Dagger in hand |
|
|
A man of prodigious fortune, coming to add his opinion to some light discussion that was going on casually at his table, began precisely thus: "It can only be a liar or an ignoramus who will say otherwise than," and so on. Pursue that philosophical point, dagger in hand. --Michel de Montaigne, Of the art of discussion. Stab back: cmnewman99-at-yahoo.com Home
Archives
Oriana: la sibilla eremita The Sage of Baltimore: Browbeating the booboisie. Reason: As in voice of. Lileks: Il miglior fabbro Volokh: Dean of Kozinski clerks Olympia: I read her only for her literary qualities. Really. Say it isn't so!: Do you think it's the lumpy oatmeal? Our girl Jane: Keep em flying, Miss U.S.A. My man Baruch: Amor dei intellectualis. Hubba hubba. Scrofula: With a name like Scrofula, it has to be good. The Idler: No frills. IJ: Fighting the good fight. ACLU: Good when they remember what the L stands for. Yourish: Meryl smash. Heidi's letters: I think she does reprisals, too. Her pinkness: Each time she falls she shall rise again! And woe to the wicked! In Context: Lynn provides it. Andrea: One spleen to rule them all. Still Waiting: Don't believe the hype. The Droll Weevil: Posts, pedantry, and pie(?) Perugia: Second home. Craven Road n.7: His name is Dog. Dylan Dog. Tom Bell: Internet law, online where it should be. Just the place for a snark: I've told you but once, but it's true. Greed is Good: And doesn't look too shabby in a T-shirt, either. Translator's Buddy: Didn't have "gliridi" though. CGFA: Favorite source of desktop material. Fallacies: Check yourself. Cosmo for men.: Implementing our equal right to feelings of inadequacy. Caplan: Visit the Museum. There's just one hitch: But it's a good one. Samizdata: Libertarian lexicographers. Unqualified Offerings: But quality assured. She is Wendy: Hear her roar. The Divine Blogroll: Entrate, che troverete speranza. Like the corners of my mind: Read it and weep. Aziz: Providing perspective. IJTIHAD: The future of Islam. I hope. Himishi: Where I acquired that raw fish addiction. My generous sponsors Alan Moore: Quis custodiet? Spoonerism: A blushing crow to tyranny. The Onion: Scary thing is, they're not far off. ScrappleFace: More important news. Day by day: Trudeau Schmudeau. Fumento: Brockovich Crockovich My alma mater: Not basketball. Croquet. The Capitol Steps: providing their fodder is the government's only indispensible function Randy Andy: Get used to it. Vasco Rossi: When they're in Italy, the Stones open for him. The Shadow: Useful counterpoint. Italiani liberi: Dr. D. Vider's Italian minions. Friendly Neighborhood Sinners: Swim the warm waters. Yuppies of Zion: The blog with two backs. Hobbit's repast: I'm partial to onesies, myself. The Friesian School: going Diderot one better Head spinning?: They can help. Looking sinister: Brian is watching. Murray's ghost: Stalking the state. Hell, no.: So anti it's not always clear what they're pro. Bureaucrash: takin' it to the streets Joe Cartoon: Indulge your inner 12 year old boy. There's a light: Rand sans droid. The Fake Detective: Rescuing damsels in dis-dress. Stromata: Amazing how much good stuff some people leave just lying around. The VRWC: Conspiring at a law school near you. The VLWC: Practicing the sincerest form of flattery. Corriere della Sera: Haven't sued me yet. Who am I?: Che ti frega? 
|
Thursday, September 11, 2003
What's next, the Apple Pie Act? I haven't taken the time yet to parse through the various provisions of the Patriot Act to figure out how bad or justified I think they really are. But the more I think about it, the more that name pisses me off. If you're going to introduce legislation, give it a substantive title that conveys some minimal description of what the law is intended to do. Or would that pin you down too much? I suppose the problem with calling it the "Defense Against Terrorism Act" is that it invites the question whether the contents are really narrowly tailored to serve that purpose. Calling something the Patriot Act, on the other hand, tells us nothing. Except that you want opposition to it to sound presumptively unpatriotic. As though the patriots who founded this country thought love of it enjoined any duty higher than safeguarding liberty by scrutinizing the use of power. And then you wonder why so many people are suspicious of the whole idea of patriotism. It's shit like this that gives patriotism a bad name, turns it from a noble sentiment into a form of cynical propaganda. Someone who really held the word in reverence would never profane it that way. Update: The Argentine writes to tell me I'm underinformed. Apparently it's an acronym: USA PATRIOT = Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. So I have to retract at least partially. Not on my main point, though. I still object to the use of the term "patriot" to denominate a piece of legislation, unless it has something to do with commemorating or compensating the families of fallen soldiers or other people worthy of the honorific. Contrary to my outburst above, however, the fully extended title does tell us what the ostensible purpose of the Act is. Indeed, it does so with more detail than usual in such a title, precisely because they needed more words to contrive the cute acronym. I wonder how many people, though, have forgotten like me that there is an extended title? Now that I focus on it, I see that some media reports concerning the Act capitalize the acronym and others don't. Thursday, September 04, 2003
|