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? 
|
Monday, April 26, 2004
If you want to be snide and condescending, you also need to know what you're talking about. I used to be a big fan of Doonesbury. I still occasionally see one that I enjoy. But this epitomizes why I often can't stand it these days. Look, I'm no fan of many of the directions in which this administration seems to want to take the law. And "strict constructionism" is not, in practice, a terribly useful jurisprudential concept. (It's not about "strictness," it's about accurate reading where possible and reasonable extrapolation where necessary.) But there is nothing inconsistent about believing in "strict construction" and also wanting to amend the Constitution. The former doesn't denote a belief that the Constitution is perfect or should never be altered--it denotes a belief that judges should not be the ones to alter it. Indeed, some people believe that the Constitution needs to be amended precisely to do away with erroneous interpretations foisted upon it by judges who failed to be "strict" enough. I think one of the tests of good political humor is: Would you still find it funny (or at least appreciate its cleverness) if you shared the views being made fun of? Trudeau used to meet this standard for me. No doubt my politics have shifted since I used to collect his comics, but I don't think that explains why I don't read him much anymore. I love the Onion, and it often barbeques my sacred cows. And while I tend to agree with Day by Day, I sometimes find Muir to be heavy-handed as well. Of course, he's just starting out, while Garry's had 40 years to hone his craft. Instead he's blunted it. Trudeau has come to epitomize the smug liberal mindset, which takes its own superior perspicacity so much for granted that the broadest of pot shots and most facile of sneers pass for clever wit. Which is too bad. Update: I just got a polite email from Chris Muir thanking me for the comment and asking for input when I think he's off-base. How many cartoonists solicit that kind of interaction?
Comments:
Post a Comment
|