Southern Buddhist

Because I was a history major, I have been thinking about this for days. [That's history major > nonprofit worker > unemployed bum > Shakespeare scholar, for those of you keeping track.]I actually can't come up with a really historically important decision on the presidential level that turned out right only because of luck. Some less direct ones, yes, such as that several Navy ships were on maneuvers on Dec. 7 and not destroyed at Pearl Harbor, thus saving part of our western fleet. Important, certainly, but probably not made personally by FDR.The best example I can come up with,

Who actually gets away from a high-speed chase, though? I think once the chase starts, the chance is zero.

With e-tongue?

As Lincoln observed, once you bake a cake, you can't take the eggs back out.

I was thinking about this further myself. I agree with both of you. We interpret it that way because we give the president the benefit of the doubt and assume that he had access to information we don't (i.e., classified stuff, policy analyses, etc.) and that he used that data that only he had in a wise, farsighted way. There are times when that is probably true, and times when it is probably false. Later events are shaped by sheer dumb luck sometimes -- history is full of dumb luck and random chance. But respect for the office and the ongoing "great man" theory of history means that we wi

Hoping for a lighter sentence by cooperating, once you knew a warrant was out, makes sense. Otherwise, it seems like as long as you thought you had a 5% chance of getting away with it, if you took the risk of doing the crime at all, you'd take this risk as well and continue to try to get away with it. It's an intellectual exercise for me -- I wouldn't do the robbery in the first place, so I wonder at the mindset it took to both do it and then to give up so (apparently) readily. But yeah, if you've realized that there is now a virtually zero percent chance of getting away with it, then you m

That's fine (re: 10 Commandments). It was a tossed-off quip, not very serious. VB actually has the far better response to you on this one.

My mistake. I now realize you never posted in the "Have You Read the Whole Bible" thread (http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...17235&st=80). Neither did BG, for that matter. Strange. What a blast from the past. I miss Checkymcfold. Herokid was smart and interesting. Lois was ... well, I'll stop now.Edit: Actually, here is the exchange we had once: You said: I said: In your second sentence, you allege that none of the regular atheist posters on this board have read the bible all the way through. We've now established that most of them have. But you haven't, most Christians ha

Sweet Saint Molly Ivins, what have I done?!Kidding -- I poke at you a lot in the religion forum, but I appreciate this. Thanks. I was thinking more of the 9/11 "links" than WMDs. As for the economy, it's not a question of who bears blame for structural and policy weaknesses, but how will history remember it and whose name will they put it under. Right or wrong, the buck has to stop somewhere, and unless you're writing an economic history of the Fed, the buck generally stops with the president. There were a lot of underlying reasons why populations were being pushed out of Turkey and into E

This is it, in a very nicely put nutshell.

Worst.President.Ever.That was too easy to pass up.Seriously, though, I truly believe we won't be able to guage his historical legacy for at least another twenty to as much as fifty years. As Faulkner said about the South, "The past isn't really dead. It isn't even really past." Bush is still current news, in terms of the long view of history. Any "analysis" now is just reaction, not analysis.For example, right now I think going to war against Iraq was the wrong enemy (one who had nothing to do with 9/11), on dishonest grounds. However, if, 15 or 20 years from now Iraq has a strong, peacef

LOL at a mainstream news outlet using "ImaLuckSac" .I have never understood turning oneself in to police. If you've got the courage and brains enough to do the crime and get away with it, what's the propblem? If they come get you, sure, go without a fight -- they caught you fair and square, no need to get anyone shot. But turn yourself in? Why?

It's not really hard to understand, but I guess maybe it is.

That's okay. Knowing you're turned on turns me on too! Thanks. I did two readings in two days, and this, I've realized, is actually my favorite sentence in the whole book: It's how we act when we're too busy to "act" that really shows who we are. How we react to sudden news, how we behave in little moments when no one is watching and we don't care how we come across, how we are when we don't self-edit -- that's our true character. Winning a huge race many people thought he might never win, that was a moment that was too overwhelming to be faked (he admitting to crying a little in the car o

That outfit is much too authentic, with the sewn-on patches and everything, to be a "costume." Plus, there's another one hanging up behind her. I think this is regular day wear for this family.I'd like to see the neighborhood she went trick-or-treating in.

This weekend -- Bristol, baby!!!!! Woot!The screaming, foot-stomping, black-wearing, cage-rattling heart and soul of NASCAR.If a casual non-fan wants to know what the sport is really about, don't bother watching Daytona. Watch Bristol (this is even truer for the night race in August).This track is magic.

Also the standard casual dig about making a big deal about it being the sacred word of God but not bothering to read all of it.

So I guess you'll never quote it again or advocate anything in it again or actually sit down and read it, right?Well, I can be sure you won't fully read it, at least.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't most conservatives say the idiot who snuck in got exactly what he deserved?And what serial killer with the intelligence of a whale would leave his victim's body draped across his back?I think Tilly was framed.More seriously, though, whenever skeptics quote the really outrageous sections of the OT about owning slaves or stoning people or that God wants and demands burnt offerings, Christians say, "Oh, lots of OT stuff doesn't apply anymore. Don't be silly and pretend we have to do all that." But here is a Christian saying one of those outrageous passages

Hello, my book, on Amazon ... link in my sig...No pimpin' for me?<crickets chirping>Oh, so that's the way it is then? Never mind, it's okay, I'm not hurt <sniffles>Actually, I did an appearance for it at the Virginia Festival of the Book today, and it went really well. Someone in the audience asked who was buying it, NASCAR fans, or Buddhists, or both. I was honest and said, "Neither."

Jeepster is right ... what all this barrage of talking points really means is that one of the most enduring legacies of Bush is that he contributed to the polarization between parties in the US. Nixon made peace overtures to communist China and stayed popular with Republicans (until Watergate), Clinton co-opted Republican ideas on welfare and budget and was still popular with Democrats, but in the last eight years we saw an astonishing entrenching of partisanship and a bitterness of debate that will not go away for many years. From voters to members of Congress, fewer and fewer people are wi

It was four AM. I made it complex because I had not the time nor the energy to make it simple.

Sigh...I tried to warn him.

Agree with this. While the impact of SCOTUS decisions matters a great deal to history, we don't really associate them with the presidents who nominated them, especially not in the long run. Example: we remember the decisions of the Earl Warren court, like Brown v. Board of Education, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Miranda v. Arizona, as wildly liberal. Virtually no one, though, connects those decisions with Eisenhower, the president who nominated Warren (or remembers that Warren was a Republican).It is worth noting that "historical legacy" has always been defined by the academy, and professors l

Are you saying you want the next one to be "Ask Me About ... Fifi the Wonder Poodle?"