So . . . I'm back! After two months of near-silence, my irrepressable urge to expound on all available topics has returned. Hope you've missed me (hell, I hope you even noticed I wasn't blogging!). Last year I took a break in the summer because of the birth of my daughter (babies keep you busy). This summer I didn't have as good an excuse other than the catch-all "I'm busy." And given that I have a previous blog post on how being "busy" really doesn't mean quite that, but rather that you've reprioritized other things, I guess I don't have a good excuse. But now I'm back, I've got a long list of topics to discuss, and I'm happy to be sharing my brain dumps with you.
Today, however, there is no real unifying topic, but rather just a collection of thoughts on some of what went on this summer. I don't want to re-tread over old news. Well, I do, but I'm not going to devote too much space to that anyway. Instead, I'll just make a few comments about this summer's biggest news stories.
How 'bout that hurricane, huh? Sometimes I think people like to have something to panic about. I know that it is better to be safe than sorry, but the word "overreaction" sure does come to mind. Especially when people in Kansas were hoarding.
Has being clinically insane become a requirement to vie for the Republican presidential nomination? Just when you think that a candidate is crazy (Palin), another version comes out that is even crazier (Bachmann), and then king crazy steps forth (Perry). I've been following news of the nascent campaign thanks to the very biased (in a good way) tweets of Roger Ebert (great tweeter - @ebertchicago - and not only movie reviews. By the way, did you know that I joined twitter this summer? Follow me @uncertainprof). I know it is early in the process, and I know that the eventual nominee may not have even come forward, but it is still a scary field. If Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney seem like reasonable men, the rest in the crowd must be pretty nuts.
Speaking of American politics, I'm glad to see that the legislators follow the same flawed thinking as the rest of us. Just as houses get foreclosed on because owners won't accept a price lower than their fairly abritrary asking price, legislators were willing to open the door to a potential financial apocalypse because they didn't want to face market realities. Should the US government be in so much debt? Damned if know, ask Bush, he spent it. It's not that the US didn't have the money, but rather they were bound by a law that limited how much they could borrow. Noble intention, poor execution.
Earthquake in the east? What's up with that?
And, of course, the biggest Canadian news story of the summer was the passing of Jack Layton. I've written some critical things of Jack on this blog and said even more critical things about him to whomever would listen to my political polemics. I was not a fan of his policies, but I did admire his acumen as a politician (he was the best at being a politician out of all the leaders he faced; at playing politics, however, he was eclipsed by Harper). I think the outpouring of emotion over his death was genuine and it's always good to see people united, even if in grief. I will say, however (and here's the part where I may get some nasty comments at the bottom), that the reaction to his death was way bigger than it would have been had it happened six months earlier or later. The fact that he died right after his greatest triumph has narrative value, and we love good stories. This is not to diminish his accomplishment(s); in fact, it could be argued that those accomplishments were diminished by the narrative. Because if he had passed away a little later (say, next year), his accomplishments would have been the same, but it wouldn't have been as good a story, and therefore not as a big a story.
Anyway, glad to be back and happy that you are welcoming me onto your screens once again. Happy reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment