Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Carter, Clinton, Obama. We need to re-learn this, it seems, over and over again, every sixteen years. Like clockwork. Like a heartbeat of stupid.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Who is John Galt?
- JohnJ | 11/04/2008 @ 23:25Johnj, at this time I am not asking that question, but another: Which way to Galt’s Gulch?
- wch | 11/04/2008 @ 23:55Those who do not learn from history…are young voters.
- tim | 11/05/2008 @ 09:39Curiously, you could argue that the pattern includes Kennedy.
He had much of the demagoguery and inexperience, though some of his best speech-points were swiped by some chap named Reagan who claimed that they were actually good ideas.
But the 16-year pattern holds with Kennedy, as does the emphasis on one or more of youth/inexperience/relatively-unknown-outsider.
- karrde | 11/06/2008 @ 08:55I included Kennedy when I put together my brief video montage about this.
Why, I wonder, is this a post-World-War-II thing. Young people have always wanted to go out and make their mark; change the world. This notion is fairly young — that this world-changing should be done by voting, with a large mob of people who are of like mind and similar age, to elect the candidate closest to your young generation, without demanding he define what “change” he’s bringing. A hundred years ago, the whippersnapper with stars in his eyes would talk about what HE is going to do. “And then I’m going to marry that girl! Over there! I just know it!”
Okay, some of that I’m conjuring up from movies, which is always a mistake.
But the point stands. There’s been an insidious attack upon the individual sometime during the 20th century. For all the bluster raining down upon us throughout the generations, it seems, looking back, that is the single most significant political transformation within our shores during that hundred years; the individual doesn’t matter very much. Achievement is something you do after you “come together,” and what exactly it is you do, together with the ultimate effect of it, are just meaningless trivialities.
- mkfreeberg | 11/06/2008 @ 10:04