A discussion of story versus sentence. Well, more of a discussion of where story lies. Is it the words we read, or the plot we follow. Of course, in my personal opinion, it's a dance of both. Plots, or story arches, can be told several million ways (just look at how often the plays of Shakespeare are recreated, like this weekend realizing that "Christmas in Connecticut" is a retelling of "12th Night"). Story at it's basic level is, "there's this character, and something happens." Words are the way we dress up the story. As is discussed, a well constructed an interesting plot can survive clumsy words, and in my experience words can carry you through a clunky plot. While a well cooked steak can be fabulous by itself (yes, I've had one or two that required no dressing), and a well made sauce can make a third rate steak palatable, when you put both together, if the balance is off, the taste will fail. If the balance is correct, it is heaven on earth.
Well, I guess they're not terrorists or Marxist (or even radical feminists), you know, if they're fighting our enemy. It's like the 80s never happened. Hello, conservatives, you all like history, time for you to really learn it (instead of adjusting it to fit your preconceptions and support your political ideals like the Texas State Board of Education). Or do I really need to mention how Saddam was our man (even meeting D. Rumsfeld as we handed of chemical weapons), or the Taliban had our support when they were fighting the Russians, and then that pesky little fact of Osama getting a few weapons from us. Yes, you know, we should probably drop the designation. But until we do, really, you don't go and speak in front of them. Especially if you've built your career out of labeling people terrorists and saying how we should have a zero policy regarding them. But it just goes to show the old adage (the one Giuliani, Ridge and Mukasey publicly denounced) that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
And I guess it's not an abuse of power if it's all about the Jebus. Seriously, how does this man (Sheriff Joe "Mad Dog" Arpaio) still have a job in law enforcement? I know, it's all about how good he makes those of us law abiding civilians feel that he humiliates his inmates. 'Cause, you know, they're bad people. Well, wearing pink, or being stacked to the rafters in military surplus tents (sans heating or air conditioning) is one thing. Being forced to sing to receive a descent meal? Yeah. Line crossed. But those federal charges of improper accounting and billing federal funds without proper bookkeeping will probably spell the end of his career.
And now that CNN is reporting on it, can we finally accept it? To quote the article, "The richest 1% of U.S. households had a net worth 225 times greater than that of the average American household in 2009." Average household, which includes that top 1%. That's how big the distortion is. Sure their wealth plunged 27% between 2007-2009 (the recession in case I have to remind anybody), but the rest of us plunged 41%. Sure the report is from the Economic Policy Institute, a "liberal" think tank (although the EPI is officially a "non-partisan" think tank, since most of their research supports the liberal point of view, they're lumped in that category). Here's a link to their preliminary report release.