12.8.2022 – when the shoe fits it

when the shoe fits it
pinches one wearing it which
about says it all

Which gets to the larger question that supersedes all the ins and outs of the maneuvering over the Republican presidential nomination and the future of the party: How, in a matter of less than a decade, could this once-proud country have evolved to the point that there is a serious debate over choosing a presidential candidate who is a lifelong opportunist, a pathological and malignant narcissist, a sociopath, a serial liar, a philanderer, a tax cheat who does not pay his bills and a man who socializes with Holocaust deniers, who has pardoned his criminal allies, who encouraged a violent insurrection, who, behind a wall of bodyguards, is a coward and who, without remorse, continually undermines American democracy?

The closing paragraph of the Guest Opinion piece, Trump Is Unraveling Before Our Eyes, but Will It Matter? by Thomas B. Edsall.

I have no comment to make on this remarkable sentence, and notice it is one sentence, but instead I turn to familiar old idioms:

If the shoe fits …

AND

only the wearer knows where the shoe pinches …

I think the above sentence is truly fitting to a certain person.

I also think that those who might complain about what the sentence says about that person know too well why it fits.

Overall, I end with another idiom, ’nuff said!’

12.7.2022 – use of language

use of language
respects truth sincerity
largely abandoned

Lincoln was also the last president whose character and standards in the use of language avoided the distortions and other dishonest uses of language that have done so much to undermine the credibility of national leaders.

The ability and commitment to use language honestly and consistently have largely disappeared from our political discourse.

Some presidents have been more talented in its use than others.

Some, such as Franklin Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, have had superior speechwriters.

But the challenge of a president himself struggling to find the conjunction between the right words and honest expression, a use of language that respects intellect, truth, and sincerity, has largely been abandoned.

From the preface to Lincoln: The Biography of a Writer by Fred Kaplan (Harper Perennial, 2010).

I cannot remember a time in my life when I was not aware of Abraham Lincoln.

Maybe growing up in a era of pocket change and when having pennies in your pocket meant seeing Mr. Lincoln’s face on a regular basis had something to do with it.

Looking though my books in my the library of my memory, when I turn to the shelf of books from before I was 10, titles on Mr. Lincoln were already showing up.

What I remember about those books too, is that while many were about Mr. Lincoln the President and written for young readers, they were a lot of them that also focused on the Young Lincoln and life in the times when Lincoln was young.

Maybe that had something to do with it.

I was not reading about Lincoln the President but Lincoln the kid.

The kid who liked to read.

Mr. Lincoln stored books in the chinks of the log cabin walls of the loft where he slept.

I stored books in the bottom of the upper bunk that was over my head in the bunkbed I shared with my brother.

At Christmas, my Mom would bring home jars of hard candies from the Sweetland Candy stores and I would eat all the Red Anise squares because I read in a book titled ‘Lincoln’s America’, in a section on the candy kids ate back then and it described the cool, sweet blocks of anise.

Young Mr. Lincoln had to read by a fire.

I tried to read by the fire until my Mom said I was going to set my book to flames.

Young Mr. Lincoln chopped up firewood.

I wasn’t allowed near an axe.

I remember a Professor I had in college in talking about the miracles that were George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.

The miracles were that the more they were investigated and researched and studied, the closer the real man and the myths came together.

There were more likely to be true than not. (not counting that cherry tree)

The midterm elections of 2022 finally came to end last night, tho I guess there are still some uncertified votes out in Arizona.

I watched a lot of coverage of the last election last night.

I listened a lot to the words and the descriptions of what happened and why it happened and what it meant.

I struggled to find the conjunction between the right words and honest expression, a use of language that respected intellect, truth, and sincerity.

Sadly, I have to say, it has largely been abandoned.

12.6.2022 – ever returning

ever returning
all streams flow into the sea
yet sea never full

The sun rises and the sun sets,
and hurries back to where it rises.
The wind blows to the south
and turns to the north;
round and round it goes,
ever returning on its course.
All streams flow into the sea,
yet the sea is never full.
To the place the streams come from,
there they return again.

Ecclesiastes 1:5-7 (NIV)

High Tide at Mackay Creek, Daufuskie Landing

12.5.2022 – dumbumvirate

dumbumvirate
debacle coverage
back worse than ever

Yes the inspiration for this haiku was based on the use of just one word in a long review of FOX Sports coverage of the World Cup and that word was dumbumvirate.

I am not 100% sure of what it means.

From the usage in the sentence, Four years on from the dumbumvirate debacle of its coverage in Russia, Fox is back, and worse than ever, it has refer to the color commentary team of talking heads that FOX has hired as the face of their soccer coverage.

The word dumbumvirate only occurs, according to the google, in this story and another story by the same author, Aaron Timms, back in 2018 on the same topic.

Mr. Timms has written for The Sydney Morning Herald so maybe dumbumvirate is one of those colorful Australian idioms like g’daymate and barbecue stopper, all said with that wonderful rising inflection that makes Australians seem like they are asking questions or for agreement, nes pas?

ANYWAY, I had to salute the word and Mr. Timms and his article, Fox Sports’ US World Cup coverage is an unmissable abomination and here are some of his other word combinations.

>> From the moment that Stone called Doha “Dosa” ahead of the opening match – between the capital of a small oil state on the Gulf and a fermented south Indian pancake, who’s really insisting on the distinction? – then promptly vanished from Fox’s coverage for the next three days, the US host English-language broadcaster of this World Cup has offered up a feast of gaffes, stupidity, and unconquerable on-air awkwardness for American viewers to enjoy. 

>> Insults to our collective intelligence have come from all angles: the constant, tedious analogies to American sports (stepovers and feints described as “dekes” and “hesis”, corners constantly compared to “pick and rolls”); the neverending quest to “contextualize” the world game by comparing whole countries to American states (“Qatar is the size of Connecticut,” we were told repeatedly on the opening day); the network’s embrace and promotion of the interminable “it’s called soccer” cause (who cares?); the strange extended segment in the run-up to USA v England about how much Harry Kane likes American football (ditto); the employment of Piers Morgan as a special guest pundit (no thanks).

>> Take a moment to appreciate the full dizzying scope of Fox’s witlessness in Qatar. After Rob Stone noted, in the lead-up to the group match between Brazil and Serbia, that the Brazilians have won the World Cup five times – perhaps the most widely known World Cup statistic of all – a wide-eyed Dempsey exclaimed, “Wow, you really did your research!” During France v Denmark, match commentator JP Dellacamera described Kylian Mbappé as “a kid who’s 23 and already the whole world is talking about him,” an evaluation whose awestruck “already” suggested that JP has watched close to no football over the past half decade. Donovan started the tournament pronouncing Iran “Eye-ran”, witnessed Tyler Adams being corrected by an Iranian journalist for mispronouncing his country’s name – then continued to call the country “Eye-ran”.

>> Indeed the mispronunciation of foreign names – stadiums, players, whatever – has become a running joke on Fox’s Corniche set. Asked to offer a prediction before the US match against England, Lalas thundered, “I don’t know how they say it in the King’s English but dose a seero my friends to the USA,” helpfully demonstrating that he doesn’t know how to say “dos a cero” in the King’s Spanish either.

I don’t watch much of soccer.

I am just not a soccer fan, like Tennis or Corn Horn.

I’ll watch golf but with a hidden NASCAR schadenfreudesque of wanting to see someone miss that putt.

But I watch football and I want to Mr. Timms to know that here in the states, CBS has worked just as hard as FOX to create the dumbumvirate of Tony Romo and any one unlucky enough to be stuck with him in a broadcast booth.

Over Thanksgiving, Mr. Romo provided commentary on the Detroit Lions game and his manner was such that I finally took to social media to ask DOES ROMO ever shut up, Its Like Tim McCARVER doing football

A friend of mine commented that she had to ask who Tim McCarver was and the response she got, “The most annoying person on the planet.”

You know, the type of person you would find in a dumbumvirate.

12.4.2022 – obsession fueled flames

obsession fueled flames
a terrible idea
social media

From the article, The Age of Social Media Is Ending It never should have begun. By Ian Bogost (The Atlantic = Novemnber, 10, 2022) where Mr. Bogost writes:

Rounding up friends or business contacts into a pen in your online profile for possible future use was never a healthy way to understand social relationships. It was just as common to obsess over having 500-plus connections on LinkedIn in 2003 as it is to covet Instagram followers today. But when social networking evolved into social media, user expectations escalated. Driven by venture capitalists’ expectations and then Wall Street’s demands, the tech companies – Google and Facebook and all the rest – became addicted to massive scale. And the values associated with scale – reaching a lot of people easily and cheaply, and reaping the benefits – became appealing to everyone: a journalist earning reputational capital on Twitter; a 20-something seeking sponsorship on Instagram; a dissident spreading word of their cause on YouTube; an insurrectionist sowing rebellion on Facebook; an autopornographer selling sex, or its image, on OnlyFans; a self-styled guru hawking advice on LinkedIn. Social media showed that everyone has the potential to reach a massive audience at low cost and high gain – and that potential gave many people the impression that they deserve such an audience.

The flip side of that coin also shines. On social media, everyone believes that anyone to whom they have access owes them an audience: a writer who posted a take, a celebrity who announced a project, a pretty girl just trying to live her life, that anon who said something afflictive. When network connections become activated for any reason or no reason, then every connection seems worthy of traversing.

That was a terrible idea. As I’ve written before on this subject, people just aren’t meant to talk to one another this much. They shouldn’t have that much to say, they shouldn’t expect to receive such a large audience for that expression, and they shouldn’t suppose a right to comment or rejoinder for every thought or notion either. From being asked to review every product you buy to believing that every tweet or Instagram image warrants likes or comments or follows, social media produced a positively unhinged, sociopathic rendition of human sociality. That’s no surprise, I guess, given that the model was forged in the fires of Big Tech companies such as Facebook, where sociopathy is a design philosophy.

To revisit some of the key phrasing here:

Social media showed that everyone has the potential to reach a massive audience at low cost and high gain – and that potential gave many people the impression that they deserve such an audience.

On social media, everyone believes that anyone to whom they have access owes them an audience.

… media produced a positively unhinged, sociopathic rendition of human sociality.

… the model was forged in the fires of Big Tech companies such as Facebook, where sociopathy is a design philosophy.

People just aren’t meant to talk to one another this much.

They shouldn’t have that much to say.

That was a terrible idea.

Or so says this feller writing this blog.