Posted by Jim at July 21st, 2007
Started: Just after noon when the UPS truck arrived.
Finished: Around midnight–read close to straight through–with interruptions like making meals, going to the grocery store a couple times, and putting kids to bed.
Worth it? Yes.
More later.
Posted by Jim at July 20th, 2007
There’s already a summary of the plot of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows up on Wikipedia.
I haven’t read it. I’m mostly immune to being bothered by spoilers, but the plot summary is so long that I’m afraid that it will blow every surprise in the book.
Thus, I’m skipping it for the moment.
Posted by Jim at July 18th, 2007
So I decided in June that rather than re-read the entire Harry Potter series in preparation for the new book that I would just read the sixth book and be done with it. So I did. I re-read “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” in June.
It is now July and “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” will come out this Saturday. Abandoning my sensible policy of last month, I decided I would re-read “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.”
Not stopping there, I continued through almost all of them and am now re-reading the fifth book (”Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix”). If I am wise, I won’t re-read the sixth book a second time in two months.
On the other hand, why should I start being wise now?
Posted by Jim at July 13th, 2007
Well this has been an odd week with regards to Iraq… We have President Bush telling us the reasons to stay and the House voting to go. Mind you, the House doesn’t have the power to do that without the Senate’s help, making it something of a symbolic vote.
Still, bearing in mind the Republican senators who have recently come out against the war, I can’t help but wonder how long it will be before the Senate has a majority for pulling out.
Of course, Bush’s inevitable veto of any resolution of that kind means that they’ll have to have more than a majority. They’ll need two-thirds of the Senate to actually succeed.
That’ll be more of a challenge.
Bush’s Characterization of Withdrawal
I found it interesting to listen to Bush’s characterization of the question of withdrawal. He described it as an argument between those who believed we could succeed and those who believed success was impossible.
I can’t speak for everyone who wants to withdraw, but I don’t believe that success is impossible. I believe that success is possible but that the Bush administration has never put in the necessary resources to succeed and that they have no intention of doing so since it would mean tripling the number of troops we’ve currently got there.
Bearing in mind that success is improbable with the resources that they are willing to put in, I’m inclined to think that withdrawal is the better option.
Abandoning Iraq to Al-Queda?
As much as Bush points out that we are fighting Al-Queda in Iraq, it’s worth mentioning that while Al-Queda does exist in Iraq, there’s also an organization called “Al Queda in Iraq.” It’s not directly controlled by Al-Queda and is more of an Iraqi franchise than something controlled by Bin Laden.
So, we’re not really fighting Al-Queda in the classic 911 sense.
What’s unfortunate though is that Bush is right that abandoning Iraq to it’s own devices shows a certain irresponsibility. We’ve made a big mess there and owe the Iraqis help in cleaning it up.
Sadly, our presence there generates a certain amount of violence by it’s very existence. Also unfortunate? The fact that pulling out would remove whatever good effects we’re having there. I’m thinking specifically that we prevent some Sunni/Shia violence and help preserve some semblance of order in places.
The essential horror of the situation to my mind is that neither staying nor going is automatically going to produce a stable society.
A Modest Proposal for Withdrawal?
I sometimes wonder if pulling out might not be the best solution in the following sense:
If we did pull out anything that exists only because we’re there would probably fall apart. Eventually though, some sort of order would come into being (probably after considerable violence). With any luck, it might be a form of order created by Iraqis, something reasonably stable and not supported by outside forces. With a government that has control of Iraq and the support of it’s people, it would be possible for Iraqis to get somewhere.
At that point, the US might be in a better position to do some good in the country–provided Iraqis didn’t refuse our help on general principles.
Of course, if we did pull out I suppose it might be possible that some other country (Iran?) might prop up an unstable government favorable to itself.
No Good Solutions But Maybe a Good Observation…
I’m trying to wrap this post up right now, but I don’t really have a good ending for this. I have no solution to point people to.
All I have is the following thought:
The Bush administration probably thought that bringing down Saddam Hussein by force was a better bet than sanctions or diplomacy. It does have the advantage of being immediate, but it should be obvious now that violent overthrow of a regime you don’t like is just as uncertain as persuasion.
Posted by Jim at July 3rd, 2007
So I was driving to a client’s house late last week and I saw a rock.
It is owned by the River City Excavation Company. River City Excavation sells mulch, rocks, dirt and presumably excavation.
I happened to speak to someone who works there (my wife wanted me to find out how much mulch cost) and learned that the rock weighs 1300 pounds and would ordinarily cost $120. Nonetheless they are currently selling it for $82.99, dropping it by a dollar a day until it’s sold.
I hear that they’re a little worried because while it is on the corner, the people in the cars that pass seem to be talking on their cell phones instead of noticing it.
They’re considering placing a manikin in a bikini next to the rock (because there’s nothing that convinces you to buy rocks like a hot manikin…).
Anyway, if you’re interested, they’re located on Hall just on the east side of 131.
You know, they ought to be paying me for this.
Posted by Jim at July 2nd, 2007
Critics can be valuable. When you’re talking about something that you might pay for (like a book, movie, or CD), critics can warn you away from something that looks great in the advertisements, but pretty much sucks in reality.
They can also be valuable to the artist if the critic points out real flaws in the work.
On the other hand there are also critics whose stuff I read and think, “This is criticism for the sake of criticism.” I’m talking here about criticism that is over the top negative and (for example) calls the author a pedophile and suggests that he “die in a fire.” To me, it feels like the critic is going nasty because people find nasty reviews entertaining–not because the object of criticism is as bad as they say.
That’s not to say that that sort of thing can’t be funny. It can even still be valuable stuff despite the tone.
Bearing that in mind, I’d just like to point out that people doing exactly those sort of reviews have come to web comics. I give you:
Your Webcomic is Bad and You Should Feel Bad
So far as I can tell, it gives no good reviews and specializes in demolishing comics. I find it amusing that someone would bother to review web comics in this way in that
1) The critic is not saving anyone any money since most web comics are free.
2) Despite the fact that most web comic authors will actually read a review, the critic is giving up any chance of influencing them by writing as if they were the source of unrelenting evil instead of writing a lousy comic.
I agree with the author’s criticisms about some comics, but I’ve got to admit that he goes considerably farther than I would. Am I planning on reading it further? No. Not when stuff like Websnark exists.
There’s no denying that bad web comics are out there, but I don’t feel compelled to wallow in them.