As Bayou Renaissance Man so clearly notes, there are many aspects to Nelson Mandela the man. I personally make no claims to objectivity in my views of him, which are much along the lines of those espoused by Debbie Schlussel (though not necessarily as strident). But Mandela did accomplish much that needed to be accomplished.
Quite frankly, the pre-Mandela South African regime was not particularly friendly towards the Jewish citizens in locations outside of Cape Town or Johannesburg. Mandela himself was tolerant, and even friendly towards, the Jewish citizens of South Africa (provided that they were in South Africa and not in Israel -- another one of those who love us when we are dead in Treblinka and Auschwitz and Terezin, but hate us if we are alive in the Holy City of Jerusalem). Mandela's successors cannot be expected to be so accommodating.
Anyway, there are diverse ways of viewing Nelson Mandela. And I do not particularly object, per se, to the vats of ink being now being fed into the presses on the occasion of his passing.
What I do object to, in yesterday's and today's newpapers throughout the America, is the dearth of ink about what happened on 7 December 1941, when the Japanese planes attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor. It is a day that will live in infamy.
The Americans who died at Pearl Harbor (including those who now repose in the sunken wreckage of the ships there) are no less worthy of the media's ink than Nelson Mandela.
I do not know what really happened in this "He said, She said" dispute between a police officer and her department, a dispute that is now in the courts. I shall let the legal system get to the bottom of it all before pronouncing any judgment.
What I will note, however, is that Officer Dolores Sharpe, having been charged with resisting arrest, has been placed on leave without pay.
Fine and dandy!
But what about all of those wrongdoing public officials (Lois Lerner comes immediately to mind) who get placed on leave WITH pay pending the outcomes of their cases?
They ALL should be placed on leave WITHOUT pay, and if they are exonerated, then they should have their lost pay restored to them.
"A large number of installed systems work by fiat. That is, they work by being declared to work."
The biographical particulars for the late polymath Anatol Holt are well beyond the scope of this posting. I now shall only say by way of understatement that his personal and professional life was interesting and accomplished, and by way of disclosure that a number of years ago I carried on a correspondence with him and was on various occasions a guest in his home.
I have not found the source for the quote set forth above that is so widely attributed to him, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Tolly Holt in fact said and/or wrote it.
Tolly, you called that one correctly! The Administration is now declaring its Obamacare website to be operational. "[W]e believe we have met the goal of having a system that will work smoothly for the vast majority of users" is the quote now being bandied about the Internet.
And I have found the source for that one: The final sentence of a Health & Human Services Report which seems to be missing a date.
The website is the least of the problems for Obamacare; it has just been fixed by fiat. Obamacare has problems far, far more extensive than its website. Money transfer, information security and availability will persist no matter how well the website works. The problems ain't over yet, folks!
Per the Hebrew calendar, the day begins at sundown, so tonight is the first night of Chanukah this year. And tomorrow during the day will be the first day of Chanukah, and also Thanksgiving Day. We thus have one of those exceedingly rare instances when the two coincide.
Barack Hussein Obama is effectively attempting to eliminate the celebration of Thanksgiving by destroying America, and is effectively attempting to eliminate the celebration of Chanukah by eliminating the Jewish people. Whether or not he succeeds on the first count remains to be seen (though I fervently hope not).
But he absolutely WILL NOT succeed on the second! G-d has guaranteed it! The Jewish people will NEVER be destroyed! Am Yisrael Chai!!
Wishing all a Happy Thanksgiving, and a Happy Chanukah!
The "No True Scotsman" fallacy goes something to the effect that one Alistair MacTavish reads a story in the Edinburgh Evening News about a violent crime wave in London, which the Metropolitan Police Service detectives believe has been perpetuated by a single individual. "No true Scotsman would ever do that," thinks MacTavish to himself. The next evening, the finding of the mutilated body of another victim is reported in the Evening News, and a horrified MacTavish again insists that the perpetuator cannot possibly be a Scotsman. After another two weeks, with another victim almost daily, the suspect is apprehended by the Mets. The suspect is identified as one Duncan Forbes MacPherson, a native of Glasgow. "He is not really a true Scotsman," declares MacTavish.
Amongst the insular Jewish religious community, there were similar sentiments expressed about two years ago during the Leiby Kletzky affair. Leiby Kletzky, you will recall, was an autistic boy who, having become disoriented, was abducted, murdered and mutilated. The murderer was a member of the same community, but a local shopkeeper named Eva Rosenbluh told a New York Daily News reporter that "To me, he is not an Orthodox [Jew] because an Orthodox Jew wouldn't do that."
Well, Eva Rosenbluh is in the New York Daily News again. Eva is now arguably a victim of violence, having had her wrists slapped by U.S. District Judge Allyne Ross. Seems that in 1994, Eva's father died, but Eva continued to collect the old man's Social Security payments for 18 years.
So, Eva, pray tell just where do we draw the line between what an Orthodox Jew would and would not do?
But my scrutiny and interest are directed not only at Eva, but at the Social Security Administration and at Judge Ross. Shouldn't the SSA know when someone dies? Especially if the person dies in a nursing home in New York City, where the death is sure to be reported?
Note that Eva got 3 years probation, no fine, and no jail time, but had to repay within 90 days the $218,194.52 she collected in her father's name after the old man died. And the prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Paulsen, observed that this constituted "essentially a 20-year, tax-free loan from the government."
And Judge Ross, you said, "I believe the punishment effected by the loss of her home, the restitution and personal pain is sufficient." And you say that Eva is unlikely to reoffend, and that jail time would serve no purpose.
Yes, Your Honor, I can sort of see some justice in the conditions you placed upon Eva's probation, including the repayment (without interest) of the $218,194.52 within 90 days, which supposedly will necessitate the sale of Eva's home and her eviction therefrom. And I can even see sparing the taxpayers the cost of incarcerating Eva if indeed she is unlikely to commit any more crimes. I suppose that what really galls me here is that Your Honor seems to have fallen for defense counsel Jacob Laufer's line that Eva is a "profoundly decent person" whose charitable deeds included helping out poor brides with their weddings. A noble cause indeed, but how noble can it really be if done with stolen money?
Another religious Jewish woman behaving poorly. Or not. After all, aren't we supposed to buy into the notion that no true Orthodox Jew would ever do something like that?