Three Notes
--I think as a blogger I have to develop a firmer habit not to gratuitously insult individuals just because I'm angered by their positions. I was a little rude last night to Professor Marge... just because I considered her a snot. But all I know about Professor Marge is that one quote. I should be more a gentleman.
I do know that modern "serious" art is very bad stuff, and that most of those who support this "art" do so because they revel in it's tastelessness. Tastelessness is superiority is new morality. An odd equation but true. Actually, inferiority is as old as man, as is that raging class of the inferior who turn values on their head and thus by definition end on the top of the heap rather than the bottom. It has always been so, but it's only in modern times that the class of the morally inferior has been so large and so firmly ensconced as "intellectual".
Oh well, doesn't matter. This is a democracy. People vote. People have the right to decide if they want to be represented by a pornographer.
--And then it is possible that James Webb is not a pornographer. It is possible, indeed, that he might be a "serious novelist". Public Reading! Public Reading! If James Webb can write he can read. Read to the public! The public can then decide if such a man is morally suitable to be validated by their vote. Seems fair to me. I will note that it has not been unknown in human history that very fine writers have been very well esteemed by their countrymen. And will note further that it does strike me as odd that James Webb would cry he's the victim of a smear campaign when his own words are published.
--Finally, the polls. I think some of my conservative blogging brethren have got to buck up a bit. I have read innumerable comments that the press has never before been so partisan, never before so clearly political, never before so clearly merely an adjunct to the Democrat Party. And you think the polls are different!? My, what innocence among the brethren. Next thing you'll think these things are scientific. I would say this: The MSM is "objective", the polls are "scientific". This is not your father's oldsmobile.
I do know that modern "serious" art is very bad stuff, and that most of those who support this "art" do so because they revel in it's tastelessness. Tastelessness is superiority is new morality. An odd equation but true. Actually, inferiority is as old as man, as is that raging class of the inferior who turn values on their head and thus by definition end on the top of the heap rather than the bottom. It has always been so, but it's only in modern times that the class of the morally inferior has been so large and so firmly ensconced as "intellectual".
Oh well, doesn't matter. This is a democracy. People vote. People have the right to decide if they want to be represented by a pornographer.
--And then it is possible that James Webb is not a pornographer. It is possible, indeed, that he might be a "serious novelist". Public Reading! Public Reading! If James Webb can write he can read. Read to the public! The public can then decide if such a man is morally suitable to be validated by their vote. Seems fair to me. I will note that it has not been unknown in human history that very fine writers have been very well esteemed by their countrymen. And will note further that it does strike me as odd that James Webb would cry he's the victim of a smear campaign when his own words are published.
--Finally, the polls. I think some of my conservative blogging brethren have got to buck up a bit. I have read innumerable comments that the press has never before been so partisan, never before so clearly political, never before so clearly merely an adjunct to the Democrat Party. And you think the polls are different!? My, what innocence among the brethren. Next thing you'll think these things are scientific. I would say this: The MSM is "objective", the polls are "scientific". This is not your father's oldsmobile.
posted by mouse at 4:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home