The ever-perceptive Victor Davis Hanson’s National Review column yesterday dealt with some issues discussed recently on this blog concerning Iran (hat tip: Soxblog). He first sets up the seriousness of the Iranian situation, and then goes methodically down the list … Continue reading →
On this thread from yesterday, an interesting discussion is ensuing concerning what could–or should–be done about Iran’s nascent nuclear arsenal. But one point I haven’t seen mentioned there, and which troubles me greatly, is the fact that intelligence has it … Continue reading →
If I don’t write all that often on Iran, it’s certainly not due to a lack of concern about what’s happening there. Au contraire; I believe Iran is of extreme importance and danger to the world. It’s just that we … Continue reading →
It seems to be an almost inevitable part of the ritual of the Haj, despite all the efforts (and they’ve been considerable) of the Saudi government to prevent it: a stampede that kills large numbers of pilgrims. I wrote this … Continue reading →
Back when I was a young mother in my early thirties, still looking to “find myself” careerwise, I hauled myself down to Boston to the Johnson O’Connor Foundation, which was housed in a beautiful old brownstone on Beacon Avenue. There … Continue reading →
Well, Churchill or Orwell he’s not. But Robert Frost isn’t too bad with the quotations, either–even some political ones (see here and here.) I never dared to be radical when young for fear it would make me conservative when old. … Continue reading →
Via Dymphna at Gates of Vienna, I came across this article by one Jonathan Freedland, a writer for the Guardian. Jonathan Freedland is what Norm Geras might call a “principled leftist”–at least, Freedland sounds like one. In the essay, he … Continue reading →
Every now and then I see comments here made by people who assume that my post-9/11 change was quick, and was prompted by fear at the event itself. The comments tend to be on the order of “You cowardly idiot, … Continue reading →
As a follow-up to my nu-ku-lar post, see this from Dean Esmay, on mispronouncing words as a sign of intelligence. Dean is speaking especially of words a person has only read rather than heard–certainly not the case for Bush and … Continue reading →
I thought this comment by Paul Snively, which appeared on the recent thread about lying and WMDs, was well-put, and worth highlighting: Brief logic lesson: You cannot prove the negation of an existential quantifier in first-order logic given the open-world … Continue reading →
Norm Geras and Clive Davis both discuss the fact that most movies based on books seem to be not nearly as good as the books from which they’re taken. They cite some rare exceptions, though; movies that equal the original … Continue reading →
At his ever-interesting blog Done With Mirrors, Callimachus offers the definitive explanation of why George W. Bush says “nukular” for “nuclear,” (as opposed to GW’s own father, who pronounces the word conventionally). Apparently, GW is just following precedent for many … Continue reading →