Blog

From washingtonpost.com, reproduced here in full because there you have to register to read the damn thing.

Republicans’ new Web site not exactly what they hoped it would be
By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Republicans want to take over the House in the fall, but there’s a problem: They don’t have an agenda.

So on Tuesday, they set out to resolve that shortcoming. They announced that they would solicit suggestions on the Internet, then have members of the public give the ideas a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down. Call it the “Dancing With the Stars” model of public policy.

Republicans were very pleased with their technological sophistication as they introduced the Web site, America Speaking Out a ceremony at the Newseum. Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who created the program, said that to get software for the site, “I personally traveled to Washington state and discovered a Microsoft program that helped NASA map the moon.”

Using lunar software is appropriate, because the early responses to the Republicans’ request for ideas are pretty far out:

“End Child Labor Laws,” suggests one helpful participant. “We coddle children too much. They need to spend their youth in the factories.”

“How about if Congress actually do thier job and VET or Usurper in Chief, Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen in any way,” recommends another. “That fake so called birth certificate is useless.”

“A ‘teacher’ told my child in class that dolphins were mammals and not fish!” a third complains. “And the same thing about whales! We need TRADITIONAL VALUES in all areas of education. If it swims in the water, it is a FISH. Period! End of Story.”

House Republicans, meet the World Wide Web.

GOP leaders seemed to have something else in mind as they rolled out their new site. “I would expect the ideas that come out of this Web site and the involvement of our members will lead to ideas that we can attempt to implement today,” House Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) proclaimed. “We want to continue to offer better solutions to address the problems that America is facing, and we see this as a giant step forward, directly engaging the American people in the development of those solutions.”

Such as?

“Build a castle-style wall along the border, there is plenty of stone laying around about there.” That was in the “national security” section of the new site.

“Legalize Marijuana, cause, like, alcohol is legal. Man. Also.” That was in the “traditional values” section.

“I say, repeal all the amendments to the Constitution.” (“American prosperity” section.)

“Don’t let the illegals run out of Arizona and hide. . . . I think that we should do something to identify them in case they try to come back over. Like maybe tattoo a big scarlet ‘I’ on their chests — for ‘illegal’!!!” (Filed under “job creation.”)

The Republican leaders attempting to demonstrate their technological savvy at the Newseum brought to mind former Alaska senator Ted Stevens’s observation that the Internet is a “series of tubes.”

The Web site not only “has cutting-edge technology,” asserted Rep. Peter Roskam (Ill.), “but a winsome design that is easy for people to interact with.”

Lest you think Republicans are just discovering the Internet, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) let it be known that “House Republicans have tweeted five times as many as the House Democrats. Leader Boehner has almost five times as many Facebook fans as Speaker Pelosi.” Boehner grinned and gave a double thumbs-up.

Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.) contributed to the discussion by twice giving out the wrong address for the new site.

House Republicans had experimented with reality-show-style policymaking before. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) has been having Internet users vote on which government programs to cut, but that experiment was more tightly controlled.

This one, McCarthy said, would do nothing less than “change the course of history.” The Web site filters out obscenity and the like, but it hasn’t kept out hundreds of ideas: some serious, some offensive and some so wacky they surely must be Democratic sabotage.

“Let kids vote!” recommended one. “Let’s make a ‘Social Security Lotto,’ ” proposed another. “What dope came up with the idea of criminalizing a parent’s right to administer corporal punishment?” a third demanded.

Some contributors demanded action to uncover conspiracies involving the 9/11 attacks and the “NEW WORLD ORDER.” One forward thinker recommended that we “build the city of the future somewhere in a non-inhabit part of the United States, preferably the desert.”

Some of the uglier forces of the Internet found their way to the House Republican site. “I oppose the Hispanicization of America,” said one. “These are not patriotic people.” Another contributor had parody in mind (we hope): “English is are official langauge. Anybody who ain’t speak it the RIGHT way should kicked out.”

But Republicans might want to take a hard look at the suggestion that “we need to reframe the discussion” about the BP oil spill to counteract the “environmental whackos” worried about wildlife. Republicans, this person proposed, should argue that “BP is creating a new race of faster dolphins. These fish are unable to compete against the fish of other countries, but now their increased lubrication will allow them to fly through the water. Faster fish = good.”

E.S. and I had a fight the other night, during which the following dialogue occurred.

E.S.: You’re such an asshole.
FAUSTUS: You’re the asshole.
E.S.: You’re the fucking asshole.
FAUSTUS: You’re the fucking asshole, asshole.
E.S.: ….
FAUSTUS: ….
E.S.: You’re such an asshole.

From the Top Model season finale viewing in my house.

KRISTA’S MOM: That’s our family motto: pride, determination, and resilience.
FAUSTUS: Sweetheart, do we have a family motto?
E.S.: Sloth.
FAUSTUS: …
E.S.: …
FAUSTUS: That’s it?
E.S.: We’re too lazy to have more than one character trait in our family motto.

Last night I watched this week’s Law & Order: SVU. After it was finished, over the Wolf Films logo, Chris Meloni introduced the preview of next week’s episode by saying, “There’s a new SVU next week.” I grinned, as a new SVU means above anything else another chance that Chris Meloni might appear en déshabillé. Then Chris Meloni said, “Wipe that smile off your face.” I clapped my hand over my mouth in shock and did as ordered, though I couldn’t prevent myself from getting a little hard.

FAUSTUS: Oh, my God, honey, I’m watching this movie Orphan, it’s like The Bad Seed times four!
E.S.: You’re like The Bad Seed times four.
FAUSTUS: Oh, please. I would never be as sloppy as Rhoda Penmark.
E.S.: Depends on your definition of sloppy.

I was standing on a very crowded bus yesterday when we came to a stop and a few people got on, including an old woman. It was obvious that she wanted to sit down, but there were no free seats and nobody got up to offer her one. Everyone had boarded the bus but it didn’t move.

“Is somebody going to give this woman a seat?” the bus driver finally asked, pointedly, over the speaker. At this point somebody did indeed get up and offer her his seat, which she accepted. Once she was sitting comfortably, the bus got going again. “It’s nice to be important,” announced the bus driver, “but it’s more important to be nice.”

This left me with two questions:

1. How can I possibly not have heard this platitude before? Its symmetry and simplicity place it on par with “When you assume you make an ass out of u and me,” a platitude I first heard (and found profound and revealing) at the age of nine. How can my ears not have lost their virginity to this one?

2. Why was I deeply moved? Have I gone over the edge? E.S. points out that I am particularly vulnerable to the pathos of old women in movies and on television; was this an extension of that vulnerability? Or have I jumped the shark?

A very nice (well, I actually have no idea, but she punctuates beautifully) doctoral candidate wrote me to ask whether I would post this call for study participants. Since I am a sucker for beautiful punctuation, I cannot refuse. I will note that I am posting it in spite of the fact that I am too old to participate, which makes it therefore one of an ever-increasing number of reminders that though I was at one point young and fresh I am now wrinkly and desiccated.

Engaged volunteers needed!

I am looking for volunteers for a study of attitudes towards marriage and parenthood among engaged couples (same-sex or opposite sex). The study consists of a 25-30 minute online survey. To qualify for the study, you must be 20-35 years old, live in the U.S., and plan to marry or have a commitment ceremony within the next 365 days. You and your romantic partner must not have children, and this must be the first marriage for both of you.

You can:

—Help a doctoral candidate;
—Increase the pool of scientific knowledge;
—Support research on marriage and families; and
—Spend some time thinking about your relationship!

I am working with Dr. Charlotte J. Patterson, a Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia. This study has been approved by the University of Virginia Institutional Review Board #2009025800.

If you and/or your romantic partner are interested in participating or want further information, please email me at survey.couples@gmail.com. I will send you a link that you can use to access the study.

Thanks!

Cristina Reitz-Krueger
Doctoral Student
University of Virginia
(434) 243-8558
survey.couples@gmail.com

In late 2006 or early 2007, I read something about a forthcoming book that had stirred up a great deal of controversy in Jewish communities around the world, especially in Israel and Italy. The book, written in Italian by history professor Ariel Toaff (son of Elio Toaff, Chief Rabbi of Rome) of Bar Ilan University in Israel, was called Passovers of Blood; according to his critics, Toaff argued, using close readings of Medieval records of Jews tortured and put on trial for murder, that in the Middle Ages the blood libel was true—that is, that Jews used to murder Christian children and use their blood as an ingredient in matzah, the unleavened bread at the center of the celebration of Passover and the commemoration of the Jews’ escape from Egypt. In response, people called for Toaff to be fired and/or excommunicated. If I understand correctly, he was forbidden to attend his father’s funeral. The book’s publisher canceled the second printing.

I’ve tried and I’ve tried and I simply can’t come up with a way to communicate to non-Jews the enormity of such an assertion. For literally thousands of years, the blood libel has led to the slaughter of Jews in pogroms (anti-Jewish riots) and government- and church-led murder trials. The closest thing I can think of is the idea of a black historian writing a book claiming that slaves in America really were beasts incapable of human thought. It’s almost unthinkable. So I figured that Toaff’s critics were distorting the text of the book to serve their own ends and that what he’d actually written, though perhaps incendiary in some way, couldn’t possibly say what they claimed it said, especially since his previous published books had titles like To Eat Like a Hebrew: Jewish Cooking in Italy From the Renaissance to the Modern Age and Hebrew Monsters: The Jewish Imaginary From the Medieval Period to the Early Modern Period.

But I am a bloodthirsty man obsessed with murder, hate, and revenge, so the whole thing was making me really happy. Obviously I had to get a copy of the book. My Italian was extraordinarily rusty, but I figured that with a good dictionary I could get through enough to be satisfied. The publishers had printed only a thousand copies, though, so I had to act fast.

Well, I didn’t act fast enough, as it happened. Because there was exactly one copy for sale in the world, offered by a used bookstore in Italy. And it cost $432.00.

I did not have $432.00, so I regretfully closed my browser and went on to other tasks, presumably involving looking at pictures of naked men.

But I couldn’t stop thinking about Passovers of Blood, and finally, a few days later, I threw in the towel. “Fine,” I thought to myself. “I’ll spend $432.00 on a book I can’t read. What else is plastic for?” So I went back to the bookstore’s web site to find that the book now cost $817.00.

I gave up.

After several months passed, however, I got an e-mail from a friend in Italy, and in my response I begged him to check his local library for a copy of Passovers of Blood and, if they had the book, to photocopy it and send it to me.

The next day, he e-mailed me a PDF of the Italian text and the accompanying images (mostly Medieval woodcuts). “I’m sorry to say,” he wrote, “that I got it off an Italian antisemitic revisionist web site. But such are the lengths I’ll go to for my friends.” I sent him something flirtatious in response, opened the PDF, and prepared to find out what Toaff had really said.

Oh, boy.

“Trials for ritual murder”—this is a rough translation, but not too rough—”make up a hard knot to untangle, where people who want to examine them go generally to research that confirms, more or less convincingly, the theories that they have already developed and in which they seem firmly to believe. Elements that don’t fit the picture are often minimized in their significance, sometimes passed over in silence. Curiously, in this type of research, what needs to be proven is treated as a given. The perception is clear that a different attitude would present dangers and implications which one wants to avoid at all costs.”

Uh-oh.

Later on: “We must decide therefore whether the confessions of infant crucifixions on Passover Eve, the testimony of the accused about the use of Christian blood in the feast document myths—that is, beliefs and ideologies going back for a long time—or rites—that is, actual events occurring in reality and celebrated in prescribed and consolidated forms, with their baggage, more or less fixed, of formulas and anathemas, accompanied by those magic and superstitious practices that were an integral part of the protagonists’ mentality.”

Oh, shit.

I couldn’t get much further in Italian, but eventually I found a translation into English—done, alas, by antisemitic revisionists and hosted on an antisemitic revisionist web site—and in the end Toaff seemed to say that it was conceivable that a fundamentalist sect had occasionally kidnapped Christian babies to put their blood in matzah. The evidentiary link seemed pretty weak to me, but I’m not a historian and so I don’t feel competent to judge his historiography.

What I don’t get is: How on earth could anybody write such a thing and not expect to be—forgive me—crucified by the world Jewish community? I saw Toaff on some YouTube video and he seemed genuinely surprised at the vitriol he’d provoked. It was as if this were no different from writing about food or monsters.

If you want the Italian text you can download a PDF here.
If you want the images you can download a PDF here.
If you want to read the translation you can do so here; it’s a revisionist web site, but as far as I’ve been able to discern it’s a pretty accurate translation.

You know you’ve sunk pretty low when even the KKK won’t have anything to do with you. (Thanks to him for the image.)

The problem with writing a show in which somebody dies of an illness that isn’t the subject of the show (Rent, La Traviata) is that as a rule the only way to convey clearly that characters are sick, other than making them talk or sing about it explicitly, is to have them cough. And the instant somebody coughs onstage, the audience knows s/he’s going to die before the end of the show, which makes it impossible for the event to have any suspense or surprise.