-hack-newsweek-trump-cuba-embargo-story
See ya Monday.
Except that we know that Trump routinely outsources stuff for his businesses overseas. And, as far as can be told, he doesn't see any distinction between himself, his businesses, and his campaign.
So why assume the Republican Party is behind the hack? Why not assume that it drew on the great pool of talent at the fingertips of his buddy Putin? DoS attacks -- something of a Russian specialty. Just ask the Baltics.
The Republican majorities in Congress refuse to investigate the hacks which are the most serious attempt by foreign powers in history to throw an American election, if that's who is doing it, for fear of damaging their preferred candidate.
That makes them guilty of aiding, abetting, covering up, and and co-conspiring with foreign powers' treasonous acts to subvert an American election.
All my life, we liberals have been termed the traitors and the unpatriotic ones by every goddamned fucking Republican White House and Congress and their alt-media enablers and paramilitary fucks in this country.
Every poverty program, every healthcare program, every tax, every piece of civil rights legislation, every anti-war demonstration, every refugee effort, every fucking treaty negotiated by Democrats has been termed Commie-inspired (or some such bullshit) traitorous action by red-baiting Republican filth.
It's really quite something to behold, the silence of Ryan/McConnell/Gingrich on this.
Besides, the Republican Party and its media attendants have proved, and way before Trump came on the scene and perfected the brand, that if you say something, any sort of horseshit, enough times, repeat it over and over, it will become the hard truth in the minds of 45% of the voters.
So I say it's the Republican party doing the hacking.
I'll say it again tomorrow. Fuck them.
Yeah, Clinton lies, so never the fuck mind.
Gingrich's newly proposed resurrection of McCarthy's House Committee on Unamerican Activities is going to have a hell of a show in its hands, as they hang each other in public.
Unless we kill them first.


Welcome inside this beautiful main level living 4 bedroom, 3.5 bath custom home. The open concept design with 4,583 sq ft provides ample room for entertaining. Gourmet kitchen with viking, 6 burner gas range, pantry, island & granite. Vaulted ceilings, spacious on-suite bedrooms and 4 fireplaces throughout. Adjacent Premiere NW Equestrian Facilities included, 50+ acres of scenic pasture / trees. Opportunity to own a slice of heaven, too many amenities to list.


text:
Andromeda Romano-Lax
From the author of The Spanish Bow comes a lush, harrowing novel based on the real life story of Rosalie Rayner Watson, one of the most controversial scientists—and mothers—of the 20th century.
"The mother begins to destroy the child the moment it's born," wrote the founder of behaviorist psychology, John B. Watson, whose 1928 parenting guide was revered as the child-rearing bible. For their dangerous and "mawkish" impulses to kiss and hug their child, "most mothers should be indicted for psychological murder."
Behave is the story of Rosalie Rayner,
Behave is the story of Rosalie Rayner, Watson's ambitious young wife and the mother of two of his children.
In 1920, when she graduated from Vassar College, Rayner was ready to make her mark on the world. Intelligent, beautiful, and unflappable, she won a coveted research position at Johns Hopkins assisting the charismatic celebrity psychologist John B. Watson. Together, Watson and Rayner conducted controversial experiments on hundreds of babies to prove behaviorist principles. They also embarked on a scandalous affair that cost them both their jobs–and recast the sparkling young Rosalie Rayner, scientist and thinker, as Mrs. John Watson, wife and conflicted, maligned mother, just another "woman behind a great man."
With Behave, Andromeda Romano-Lax offers a provocative fictional biography of Rosalie Rayner Watson, a woman whose work influenced generations of Americans, and whose legacy has been lost in the shadow of her husband's. In turns moving and horrifying, Behave is a richly nuanced and disturbing novel about science, progress, love, marriage, motherhood, and what all those things cost a passionate, promising young woman.
Soho Press
About Andromeda Romano-Lax
Andromeda Romano-Lax is the author of The Spanish Bow, a New York Times Editors' Choice that has been translated into 11 languages, and The Detour, as well as numerous works of nonfiction. She teaches in the low-residency MFA program at the University of Alaska Anchorage and is a co-founder of 49 Writers, a statewide literary organization. Recently, she has divided her time between Alaska, Mexico, and Asia.
"Riveting."—People Magazine
"Shocking and thought-provoking . . . The intimate struggles of a woman weighing her value, utility, and satisfaction both within and outside the home certainly resonate today."—The Boston Globe
"This novel suggests the pain of wanting, and failing, to behave."—The New York Times Book Review
"A novel to be savored and shared."—Shelf Awareness
1. On page 53, Rosalie's father asserts (in reference to eugenics) that "scientists are misusing what they don't understand to divide humanity up all over again." Does John's scientific work go against this trend, or in a way does it also "divide humanity up"?
2. A number of times John claims that you have to avoid being "softhearted" or "sentimental" to be a scientist. What scenarios does Behave present to support and challenge this notion? Does it suggest that detachment actually is necessary for effective sci- entific research? To what extent?
3. Based on Rosalie's descriptions of John and her explanations of his motives and behavior, did the events of his life encourage his behaviorist ideology? Why or why not?
4. On page 133, Annie comments that "Sometimes . . . I think the only way things change is on a whim." Does Behave support this notion, or does it favor Rosalie and John's idea of change com- ing from "logical, measured, reasoned decision"?
5. In what ways are Mary Watson and Rosalie depicted as sim- ilar in Behave? In what ways are they depicted as opposites? What might Romano-Lax be suggesting through the connections between these characters?
6. Describe the role of female friendship in the novel. How does it affect the way Rosalie is portrayed?
7. What role does class play in Behave? How do John's and Rosalie's differing financial backgrounds affect their relationship?
8. What does the novel suggest about the professional and personal roles and issues of women in Jazz Age American society? Do any of the comments continue to resonate today?
9. Are John's attitudes regarding gender roles (for examples, his claim on page 336 that "You're my wife. That's your That's any worthwhile woman's career") consistent with his behaviorism? How do you account for his attitudes toward women?
10. Why do you think John chose "an abnormal baby for his most famous experiment" (377)? Do you think it undermines the results of his experiment? Do you think it undermines the rest of his work?
11. Why might, as Romano-Lax puts it, Rosalie Rayner Watson's life have been "deemed not worth recording or not worth protecting from erasure by others" (385)? What are qualities that make a life more "noteworthy," and why might this be the case? Have there been any recent changes in which lives are considered noteworthy?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Temp rendezavous shelter set up?
Im looking to build something very simple, 3 poles maybe, then drape a canvas tarp ( without the modern grommet ). This shelter just has to be big enough for 2 of us to sit or lay under while we're on site, selling/trading goods.
I have something like this in mind, but a little more simple.
Does anyone have some info on something that may suite me better?
Nope...that looks about as close to a MM setup as you'll get? I'd say the only thing missing is a camp fire; a canvas side flap, and maybe a fleshed hide on a stretcher? Looks rite comfy to me! Save me a spot!
Good luck with the blanket trades. MAN... I just remembered what all I missed about Rendezvous'. Lord...the memories I have!!
Without knowledge of your setup being "era" correct FG, it certainly looks primitive enough to serve the purpose of a portable shelter.
Trivial as it is, I wonder what they used in the day as a ground stake to tie-down their pole ropes...wood or metal...??
Jonathan the biggest problem were you'll be setting up is rain, wind and dust blowing off and on getting all your wares dusty and damp. There are lots of other designs that are correct, over the years I have used anything from just a drop cloth to a 20 foot tipi.
For hunting or just short stays a single pole tent works very nicely - look at Panther's "Hunter Tent", sets up fast, original called a "Pyramid Tent" popular in The War of 1812. Have wore out two of these from the hard use in hunting camps and bad weather.
Buck, I plan on waterproofing this material. Its basically going to be a sun shade for my buddy and I when I set up my trade blanket. I don't have a ton of stuff to bring, so everything will fit into a waterproof container and be taken back to camp once the day is over or its raining. I ended up buying the 9x12 which is plenty big for what we intend to use it for. Just have to find some poles in the mountains.
One of the best and least expensive material is a high thread count king size bed sheet 200-300 thread count treated with canvas water proofing, light and strong. Pike used these when exploring in southern Colorado Territory.
In the corner use smooth small river rock to prevent tearing the material, make a pocket with corner, place the clean smooth small rock then tie your rope around the sheet and the rock. Now you'll have four corner ties and middle ones can be added is needed. Pretty easy and light in weight. I used a rope usually hemp that has been worked a little to be softer and not as coarse as most you see. Easier on the sheet and on your hands.


Almost two in every five handsets sold in the Middle East are smartphones, according to IDC figures.
Smartphones now account for nearly two out of every five phones in the Middle East, according to the latest research from International Data Corporation (IDC), with smartphone volumes up 16.4% in the second quarter of 2013 when compared to the same quarter in 2012.
Nokia remains the brand leader for the overall Middle East mobile phone market, with 45.2% share of the market's volume. Samsung, which ranks second, had 18.3% share of the overall handset market for Q2 2013, but held nearly half of the smartphone market, where it outsold Nokia by almost five to one.
The South Korean giant shipped nearly half of all the smartphones sold in the region in Q2 2013, with its Galaxy SIII and SIII Mini models selling extremely well. Together, they outperformed Apple's iPhone 5 and also outsold Samsung's new Galaxy S4 flagship, which was priced well above the SIII. Apple's overall smartphone share was slightly down, quarter on quarter, at 11.4%, as consumers awaited yesterday's launch of the iPhone 5S.
Nokia's smartphone share crept back up into double figures, increasing from 9.7% in Q1 2013 to 11.8%. Symbian models are now being phased out as the Lumia Windows Phone lineup is extended, and it was the vendor's cheaper Lumia models that helped stage its rebound. BlackBerry held on to its position as the number-two vendor in the smartphone category, but its new Q10 and Z10 devices have made a slow start to life in the market, accounting for just 13.3% of the vendor's sales in the second quarter of 2013.


text:
Uh-oh - you don't have JavaScript installed. Some parts of this site won't work without it. Better turn it on!
Ambassador Board
< Back to Volunteer
Program Support: Tutoring and Events
Become a tutor or support our youth and family activities to help youth build community and reach their goals.
Thanks to the support of almost a dozen volunteer tutors, Friends of the Children–Seattle is able to provide one-on-one tutoring to nearly 30 youth each quarter. Most tutors work with youth in elementary school and focus on meeting grade-level math and reading requirements. Other tutors have focused on SAT and GED prep with our teens and seniors, helping prepare them for upcoming tests or improve their scores.
Tutors typically work on-site at Friends of the Children–Seattle, though this opportunity is currently virtual. Tutors are expected to commit to a minimum of one academic quarter and have a higher education degree or pursuing a higher education degree.
If you are interested in tutoring, please fill out the form at the bottom of the page and select K-5 Tutoring, Reading Buddy, and/or High School Tutoring.
Family Engagement Events
Volunteer your time and/or resources for Family Engagement Events at Friends of the Children-Seattle! Our events include (but are not limited to):
Women of Influence celebration (early May)
Family and Friends event (Summer)
Legacy and Promotion Celebration (June)
Back to School Bash (mid-August)
Winter Celebration (early December)
Family Engagement Events at Friends provide special opportunities to build community amongst families and staff, celebrate the various seasons and accomplishments with our families and equip them with necessary supplies for success. For example, putting together pamper kits for the incredible women in our youth's lives, creating 'post-high school' survival kits for program graduates, organizing take-home kits with summer activities for youth to prevent the summer slide, and packing backpacks with needed school supplies for the new school year.
If you are interested in supporting our community in this way, please fill out the form at the bottom of the page and select "Family Engagement Events".
Be Part of The Story
info@friendsseattle.org
© 2023 Friends of The Children. All rights reserved.


text:
Home Canadian Soccer Men's National Team Ricketts edges closer to national goal-scoring record in win over NZ
Ricketts edges closer to national goal-scoring record in win over NZ
By Gavin Day
Canada celebrates. PHOTO: CANADA SOCCER
Thanks to a Tosaint Ricketts goal that capitalized on a New Zealand defensive miscue, Canada is off to the races in the John Herdman era with a 1-0 victory is San Pedro Del Pinatar, Spain.
It was route one soccer to its finest that got Canada the lead, although it was probably not meant that way as Dejan Jakovic knocked forward a long ball that got twisted around in the heavy winds. The New Zealand back line didn't know how to manage that ball and it then sat up for Ricketts who was all by himself to score goal No. 16 in his international career.
"It's big. It was my first game of 2018," said Ricketts, who's dealt with a thyroid issue in the early MLS season. "I had a rough start with health problems earlier this year. So it's a big step forward in the year and I'm happy to get the minutes. I'm happy to play for my country and I'm happy to show that I can provide."
Almost out of nowhere, it seems, Ricketts sits just six goals back of Dwayne De Rosario's all-time Canadian record of 22 goals.
DeRo is highly recognizable in the North American game thanks to his long career played in MLS, while Ricketts, from Edmonton, has toiled abroad and away from the public eye before finally coming back to Toronto where he's been in two MLS Cups with TFC.
"It's a big accomplishment to even be listed in the same conversation as DeRo," said Ricketts. "He did so much in Canada. He's done so much for MLS. I'm just grateful to help out the country in any way possible."
It wasn't all sunshine in Herdman's first game in charge since making the switch from the women's program to the men's.
Tosaint Ricketts PHOTO: CANADA SOCCER
Based on the first 10 minutes or so, odds would have been favourable for the Kiwis to take the early lead and they had two very close chances to do so early.
But Michael McGlinchey will live to rue to missed chances that went off the post just seconds apart.
The All Whites also had the ball past Milan Borjan, who mishandled a cross but it was called back for offside when former TFC player Jeremy Brockie, who didn't make contact with the ball, certainly was involved in the play as he provided a screen on Borjan.
Canada saw through those shaky moments and did string together some dangerous moments in attack.
"We knew the wind was going to be a bit of a factor," said Herdman. "We were preparing for whatever New Zealand were going to turn up and throw at us. We didn't really have any intel on them so the first 15 minutes I think we were caught on the back foot a bit and just not really getting to grips with what New Zealand were offering."
The player perhaps most responsible for Canada getting into the game was Liam Millar, the 18-year-old Liverpool prospect was not at all out of his depth and was a handful racing down the left side of Canada's attack.
Time and again he would cut around defenders and launched a few tantalizing crosses. He very nearly got himself a goal in the second half as well in what was about as close to a dream debut as possible.
"I thought I played quite well, to be fair," Millar said. "I was confident. I wasn't afraid. I think I did quite well. The only thing I missed was a goal."
Herdman's never had a problem with throwing young players into the fire and seeing how they fare. He did it with Jessie Fleming and Kadeisha Buchanan with the women and he's done it with Millar on Saturday.
Millar proved that he can swim and Herdman's indicated that he may be tough to dislodge as the CONCACAF Nations League gets rolling.
"He's good enough," said Herdman. "He's light the camp up this week. The senior players have got behind him from the first session. He was fearless. He's got that x factor. He doesn't know any other way than to try and terrorize fullbacks. It's exciting."
TagsCanadaJeremy BrockieJohn HerdmanLiam MillarMichael McGlincheyMilan BorjanNew ZealandTosaint Ricketts
Previous article Edmonton experiences the big-tent soccer evangelism of the Canadian Premier League
Next article Open letter from FC Edmonton GM Jay Ball on CanPL campaign: "For me, it's about the community"
More By Gavin Day
More In Men's National Team
To finish third at a tournament, in which more than three teams were participating, withou…
Right now, Canada is one win, one draw at the Algarve Cup because, really, their goal hasn…
Let's face it, you would stay off the message boards and Reddit and the soccer blogs if yo…
Canada's men's team thrashes Dominica, but still has a country to win over
Canadian men's national lteam coach John Herdman has made it something of a trademark to t…
After Gold Cup elimination, what's next for the Canadian men's program?
There's one game scheduled in September in Jamaica and with no World Cup qualifiers or Gol…
Draw sends Canada to Gold Cup quarter-finals
A second-place finish in Group A to go with a no-fear sort of performance against both Cos…
Load More By Gavin Day
Having Herdman come out to give the final words at a press conference is like knowing that…
So what should the Alphonso Davies shoes be named? Should we be able to buy Sincy12 gear? …
Davies, who is now with Bayern Munich after a record transfer from the Vancouver Whitecaps…
Load More In Men's National Team
The wind made it hard to judge anything. It would be nice if we could play the ball on the ground in those conditions and keep control but back to "direct" soccer. Will we ever learn? Route 1? I keep getting deja vu all over again.
Good to see some of the young players but I am not happy with the style of play. We seem to be regressing. Hopefully it was just one game in the wind.
Security Question * − eight = 1
Follow The 11
Commissioner: NASL does not want to be an affiliated developmental league
No Barca, no Roma, no PSG; Officially, beIN Sport mum on Canadian plans
Worst-kept secret in Canadian soccer: Zambrano was on hot seat from day one
Saiko's time with FC Edmonton comes to a close
The new Canadian Professional League needs to go public ASAP
frank smith: is still on the radar of the CPL ?...
Mark Mercier: Ok, I realize this thread is ancient but I played with Steve Lambert and Brian D...
Steven Sandor: Just a note. As you may have noticed, I am currently working for CanPL.ca as a c...
Aargy: What happened to the "Minutes for Canadians in MLS"? I guess you don't want to k...
Garry Grams: True words....it's not how many chances you get, it's how many you convert that...
MLS NASL FC Edmonton Canada Toronto FC Vancouver Whitecaps Montreal Impact Colin Miller Canadian Soccer Association Ottawa Fury USL FC Dallas women's soccer Will Johnson Kyle Porter Jonathan Osorio Russell Teibert Julian de Guzman World Cup Kyle Bekker Mallan Roberts Patrice Bernier Nana Attakora Orlando City Marcel de Jong
A Canadian Soccer Novel
A Canadian Soccer novel for young adults
Buy it at
Chapters/Indigo


text:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/sgml/loosedtd.html">

		<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1">
		<meta name="keywords" content="erase, trash">
		<meta name="description" content="Learn more about erasing rewritable optical discs with Permanent Eraser.">
		<link media="all" rel="stylesheet" href="../sty/task_style.css">
		<title>Erase Optical Discs</title>

				Permanent Eraser Help

				Index

Erase Optical Discs

To erase a rewritable optical disc (CD-RW or DVD-RW), drag the disc onto the Permanent Eraser icon.  The program will start and will erase the disc.

See also

Erase the Trash

Erase Files

Erasing Levels

General Preferences

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: Word search string manipulation This segment of code I have is part of a much larger code, but this segment what it basically does is the searchword(); function uses strstr to find all words matching to the users input search word puts the initial position of the word into the keywordsat[] integer array so that I can use it to the print 1 line of the text. what searchword(); returns is just number of words found or 0 when no words are found, dosent have word. printsummary() and wordfoundYN are irrelevant for this code bit. Also bear in mine message[] is a paragraph, with \n and stuff.
So basically this code currently functions properly, it finds key words within the message[] array and returns the starting positions of the words, puts them into keywordsat[]. Then in order to print only 1 line I go back until previous \n character then i simply print till the next \n character, thus printing out the line of the paragraph the word is contained in.
But I have a problem, lets say we assume that message[]={"\n the cat is in the bag.\n"}
and then the user inputs the search for word to be "the" it would print the same line in the paragraph twice, since it found the word in the sentence twice, keywordsat[] would fill up with 2 numbers keywordsat[0]=1 and keywordsat[1]=16. I was wondering if there was anyway for this program to know that if 2 words are in the same line, dont print the same line twice?
...
                searchwordYN=searchword();
                    if(searchwordYN!=0){
                        printsummary(d);
                        wordfoundYN++;
                        counter=0;
                        while(counter<searchwordYN){
                                i=keywordsat[counter];
                                while(i>=0){
                                    if(message[i]=='\n'){
                                        break;
                                    }
                                    i--;
                                }

                                for(f=i+1;f<10485760;f++){
                                        if(message[f]=='\n'){
                                            break;
                                        }
                                    printf("%c", message[f]);
                                }
                                printf("\n");
                                counter++;
                        }
                        counter=0;
                    }
...

My searchword() function:
int searchword(){
    char *ret;
    int i=0;

    ret = strstr(message, keyword);
    if(ret==NULL){
        return 0;
    }
    while(ret!=NULL)
    {
        keywordsat[i]=ret-message;
        i++;
        ret++;
        ret = strstr(ret, keyword);
    }
    return i;
}

A: One way would be to save the last position of start of line (value of i)
something like this might work:
  searchwordYN=searchword();
  if(searchwordYN!=0){

      //old start of line needs to be initialized by something bigger than file size

      int oldStartOfLine = 10485760 + 1;

      printsummary(d);
      wordfoundYN++;
      counter=0;
      while(counter<searchwordYN){

          i=keywordsat[counter];
          while(i>=0){
              if(message[i]=='\n'){
                  break;
              }
              i--;
          }
          if( i != oldStartOfLine ){

              // only do the print out if this is a new line.

              for(f=i+1;f<10485760;f++){
                  if(message[f]=='\n'){
                      break;
                  }
                  printf("%c", message[f]);
              }
          }
          printf("\n");

          // save old start of line
          oldStartOfLine = i;
          counter++;
      }
      counter=0;
  }

At the end a tip:
Don't be afraid to use attributes to functions instead of using global variables. Makes it nicer.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


CTT (Corporazione Toscana di Teletransmissione--Tuscan Broadcasting Corporation), southern Italian news corporation.
TPI (Teletransmissione Piemontese Internazionale--Piedmontese International Broadcasting), a northern Italian broadcasting network that also broadcasts internationally in many languages.
BBC's Are You Being Helped?
This page was last modified on 18 August 2010, at 22:37.


InnerWorkings to Announce Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2017 Financial Results on February 27, 2018 | InnerWorkings, Inc.
CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- InnerWorkings, Inc. (NASDAQ: INWK), the leading global marketing execution firm, will announce its fourth quarter and full-year 2017 results after financial markets close on Tuesday, February 27, 2017.
Eric D. Belcher, Chief Executive Officer, and Chip Hodgkins, Interim Chief Financial Officer, will host a conference call to discuss the results the same day at 4:30 p.m. Central time (5:30 p.m. Eastern time).
InnerWorkings, Inc. (NASDAQ: INWK) is the leading global marketing execution firm serving Fortune 1000 brands across a wide range of industries. As a comprehensive outsourced enterprise solution, the Company leverages proprietary technology, an extensive supplier network and deep domain expertise to streamline the production of branded materials and retail experiences across geographies and formats. InnerWorkings is headquartered in Chicago, IL and employs approximately 1,900 individuals to support global clients in the execution of multi-faceted brand campaigns in every major market around the world. Among the many industries InnerWorkings serves are: retail, financial services, hospitality, consumer packaged goods, not-for-profits, healthcare, food & beverage, broadcasting & cable, automotive, and transportation. For more information visit: www.inwk.com.


text:
Rsvp | Sponsor | Donate
Parents Care Program
About Urban Tech
As Chairman of Global Brokerage at Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., Bruce Mosler advises major tenants and investors on strategic real estate matters, managing key client relationships on behalf of the firm globally. Widely respected as one of the commercial real estate industry's most influential and talented professionals, Mr. Mosler has leased millions of square feet throughout his career. Called "cutting-edge" and "one of the most energetic and successful" executives in the industry, Mr. Mosler has been a formative leader at Cushman & Wakefield for over 20 years and has executed deals that have shaped the fabric of New York City.
Mr. Mosler served as President and CEO of Cushman & Wakefield from 2005-2010, leading the firm from $800 million in sales to $2.1 billion and diversifying the company's revenue stream by 30 percent through expansion of the business in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. Prior to this, Mr. Mosler was President of U.S. Operations and implemented a number of initiatives for the firm, including creating national leadership roles in Industrial, Retail and Multifamily and creating the Cushman & Wakefield Alliance, a first-of-its-kind affiliate network of top independent real estate companies operating as a unified team with Cushman & Wakefield. Before the start of his illustrious tenure at Cushman & Wakefield, Mr. Mosler served as President of the Eastern Region at Galbreath Riverbank.
Over his career, he has enjoyed prolific, long-term relationships with a number of public and private companies and not-for-profit organizations over the years, overseeing real estate strategies for projects large and small. His ongoing accounts include Brookfield Properties, RXR Realty, Vornado, JPMorgan Chase, NYU University Hospital (The Langone Center), Citigroup, Vanbarton Group, Savannah and MetLife, among others.
Mr. Mosler has been the recipient of myriad industry honors, including the Real Estate Board of New York's (REBNY) Deal of the Year Award for ingenious brokerage. Well-known for his commitment to a number of civic causes, Mr. Mosler has been recognized with several philanthropic industry awards, including REBNY's Kenneth R. Gerrety Humanitarian Award and Louis Smadbeck Brokerage Recognition Award, the US Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation's Commandant's Leadership Award and the Leadership in Support of the Military Award by the New York Council Navy League of the United States in 2017. He most recently received the 2018 Honorary Doctoral Degree by the Rabbinical College of America.
Mr. Mosler sits on numerous non-profit boards and most notably has directed much of his attention toward veteran and military issues, including founding and serving as Chairman of Cushman & Wakefield's Veterans Initiative Program. He also serves as co-chairman of the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. From 2011-2017 he served as Chairman of BENS and currently still serves as Chairman Emeritus on its Executive Committee. Mr. Mosler also serves on the Board of Governors of the Real Estate Board of New York and is a member of the boards of the Navy League of the United States, Police Athletic League, ISW (Institute for the Study of War) and Syracuse University Institute for Veterans and Military Families, among other civic and charitable organizations.
BRUCE MOSLER
CORPORATE LEADERSHIP HONOREE
D. PLUMP CONSULTING, LLC
EVENT PRODUCTION | MARKETING | PUBLIC RELATIONS


text:
Home » Emily McFarling
Emily McFarling
Pro Bono Volunteer of the Month – March 2016
Emily McFarling of McFarling Law Group
Emily McFarling began her legal career in 2003 after opening a solo practice in Las Vegas with a focus in family law. She received her J.D. from Northeastern University School of Law in Boston, Massachusetts. She has gained the credential of Certified Family Law Specialist by the State Bar of Nevada and has been accepted into the International Academy of Family Lawyers and the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
Since Emily began volunteering with Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada in 2013, she has accepted 9 pro bono cases in a range of areas, including appeals, domestic violence, guardianship, probate, divorce and custody. Emily also participates in Legal Aid Center's Partners in Pro Bono program in which lawyers and law students are matched up to work together on a pro bono case.
Law student mentee, Michael Burton, who has assisted Emily on three pro bono cases says, "Fighting for these people who cannot fight for themselves–believing in them and their cause, is what Emily is about."
Emily says she performs pro bono work due to the number of people who lack the financial resources to afford legal representation. She is particularly sensitive to issues of domestic violence, such as when victims are cut off from the finances, making it very difficult for them to leave their abuser and especially difficult to have the assistance to do so.
When asked about a memorable pro bono client, Emily said, "I was referred a pro bono case in which a biological father filed a paternity action prior to his child's first birthday only to have it dismissed because the mother had placed another man on the birth certificate." Emily represented the father on appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court in which she succeeded in getting the dismissal reversed and on remand was able to get the other man's voluntary acknowledgement of paternity set aside and joint physical custody established for her client.
For her commitment to representing pro bono clients and dedication to inculcating a pro bono ethos into our future generation of lawyers, we honor Emily McFarling as the March Pro Bono Attorney of the Month.


Pasta is one of the most enjoyable and comforting foods out there but a lot of people fail to enjoy this great meal because of the way they cook it. The truth is irrespective of whether you choose to add tomato sauce or creamy alfredo, pasta is a good meal to have and how easy it is to make.
Making pasta is however different from your regular noodles and making them the same way is probably why you end up with a soggy mess. Here are some of the top pasta offenses that are making your meal soggy and unpalatable and how to prevent them.
It is best to reach for the largest pot and fill it with 5 to 6 quarts of water when cooking your pasta. This will prevent you from having to break up the pasta to fit and also ensure that it doesn't come out sticky. When you add pasta to a small amount of water, it lowers the temperature of the water as opposed to when you add it to a large amount of water. This will make the pasta sit at the bottom of the pot and start to clump and become mushy unless you stir.
A smaller pot means less water and higher amount of starch in the pot, which will cause it to come out sticky after you drain the water. Best bet is to go for the big pot irrespective of quantity.
Cooking directions can be helpful but following your instincts can be better sometimes. Any box of pasta you buy will have directions on the back. Don't stop cooking just because the wrapper it comes in says it should be cooked for 10 minutes. They are mostly accurate 50 percent of the time and when the cooking time is up, taste a noodle or two before draining the pot.
It's best to keep cooking your pasta till its cook and still firm. You should keep tasting till you're sure and try not to make it mushy.
The cooking instructions usual says boil in salted water. Failing to add salt maybe because you're trying to eat healthy or because you're simply lazy but it may be responsible for your slimy pasta. It is important that pasta water is salty and you don't have to worry about your sodium levels as it won't absorb most of the salt.
It will only roughen up the noodles so they don't get slimy. 1 to 2 tablespoons of salt for every 5 to 6 quarts of cooking water will do.
Once the water starts boiling, remember to stir ,instead of just pouring it in and waiting for it to get cookedm its best to stir your pasta to prevent it from sinking to the bottom of the pot and sticking together like a gum.
Mix it together periodically to prevent sticking. Spread it around the pot ,to help it slowly sink into the water. Instead of stuffing your long noodles into the water all at once, allow it stand up in the pot and sink as they cook, then stir to help them cook evenly.
Once your pasta is cooked, retain some of the cooking water. The water is now starchy and contains a lot of the flavours which you can still use. A splash or two of cooking water is the perfect way to make a clumpy and dry sauce become luxurious and silky.
The water helps loosen up the sauce to coat up the noodles, just as the starch helps the sauce stick to the pasta better.


text:
Lesson 1. Counter Bullying
Lesson 2. Introduce the Religions
Lesson 3. Meet the People
Lesson 4. Explore the Places
Lesson 5. Take the 3Rs Oath
Lesson 3. Add the People
Step A. Prepare the Space
Consider allowing 40-minutes for this session.
Post the 3Rs Oath. Reconstruct the grid. Set aside the dry erase markers. Set aside the 3Rs fill-in-the-blank Oath
Step B. Recite the Oath
Motivate: Gather students and remind them that today is the third of the five lessons to earn the 3Rs Ambassadors Patch.
Remind: Briefly explain why it is so urgent for them to become 3Rs Ambassadors to help prevent religious-based bullying.
Unite: Invite the students to recite aloud and at once the 3Rs Oath.
Step C. Follow-Up
Check-In: Briefly follow-up with the students. Check-in with them about anything that arose from the last session. Share anything you learned in response to the questions they previously asked.
Step D. Play the Visible & Invisible Game
Enact: Form a circle. Invite students to step into the center circle if they are wearing a long-sleeved shirt; wearing earrings; has brown eyes; born outside the U.S.; loves Brussels sprouts; plays an instrument; has a sibling; speaks more than one language; as been on an airplane. Briefly discuss how many of our identities––the things that make us who we are or what we like––are both visible and invisible. Ask students to give examples of how someone's religious identity may be visible. Ask students to give examples of how someone's religious identity may be invisible.
Step E. Review the Grid
Review: Summarize what students learned when constructing the grid from the last lesson. Refresh their memory of the names of the religions and the symbols.
Step F. Add the People
The purposes of this next exercise are two-fold: first, to identify the internal diversity within religions––not everyone is the same; and second, people's identities are expressed in both visible and invisible ways.
Explore: Break the class into small groups. Divide the six people-cards among the groups (e.g., three groups with two cards each). Then ask them the following questions:
Who is religious? Use the dry erase marker to indicate whether you think they are religious.
What religion do you think they identify with?
What do you notice about the people?
What makes you say that?
What else do you want to know?
Reveal. Share the point of this lesson: every person on a single card identifies with the same religion. Whether the person is wearing a cross or not, all the people on that card identify as Christians. Whether the person is wearing a hijab or not, all the people on that card identify as Muslim.
Organize: Invite the students to organize the photos on the third row of the grid, as follows.
Compare: Ask students about the similarities and differences of the visible ways people express their identities. Give special attention to the head-coverings across traditions.
Step G. Recite the Oath
Reflect: End the lesson by explaining that people are bullied for many reasons. People are bullied because of their clothing, or how they wear their hair, or whether they wear a religious symbol. People are also bullied because of their invisible religious identities.
Motivate: Congratulate the students for completing the third of the five lessons toward earning their 3Rs Ambassador Patch.
Recite: Close the lesson by taking down the 3Rs Oath and holding up the fill-in-the-blank Oath. Invite the students to read it aloud and together.
Lesson 4 >>
A project of The Foundation for Religious Literacy and 1791 Delegates.
3Rs Ambassadors


text:
Traditions - General Info
Bastille Day after the French Revolution
This page was updated on: Monday, December 11, 2017 at: 2:14 pm
Bastille Fortress
Bastille Day is a French National day.
It was institutionalized after the storming of the Bastille Fortress on July 14, 1789.
The first stone of the Bastille Fortress was laid in 1370, in the extension of the already existing city walls.
Eight 24m high round towers flanked the fortress and and 25m wide moats protected it.
It ceased to be a military fortress in the late 16th century and was converted into a state prison.
Seven prisoners were still imprisoned in the Bastille on July 14, 1789 when 633 revolutionaries seized it.
Ironically, most of these men were of German origin and worked as cabinetmakers in the nearby St-Antoine district.
Demolition began the following day and was completed in 1792.
Most stones were used to erect the Pont de la Concorde.
The remaining stones were used for the creation of 83 models of the fortress.
A model was sent to each French department in order to commemorate the end of the monarchy.
Dark cobblestones today mark the layout of the fortress on Place de la Bastille.
What is Bastille Day?
Bastille Day - Quatorze Juillet (14th July) - Fête Nationale or colloquially Fet. Nat. is not a commemoration of the storming of the fortress.
It is the commemoration of the Fête de la Fédération, which took place a year later on July 14, 1790.
The storming of the Bastille was indeed deemed too tragic and therefore couldn't carry the symbol of freedom, equality and fraternity.
The Festival of the Federation took place on the Champ de Mars.
It commemorated the first anniversary of the storming, and even the unfortunate King Louis XVI attended it!
Bastille in 1420
Demolition of the Bastille in July 1789
Republican Guards 1st Infantry parade on Bastille Day
How do French celebrate?
Bastille Day is one of the most observed public holidays of the year and brings together all social classes.
This is indeed an opportunity for a spectacular military parade on the Avenue des Champs-Elysées.
It is recommended to arrive very early in order to secure a front row place.
French and foreign guest troops march down from the Arc de Triomphe to the Place de la Concorde and the Patrouille de France flies over.
Troops then split in front of the huge canopy, where the president of the Republic and his guests of honour stand.
The parade is followed by a garden party in the gardens of the Elysée Palace.
A spectacular fireworks display is organized in the evening on the Champ de Mars near the Eiffel Tower and is followed by street celebrations.
Bastille Day ball - Bal du Quatorze Juillet is indeed a veritable institution.
People dance in the street and have fun until dawn, and this since 1880!
Bastille Day is also an opportunity for the President of the Republic to grant remissions.
If you decide to visit Paris on July 14th, you will find many shops open.
However, it will be very different if you travel to the province as everyone is busy celebrating.
It's best to follow the flow and enjoy the day.
Photos via Wikimedia Commons: Bastille Fortress in 1420 Feodor Josef Hubert Hoffbauer (1839-1922) is in Public domain - Bastille during demolition by Anon is in Public domain - 1st Infantry Republican Guard by Marie-Lan Nguyen is licensed under CC BY 2.5
Traditions - General Info - Latest content
How to get to Paris from Charles de Gaulle Airport
Discover how to get to Paris from Charles de Gaulle Airport using one of the three main means of transport, taxi, fast train RER and bus
Buses from Charles de Gaulle Airport to Paris
Direct buses from Charles de Gaulle Airport to Paris are a fast and economical means of transport while standard public buses are the cheapest but slowest
Express train RER from Charles de Gaulle Airport to Paris
Express train RER, a fast, reliable, easy to use and good value for money means of transport from Charles de Gaulle Airport to the centre of Paris
How to get a taxi to Paris from Charles de Gaulle Airport
Basic tips and general information on the various taxis options on offer to get from Roissy-Charles de Gaulle Airport to the centre of Paris


text:
Theater of Cruelty: The Strange American Reception of Nell Zink's 'Mislaid'
By Jonathon Sturgeon
Nell Zink's second novel, Mislaid, announces her as one of a handful of the best novelists on the American scene. More satirical, willfully magisterial, and, yes, even earnest than The Wallcreeper — a debut that was far more earnest than even its admirers admit — Mislaid draws its immense humor and literary ingenuity from the postwar American South, that weird, melodramatic dispositif of class, race, and gender lines that strains to confine our lives even today. By the end of Mislaid, the satire dissolves into parody, or vice versa, leaving a cast of characters — of human animals in a habitat — who have rearranged their limitations, in a way that may offend many readers, in order to pursue better, shared lives.
Yet if Nell Zink is strange — and she is — the American reception of her second book has been stranger. Whereas most critics accepted The Wallcreeper as fleet and concise and irrevocably new — a peck in the eye of American fiction — Mislaid has baffled them and led to a misnomer or two about its author's biography. Why? I think know why. It has a lot to do with its author's idea of what awakens the human animal.
Nell Zink has a thing, or a non-thing, or an anti-thing for Antonin Artaud's "theater of cruelty." Take, for example, her new novel. On the 30th page, Peggy Fleming (née Vaillaincourt) — a lesbian who has made love to, married, and been cheated on (twice) by a gay man — attempts to drown herself (and her children) in a fit of jealous mania. Then she admits to a campus security guard, who has witnessed the scene, that the drowning was not an accident:
The officer sighed and said, "Mrs. Fleming, are you saying that was not an accident?" "Nope. That was theater of cruelty."
Now, this is of course a relatively straightforward literary allusion in a book with no shortage of oblique ones (like the James Merrill seance allusion!), so it's probably safe to say that Zink is shooting for bigger game here. But I'd like to point out that New York Times critic Dwight Garner, whose kiss-and-slap review of Mislaid was more slap than kiss, seems to have missed the point of this scene (almost entirely). He notes it as an example of Zink's "salted" dialogue — certainly it is, but this reference to Artaud also ensnares the reader. The theater of cruelty, if anyone bothered to remember, is simply a practice that tries to awaken the viewer's (or reader's) "organism" by way of various shocks and awes. (And organism, as we shall see, is the key word.) Strong novels, it is sometimes said, teach you how to read them as they move along. This is an example of that. The drowning is meant to work on the nervous systems of both the characters and the reader, and it does. Within a few pages, the names and race of Peggy and her daughter have changed — in a way that clearly bothers Garner and is meant to, and in a way that suggests two human organisms adapting to trauma.
Zink has made other references to Artaud. Last week at Park Slope's Community Bookstore, Zink, who was in New York to promote Mislaid, mentioned Artaud in more ways than one. First indirectly, as an act of theater:
"Today, I pulled the pants off a Nazi. He was in Union Square being a Nazi. So I unbuckled his belt, and pulled his pants down. And he just kept being a Nazi."
Later, directly:
"I always thought the theater of cruelty was normal, and maybe I'd just snapped."
Now, I'll admit that I'm not exactly sure what Zink was referring to here — it seems to be a way of addressing realism as a kind of cruelty — but I do have some thoughts about what her novels are doing, viz. Artaud, and it's basically what you think: their reputed "zaniness," which is really just a way of describing incisive jokes (about race, sex, death) made at great speed, is meant, again, to shock the reader's organism. And one way of understanding a shock, of course, is as a form of punishment. So let's look at the peculiar difference in two opinions on how punishing Zink can be.
Here's Alexandra Schwartz, writing for Bookforum:
The strangest part of Mislaid is Zink's abandonment, even punishment, of her initially vivid characters.
Now, Kathryn Schulz, writing for The New Yorker, reaches the exact opposite conclusion:
That is a kind of realism—in life, too, perpetrators go unpunished all the time—and Zink often excels at exploring such truths through comedy. But the ratio of buoyancy to ballast ultimately goes awry in "Mislaid," and I missed the moments in "The Wallcreeper," few but sufficient, when the bill came due.
So both critics thought the second half of Mislaid sagged, but for opposite reasons. For Schwartz, Zink was too punishing. For Schulz, she wasn't punishing enough.
The speed of the novel seems to have led to another problem. Here again is Schulz in her profile of Zink:
By then, Zink herself had sent "The Wallcreeper" to Dorothy, so she sat down and drafted, again in three weeks, a new novel. She saw it, at the time, as a kind of loss leader for her other work—as, in her words, "agent bait." The agents bit. Last year, shortly after Dorothy published "The Wallcreeper," Ecco shelled out six figures for the book that became "Mislaid."
Nell Zink's Mislaid is 242 pages long. It is far more robust, complete, and complex than her debut, The Wallcreeper (which she is said to have written in a matter of days). There is no way, in other words, that she wrote this book in three weeks. At the Park Slope reading, Zink was clear enough:
"Mislaid was written over a period of years. You can't believe everything you read in The New Yorker."
Later she clarified that it took two years to write the novel.
I can only surmise that the "cruel" pacing of Zink's novels has shocked the nervous system of her critics and profilers so severely that they can no longer read her properly. Or it may have had something, again, to do with punishment. Schulz admits that Zink slighted her when they met in Germany:
"Don't be so pathetically American," [Zink] snapped, not kidding, and delivered a short lecture on income stagnation: a bird ridiculing its fellow-bird for stupidity. I didn't take it personally, but I did take it as telling. "Pathetic" is a decent synopsis of Zink's overall attitude toward America.
But Schulz's profile does have one benefit, even if you have to read between the lines to redeem it. The upshot of Zink's attempt to shock the human organism, if you also consider her deep-seated environmentalist tendencies, is that she — without question — understands humans as homo sapiens, as animals delimited by language, in an environment. Here's a sampling of some other quips from her reading in Park Slope:
"a perverse longstanding acquaintance with life on earth"; "everyone reproduces like you wouldn't believe…"; "one drop of semen on you, and you were gay…"; "I don't know if anyone here has ever been seduced? Raise your hands…"; "That's what human beings do when they have a sex drive…they fall in love…"; "If you want to write a book about homo sapiens…"
More proof? Even Zink's infamous zine (in which she wrote stories about animals) from the 1990s was called The Animal Review. Even her old band was called F.E.R.R.E.T.
But in the final estimation, it seems to me that Zink does see this theater of cruelty as a default mode of American realism, or reality, and not, necessarily, a moral high ground. Whether this makes Mislaid satire or parody is difficult to say. My gut tells me Zink understands the novel as satire, but that the South's self-mediating tendencies will make it forever read as parody. In any case, Mislaid is a biting take on an America where "fortunes do not accumulate, the soil does not grow, families have no history," as Nathanael West — another satirist-parodist invoked by Zink — once explained. And I know I've said it elsewhere, but West's next line, too, is fitting: "Leave the slow growth to the book reviewers, you only have time to explode."


text:
Charles W R Arvin
The Life of Charles W R
When Charles W R Arvin was born on 22 August 1922, in York, Pennsylvania, United States, his father, Charles R Arvin, was 20 and his mother, Irene M Snyder, was 23. He lived in Springettsbury Township, York, Pennsylvania, United States for about 10 years. He died on 13 April 1998, in York, Pennsylvania, United States, at the age of 75, and was buried in Mount Zion, Springettsbury Township, York, Pennsylvania, United States.
Learn about Charles W R's homeland.
Put your face in a costume from Charles W R's homelands.
Jean J Kepler Arvin
Female– • Female
Charles R Arvin
Irene M Snyder
Richard Eugene Arvin
Clyde Elwood Arvin
Thelma Irene Arvin
James B Arvin Sr.
+1 More Child
1923 · The President Dies of a Heart Attack
Warrant G. Harding died of a heart attack in the Palace hotel in San Francisco.
1923 · Amendment of Equal Rights
Is a proposed amendment to help guarantee equal legal rights for all citizens of the United States. Its main objective is to end legal distinctions between the two genders in terms of divorce, property, employment, and other legal matters. Even though it isn't the 28th Amendment yet, it has started conversations about the meaning of legal equality.
1942 · The Japanese American internment
Caused by the tensions between the United States and the Empire of Japan, the internment of Japanese Americans caused many to be forced out of their homes and forcibly relocated into concentration camps in the western states. More than 110,000 Japanese Americans were forced into these camps in fear that some of them were spies for Japan.
Probably a variant of Irish Irvin .
Charles W Arvin in household of Charles R Arvin, "United States Census, 1930"
Charles Arvin in household of Charles R Arvin, "United States Census, 1940"
Mr Charles W R Arvin, "United States, GenealogyBank Obituaries, 1980-2014"


text:
In Depth Analysis, Commentary, and Publications
115 items, Page 2 of 12
Missile Defense Is Compatible With Arms Control
Robert Soofer
What will it take for Russia and the United States to make progress on arms control? In announcing the Biden administration's intent to extend the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) for another five years, Secretary of State Anthony Blinkin offered a hint. He noted that the next negotiation must include all of Russian and American nuclear...
What to Look for in the FY 2022 Defense Budget Request
Tom Karako and Wes Rumbaugh
The Biden administration is expected to release its first budget request for FY 2022 in May. The request marks the first budget since FY 2011 that is not subject to the discretionary spending limits imposed by the Budget Control Act. While the defense budget request for FY 2022 was developed predominantly under the previous administration,...
Five Types of International Cooperation for Missile Defense
Kevin Fashola
The United States has long worked with its allies on missile defense cooperation. Yet as missile threats proliferate, cooperation is increasingly important.
Bad Idea: Ignoring Congressional Oversight on Space Sensor Development
Wes Rumbaugh
The decision to reject congressional oversight on HBTSS increases institutional uncertainty at a time when stable funding and management is critical.
The Air and Missile War in Nagorno-Karabakh: Lessons for the Future of Strike and Defense
Shaan Shaikh and Wes Rumbaugh
The combined use of drones, artillery, and missiles in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh offers critical insight into the conduct of future wars.
Adapting to the Hypersonic Era
Just as the world mitigated the most destabilizing aspects of systems like the strategic bomber and the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), the United States can blunt some of the risks posed by aerial hypersonic weapons.
America Should Integrate a Strike Capability With Its Missile Defense Systems
Offense-defense integration will not be a panacea, but it will be critical to a realistic and cost-effective way to contend with modern missile threats.
Offense–Defense Integration for Missile Defeat
Improved ODI would go a long way to countering modern missile threats. This report examines its benefits, challenges, and the possible road ahead.