the mindset of the modern intelligentsia is seen in series like Roadkill, which was an adaptation of a David Hare play about an unscrupulous Tory, played by Hugh Laurie, a modern version of House of Cards, he had some success with the Worricker series with Bill Nighy some years ago,

The Democrats are now trying to “clean things up,” by saying that Walz may have “misspoken,” here and there, about his military service i.e. it was inadvertent , it was a simple mistake.

Well, how about this.

When he was a member of Congress, Walz had “Challenge coins” struck as a souvenir to give to people, celebrating both his military and his Congressional service to Minnesota, and to our country, and on this coin he has the image of his rank insignia, the stripes from his military service, and those stripes are those of a “Command Sergeant Major,”

Walz was actually discharged with the rank of Sergeant Major, because he failed to complete the requirements to keep his temporary rank of Command Sergeant Major.*

Then, there is a speech by him, dissected in the article below, in which Walz gives the impression that he was serving in the National Guard (not later, when he was actually at Bagram Air Base in his capacity as a member of Congress) when he was at Bagram in Afghanistan.**

* See https://redstate.com/wardclark/2024/08/11/stolen-valor-walz-strikes-again-n2177992

** See https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2024/08/11/new-in-2021-911-speech-tim-walz-references-being-on-the-tarmac-at-bagram-n2178004

Rightly so IMO.

I really liked Earthly Powers and I thought it was better than Clockwork Orange. But as Abraham Lincoln or Socrates or somebody once said, the world don’t move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you, might not be right for some.

It is a consistent complaint with him, that a short book he more or less dashed off, stands as his most famous and most studied work. While his intricate high-lit tomes are being forgotten.

Rightly so IMO.

It is a crackin’ good read. Leaving off the last chapter, in which Burgess justifies his Big Moral proposition, was the right thing to do.

No one is saying that Burgess “enjoys raping and ripping by proxy.”

That quote sums up much that I find infuriating with AB.

Probably best to let Burgess himself speak to it.

Unfortunately there is so much original sin in us all that we find evil rather attractive. To devastate is easier and more spectacular than to create. We like to have the pants scared off us by visions of cosmic destruction. To sit down in a dull room and compose the Missa Solemnis or The Anatomy of Melancholy does not make headlines or news flashes. Unfortunately my little squib of a book was found attractive to many because it was as odorous as a crateful of bad eggs with the miasma of original sin.

It seems priggish or pollyannaish to deny that my intention in writing the work was to titillate the nastier propensities of my readers. My own healthy inheritance of original sin comes out in the book and I enjoy raping and ripping by proxy. It is the novelist’s innate cowardice that makes him depute to imaginary personalities the sins that he is too cautious to commit for himself. But the book does also have a moral lesson, and it is the weary traditional one of the fundamental importance of moral choice. It is because this lesson sticks out like a sore thumb that I tend to disparage A Clockwork Orange as a work too didactic to be artistic. It is not the novelist’s job to preach; it is his duty to show.

I’m sure Burgess had concern for violence when his wife suffered an attack.

I am saying that in his book, “Clockwork Orange,” and his later discussions, he showed no such concern that I could detect. Victims were just part of the scenery to make Burgess’s point about free will vs. state control.

In the last chapter of “Clockwork” Alex is losing his taste for violence and maybe he will finish growing up and raise a family. Free will. Yay!

However, Burgess shows no concern for Alex’s victims, including at least one cold-blooded, brutal murder. Does all that go away because the state used the Ludovico treatment on Alex?

So argues Jonathan Turley in his new book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in The Age of Rage.”

What makes today’s threat so powerful and irresistible is the union of mass media and corporations, the Federal government, the Democrat Party, professionals and campus professors against dissenting speech. We have never seen this before.

The election of 1800 was decided by the People. Today, again, the People stand with the exercise of free speech.

The US has weathered the storms before, but there is no guarantee that we will this time.

Joe Biden is the worst President on this issue in history. A Federal Judge has called their censorship system Orwellian, yet it continues unimpeded.

Turley argues that this election must be decided on free speech Liberty grounds.

Turley appeared on Mark Levin’s Sunday night show in two segments to argue for hi indictment of these dire times we face.

Fox News has only posted one online
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6360280048112

I expect to post a complete interview LINK later on the Unthreaded thread.