Controversial Dutch MP Geert Wilders comes to D.C.
Good piece from Foreign Policy on Geert Wilders, the anti-Muslim Dutch politician who created the film “Fitna.” Great Britain recently refused to let him in their country, but he’s enjoyed a nice reception in the United States. Shows the difference between our “marketplace of ideas” approach versus the less-open European model.
On Madea and Forgiveness
Here’s a good reader from Cathleen Falsani on the success of the Tyler Perry “Madea” Films. Apparently, there’s a got going on in them:
What keeps me attached to Madea is what she says and how she says it. One of my favorite quotes comes from the stage version of “Madea Goes to Jail,” where she talks about people in our lives being like trees; that some fall off like leaves in a season, while others are the roots that keep us grounded in a storm. “When you get you some roots, hold on to them,” Madea says. “The rest of ‘em? Just let them go. Let folks go.Trite? Maybe. But true.
The “Madea Goes to Jail” film is about a lot of things, and its meandering plot may wear on some folks’ nerves. Its central theme, though, is forgiveness — a motif that runs through all of Perry’s work.
“With everything I’ve done, in the end, whoever the central character is, they would find a way to forgive, because that’s really important to me,” Perry said in an interview with Beliefnet.com a few years ago. “The most important thing that I learned in growing up is that forgiveness is something that, when you do it, you free yourself to move on. And in finding that in my own life, I wanted to share it with other people.
I haven’t seen any of the movies, but I think I should.
Climate change and objectivity
Interesting column in the New York Times about scientific objectivity and political advocacy:
But climate change, like most political issues, isn’t so simple. While most scientists agree that anthropogenic global warming is a threat, they’re not certain about its scale or its timing or its precise consequences (like the condition of California’s water supply in 2090). And while most members of the public want to avoid future harm from climate change, they have conflicting values about which sacrifices are worthwhile today.A scientist can enter the fray by becoming an advocate for certain policies, like limits on carbon emissions or subsidies for wind power. That’s a perfectly legitimate role for scientists, as long as they acknowledge that they’re promoting their own agendas.
But too often, Dr. Pielke says, they pose as impartial experts pointing politicians to the only option that makes scientific sense. To bolster their case, they’re prone to exaggerate their expertise (like enumerating the catastrophes that would occur if their policies aren’t adopted), while denigrating their political opponents as “unqualified” or “unscientific.”
A good read.
"Because the world needs more fun"
Take 3 minutes out of your life and watch this audio slideshow from the New York Times. This is a great story, and great storytelling. It’s about a guy who builds things out of old car parts. Why? “Because the world needs more fun.”
Top-secret vessel giveaway
From the WSJ:
Anybody want some top-secret seagoing vessels? The Navy has a pair it doesn’t need anymore. It has been trying to give them away since 2006, and they’re headed for the scrap yard if somebody doesn’t speak up soon.One is called Sea Shadow. It’s big, black and looks like a cross between a Stealth fighter and a Batmobile. It was made to escape detection on the open sea. The other is known as the Hughes (as in Howard Hughes) Mining Barge. It looks like a floating field house, with an arching roof and a door that is 76 feet wide and 72 feet high. Sea Shadow berths inside the barge, which keeps it safely hidden from spy satellites.
The barge, by the way, is the only fully submersible dry dock ever built, making it very handy — as it was 35 years ago — for trying to raise a sunken nuclear-armed Soviet submarine.
click here to view a sideshow of the vessels.
Future of journalism
Interesting roundup of a panel discussion on the future of journalism in Chicago. This seems pretty valid:
I’m not one of the young people in the crowd, but I cringed every time when an older person said, ‘Newspapers are giving it away for free.’ They aren’t giving it away for free. Their Internet sites promote the newspaper with very little overhead. Newspapers’ problem isn’t the Web sites; they aren’t utilizing the ad space well on those Web sites.Newspapers complain about how they ‘don’t make money’ from their Web sites. That shames their own employees who sell ad time on the Web sites. Newspapers should be making lots more money with their Web sites but they don’t seem to know how.
Newspapers are in the journalism business, and quite frankly, they are doing a lousy job of it. The reason we have a lot of Web sites is that consumers have discovered that the news from corporate-owned Web sites may be ‘true,’ but far from a complete picture of what is really going on. When newspapers had a virtual monopoly on information, they succeeded. Now they don’t have that stranglehold, and they are panicking as a result.
It was suggested in the forum that both Chicago newspapers could die. They might. But a new and different newspaper would rise from the ashes, giving Chicagoans what the Tribune and Sun-Times refused to do. Newspapers have to start doing what every other media form does: hustle and work hard. If they do so smartly, they will stick around. If not, something else will take its place.
Quite right.
Life imitates art
Here’s Kate Winslet explaining how one really gets an Oscar. Given her win last night, a rather ironic example of life imitating art.
By the way, if you haven’t seen Ricky Gervais’ “Extras
