Thursday, February 05, 2004

 
This is the forest primeval,(4.)
Hu, Hu, Hu, Hu,(1.) burning bright,
In the forest of the night,
Buried by the Army Corps Crapweasel.


The above took about 2 minutes and it shows-tho in my defense, in the matter of the metre of "Evangeline," it's hard to "Blake" it.
I intended tonight to tie in the "Kennewick Man" with the gathering storm of disinternment with the post of Jan 26, 2004 titled "Re "Siberian-Americans"Or: "Kill Yue-chi Scum"(a take-off, of course, on Derb's "Kill Yuppie Scum") when I spied John J. Miller's good news about litigation over the remains of the guy referred to as the "Lost Man" in the New Yorker article of June 16, 1997. Given the obscurity of this site, I'll accept no blame for the zeitgeist of gibbetting, in spite of posts regarding the er, lame post about the Russkies digging up Timur the Limper(2.), and the wish for the eventual shredding of the shade of Dennis Kucinich.
And, hey, I *did* warn the gang at NRO *not* to get into the posthumous punishment paradigm. -Tho I'm not sure that my wishing for afterworldly torture, makes "us" look any better to ourselves or others than wishing for the abuse of insensate remains. For the record, I either blogged or emailed a wish for some kind of purgatory for the soul of the late Paul "Pol Pot" Wellstalinist, a manic little creep who spoke and shaved like Lenin. -And that's cutting him some *slack* on account of what the Tsar's minions may have done to some of his ancestors. And as for John Edwards, who made his fortune convincing juries that cases of cerebral palsy were the result of medical malpractice, I hope that his "aftercare" is administered by some *thing* that makes[gotta' do some editing here-getting way too creepy-not following my own "good advice"-and am confident that the Big Guy doesn't pay heed to what I might momentarily wish for in the afterlife for folks I don't like]look like frickin' Florence Nightingale. (As noted on NRO one doesn't know the particulars of Edwards' cases; only that there has been something of a consensus of medical opinion that CP is rarely the result of birth asphyxia. It should be noted that the major medical journals are *not* hesitant to point out harm that results from shortcomings with respect to *other* medical issues.)
The tie in,(or "compare and contrast" for those who pine for their years in jr. high school) of course, is of course, with the fantasies of a few Cornerites to disinter some monsters(some of whom were International Socialist types) and the efforts of Amerind National Socialist(excuse me: *Sovereign Nation* Socialist)types and their any-multi-but-the-West-culturalist allies to reinter the remains of the "Kennewick Man" and other skeletons that do not resemble those of modern Amerinds. What the Left *really* objects to is the remembrance or disinternment of the evils done or supported by its dirt temperature(but so much with them in spirit!)members. Conservatives are right to be at least discomfitted by the testimonials to departed totalitarians in the major media, and if the (Red)StarTribune is typical of many other newspapers the puff pieces on the transitions of local useful idiots and lackeys are TNC(too numerous to count). And who among us hasn't gagged upon hearing some scumbucket who was very much on the wrong side of the Cold War, while making some often reasonable comment about the new realities, complexities and so forth about the post Cold War world, slip in a howler along the lines about things were different when we were united against the Soviet Union? -would like to hear just once someone ask(or heckle before being tackled by some Al Frankengoon Squad), "Whadda' ya' mean, "*WE,*" Commiesabe?!?"
Yep, conservatives(and a few Lefties like Hitchens) are hated, not so much for the rather silly mental exercise started by Derbyshovel, but for their efforts to keep the truth about the crimes of the Left -Which prefers that we say, wallow in apologies about slave holding by our Founding Guys-who at least did not fatally poison the soil from which sprang the idea that slavery(not just that it is shameful to be a slave, but also shameful to have any)is morally wrong. The Left has always, and still does, ultimately assert that Slavery is Freedom, of course.
The link to the court decision provided by John J. Miller seems to be worth a read, as is the New Yorker article(which I still haven't disinterred(if still present)from the basement). The Army Corps of Engineers(incident also covered by the New Yorker, I think)buried the site where the Kennewick guy was found under "approximately two million tons of rubble and dirt, topped with 3700 willow, dogwood, and cottonwood plants." The New Yorker article ended on some notes doubtless grating to me and most conservatives, arguing that even if Amerinds did exterminate what may have been caucasoids from the New World, that such is the way of the world or history-nothing to get upset about and so on. -whereas the conquest of the New World by europeans was shameful, icky,(perhaps deserving of reddress) etc. The New Yorker piece uses two very different(and arguably mutually exclusive)moral arguments to make some defensible points. And in truth, few of us would agree to do without either morality in arriving at particular judjments. I think it was Thomas Sowell who observed that when groups argue with each other about, say, claims to some piece of the Earth, they are very careful to choose particular times in History from which to base their claims. (And of course, people(well, most outside the West) find it easier to apply moral standards to others than to themselves.)
Droning on too long here, and wish that someone would dredge up the famous observation that a reconstruction of the likely face of the Kennewick Man resembles that of Patrick Stewart. Jonah could maybe use a little cheering up, given the tone of his late-night post. My advice would be to not show the bastards that they "got" to you.(I'd also like to advise him not to hold a grudge-I once called him a crapweasel and repeated a claim about a change in the conditions of his employment, which may not have been softened much by also noting that I *wasn't* serious and was trying to burn any bridges that might exist in an effort to cure myself of the habit of hacking out political emails. But that would be (gasp!)self-serving. - doubt that he even remembers the exchange(in which he came out rather well)or or gives a rat's ass about or reads this rambling blog among some other 4-5 million blogs online.)
Droning on-Did I read last night someone(Lileks? NRO?)refer to Patrick Stewart as *english*? Isn't the guy a Scot?("Jean-Luc Picard" was of course, (shudder) french) -too bad he didn't "stay in character" saying that a trip to Mars would be too expensive.(the old condom repair joke comes to mind which ends with, "No, the rrrrrregiment has decided to rrrrreplace!") Btw., Patrick Stewart was *hilarious* in a SNL bit with Mike Myers in his role as Scottish pyschologist, "Phil McCracken."
And not to suck up(a little late for that!) to Jonah, but he did a good job of summarizing what's to like and not about the various incarnations of Star Trek. I have watched only a fraction or the episodes that followed the voyages of Cap'n Kirk, and did so for "escape," disliking most injections of what seemed to be 20th century politics. I didn't mind it much that the Enterprise was not some commercial vessel engaging in opening new trade routes for the spice melange'(oops, wrong universe), dilithium crystals etc. Or that Cap'n Riker never annouced anything like, "Attention, all hands! If we successfully complete this mission, we'll net some one million bars of gold-pressed Latinum.....And it's equal shares for all!"(cheering follows)

1. See the "Who are you?" post of Feb 2, 2004, although by the time the symbol for "tiger" was used to denote the "Hu," the various tribes of Hu had long ceased to include guys we would see today as caucasian in appearance.
2. a.k.a. "Tamerlane" see Jan 20, 2004 post "Worse Than a Mongol"
3. Say what?!? Footnotes are supposed to cite *other* peoples' stuff? Oh.
4. And you say that they should be in numerical order? Anyway, it should be noted that the ancient Amerinds didn't allow any "caucasoids"(if any were, in fact, here some 10,000 plus years ago)to survive on any "reservations," or in some "Quebec" or escape to some "New Orleans."