 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At this same lunch, the subject of the rededication of the Justice Department building — in honor of Robert F. Kennedy — came up. Someone commented that "people" weren't too happy that President George W. Bush presided over that rededication: He was an unwelcome guest in "Camelot." I, of course, couldn't help remarking that some other people weren't too happy . . . the other way. End of (double) vignette.
Thomas for Chief, y'all.
"Ramon Humberto Colas, founder of Cuba's independent-libraries movement, held a briefing on June 11th for the press corps of the United Nations, where he was attending meetings. . . . "Reiterating [the movement's] offer to close down independent libraries, he said these would be unnecessary once Cubans have [broader] access to books and publications now forbidden and are free to exercise their cultural and intellectual rights. An Afro-Cuban, he also denounced the Castro regime's propaganda on racial issues; highlighted blacks' participation in the peaceful opposition movement; and denounced Castro's need to find external scapegoats and excuses for his failures and absolute control. . . . "The Cuban ambassador to the United Nations made several attempts to have the meeting canceled. The United Nations Correspondents Association (UNCA), which hosted the briefing, refused to cave in to the pressure. An audience of correspondents from all over the globe and several diplomats accredited to the United Nations attended the event. "Mr. Colas, a psychologist, and his wife, Berta Mexidor, an economist, founded the movement in March of 1998 after Fidel Castro declared at the International Book Fair in Havana that 'in Cuba, there are no forbidden books, just no money to buy them.' Avid readers, they were emboldened to open their personal collection of books and publications from abroad, kept private until then for fear of reprisal. Their project grew into a grassroots movement as more people overcame fear of persecution and opened their homes for the population to gain access to books, including those forbidden in Cuba's public libraries. "As book donations and support started coming in from overseas, the Colas family faced reprisals, harassment, detentions, and, finally, [exile]. In December 2001, the couple and their two children became political refugees in the United States. The movement, however, has continued and today there are 105 independent libraries in private homes all over the island offering books and hosting workshops and roundtables to discuss cultural and social issues missing from the officially sanctioned discourse. Since last March, when a repressive crackdown began, Cuban State Security has ransacked 22 of the libraries and sentenced 14 independent librarians to long prison terms. "Independent libraries have no access to any public or commercial spaces, and donations of books and materials such as pencils from abroad are often confiscated by the authorities. Banned books include the literary production of leading international authors, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the works of peace-loving activists such as Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi, and Vaclav Havel." The Cuba pot is a-boiling a little. I'm going to do a piece on this for the next NR. Meantime, if you wish to find out more about the independent-library movement, their site is at www.bibliocuba.org. (The English-language button is on the upper left.)
It all comes together, doesn't it? Gay rights, tobacco, social crusades by government, lawsuits — America (today, that is).
Here is what the obit, over the AP, had to say:
There was a man. There was a man.
Graham the other day said, "We not only cannot find Osama bin Forgotten or Saddam Hussein, we can't find the weapons of mass destruction." This is something a particularly dull and ill-mannered undergraduate might say — perhaps reciting what he'd read in a bathroom stall. And John Edwards is even more off-the-wall. Said he, "The fundamental difference I have with this president . . . is that he seems to value wealth and preservation of wealth over the value of work." Huh? How could he even entertain this absurd lie? "You know, the value that I disagree with the president about is that he values and honors wealth and the protection of wealth." That's Edwards. A little more from the North Carolina senator? Bush's tax-cut program is "the most radical and dangerous economic theory to hit our shores since socialism. It's time to end the failed conservative experiment and return to the idea that made this country what it is. Instead of helping wealthy people protect their wealth, we should help people build wealth." Etc. Let's move on to Edwards and Miguel Estrada. The senator has been saying that Estrada was nominated for a judgeship only because of his surname — because he is Hispanic. Actually, Estrada is one of the legal stars of his generation. But because Democrats act routinely in this fashion, why wouldn't others? What do the psychologists call that again? I always forget: transference or projection. On to Gephardt. If you can understand the following statement, you're a better man than I: "The president is right to begin withdrawing American troops from Saudi Arabia. . . . But what good will it do if our government remains shackled to Saudi oil producers? That's why this administration tolerated Saudi silence when we struck back against the Taliban." Huh? And here's Gephardt in his Marxian mode: "[The Republicans] go on and on passing programs for the wealthiest Americans. It's immoral." Excuse me, what programs for the wealthiest Americans? Tax cuts? These are "programs" for them? I wonder whether Democrats can even speak right — even when they're wrong — anymore. A final Gephardt note: As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, his daughter Chrissy said, "Being an open lesbian, it's really important to have the visibility, and I'm in a unique position, as the daughter of a presidential candidate . . . to have a voice." As for her dad and support for gay marriage, she said, "I'm working on it. It's a matter of time, as far as I'm concerned." That's no doubt true. A little Dennis Kucinich? He picked up a "super-delegate," fellow representative Lynn Woolsey of California, who works with Kucinich in the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Make your own jokes. Finally, I read that while Gephardt is calling his energy plan "the New Apollo Project" and John Kerry is calling his "the New Manhattan Project," Joe Lieberman is calling his "the Declaration of Energy Independence." I may be weird (no comments from the peanut gallery), but I think it's mildly offensive to call your latest energy proposals "the Declaration of Energy Independence," given the grandeur and world-historic importance of the real Declaration of Independence, which continues to be one of the truest, most breathtaking, and most inspiring political documents ever fashioned by man. I have no doubt that Republicans, too, have had their own "Declarations of Energy Independence" — but I still don't like it. So sue me!
Still, he was astoundingly handsome. And what else counts in life?
Congratulations, Kathy.
"'Mr. Clinton said he had gotten to know several people on his street, Old House Lane, quite well. He said he often plays golf with one neighbor, Dr. Tony Sanfilippo. And Mr. Clinton said he was pleased and surprised to find a Kosovar Albanian family living across the street. "They have a relative that's in the Kosovo government right now, and you know because I basically saved them from Milosevic, it's nice to have a neighbor who knows something you did when you were president. What are the odds of that?" he said.'"
"And in the current issue, the Economist calls the Unabomber a 'right winger,' in the article on the Atlanta bomber's capture. Somehow they associate him with the militias. "Finally, how could you resist an opportunity to say, regarding fluoridation, that 'the water tables have turned'?" Wish it had occurred to me!
"Me: 'Um, is that Mao?' "Her (grinning): 'Yeah, I got it on Ebay.' "How does one react to and more importantly pierce such appalling ignorance? (I fixed her with a cold stare and walked away silently.) This is a supposedly educated, intelligent woman. And while she is a fervent Bush-hater, I would not in any way designate her as a radical. She is some sort of art director for a gallery, and apparently thinks it's cute and hip to have he-who-is-probably-history's-greatest-murderer adorning her timepiece. "(I have another friend who owns a Che Guevara T-shirt. Again, this person is not a radical; he just thinks he is being cool.) "When and how will we live in a society where the appalling horrors of Communism are known and appreciated?" Dunno.
Yes.
"I get appeals all the time from groups I'd never give money to: Sierra Club, Earth Watch, Planned Parenthood, etc. They always have some emotional appeal and imply that if I don't cough up dough RIGHT NOW! then some conservatives will destroy all they've set out to accomplish. "This creates the impression that conservatives have all the money and power, and the liberal groups are on the verge of destruction (I particularly like getting direct mail from environmental groups that want to save trees!). "Personally, I like the VDH presentation, but still, it does not compel me to take action. It's too academic. Perhaps the call for reasoned thought makes impassioned pleas distasteful. I can understand. "The best alternative would be humor. Mock the liberal groups by reproducing their frantic pleas, but with an NRO twist. Here's a free one: "Picture of a factory worker who grinds up trees for pulp: 'Terry works nine hours a day producing the paper that becomes National Review. He has a wife, three children, and a mortgage. When you subscribe to National Review, you do your part to help Terry live the American Dream. Subscribe today to National Review. Otherwise, you crush the dreams of five humble people in Kentucky.'"
Later. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
o, I'll give you a little vignette. It comes from a lunch attended primarily
by liberals (and by "liberals," you know what I mean —
I ain't talking John Locke). One man — a friendly Briton — says
to me, "So, where are you from?" I say Michigan (being from
Ann Arbor, as many Impromptus-ites know). He says, "Ah, that's where
the militias are, right? Were your family militia members?" I just
sort of smile — thinking that posters of Che Guevara and Mao in Ann
Arbor way outnumbered any guns. And possibly American flags.
I received a letter saying Justice Thomas didn't deserve to be elevated
to chief justice, because, in his decision-making, he simply followed
others. This gives me a marvelous opportunity to quote from a great speech,
which you can find 
