Happy Valentine’s Day!

elvgrendressinggown

You tell me.

Now things are going to get really interesting this election year.

Will the death of Antonin Scalia be enough to get Americans to take this election year seriously?  Will we hear talk about how much fun it would be to “have a beer” with this or that candidate?  Will we hear more about vague plans for “revolution” against the “Washington cartel,” or will we–and our candidates–grow up and join the reality-based community?  

Me, I’m sitting here in my dressing gown indexing my book.  (Yay! I love indexing.  It means 1) that I can shape the way readers experience my book, and 2) that I’m ALMOST DONE!!!!11!!eleventy!)  I’ll let you discuss the historic political sh!tstorm that will result over the ensuing months.

I’ll just make my pitch here for President Obama to nominate the “bong hits 4 Jesus” guy to replace Scalia on the Supreme Court.  Who cares if he went to law school, or not?  According to this article, Joseph Frederick would be about 32 years old now.  Young people don’t have enough representation on the court!  I think Obama should make youth his priority in this appointment:  now that would be a legacy appointment.

 

9 thoughts on “Happy Valentine’s Day!

  1. May I just say (and I know this was supposed to be a serious post about a serious matter): But I love indexing. It’s one of the most exciting intellectual challenges there is; seriously and not being snarky. And it’s SO important to the way readers navigate content. Few things irk me more than a shit index. And few things excite me more than building one. I know. I know. Wierdsville…..

    Like

    • I completely agree! I love it. I wrote a post about this last spring–should have linked to it in the body of the post–in which I argued that if we want people to buy and read codex books, we need to make them as coherent and useful as stand-alone objects as we can.

      (And your comment is perfectly serious, Maureen. My post wasn’t all that serious, although it invites MOAR SERIOUSNESS in our political lives and thought than is evident to me as I gaze across the rolling fields of the Republic this afternoon.)

      Like

  2. Fortunately, the speakers on my computer are not working, so it can play video all it wants. That is interesting! And a useful reminder that people we disagree with are multi-faceted human beings and not just their political ideas.

    And if people are not taking this election seriously, I don’t know what’s wrong with them.

    As for indexing, huzzah! I can’t say I think it’s fun, but I get so annoyed at bad indexes that I really appreciate good ones!

    Like

  3. I indexed my book, and as noted on the link back to April, it really felt like all of the stress going away. I’m pretty sure I would/will do it again that way. When I was back there on the Grad Farm, though, we actually had to index our dissertations, which was pretty much a suck experience, and I didn’t do it very conscientiously. But for me, an unindexed book, or a badly indexed book, is an invitation not to read.

    Who to nominate for the High Bench? Al Gore? Al Sharpton? A real knuckle-ball pitch for the other side, almost amounting to a spitter down around the ankles, would be to send up a liberal-moderate, Republican, woman, sitting-senator, like Susan Collins [who got a big fat F (14%) rating from the Conservative Review]. Bernie Sanders? Mitch McConnell’s claim that “the American people should have a voice” in the matter, thus the vacancy “should not be filled” until next year is a really shockingly radical constitutional claim when you think about it as anything other than an idiotic piece of partisan aisle-speak. It implies that whatever “mandate” may have been extended by the electorate in 2012 was not really good for the four years specified in the originalist-intentionalist 1787 document itself, but rather maybe something like 3.08 years. Just because he’s not doing anything with the last 25% of his term…

    Like

  4. “if we want people to buy and read codex books, we need to make them as coherent and useful as stand-alone objects as we can.”

    Hear, hear! One of my favourite discipline-specific books has an absolutely abysmal index and it just kills me. Every time. I’ve pretty well made my own now, using a flutter of sticky notes but geeze, way to to disrespect the book user.

    As to the Supremes, I say nominate Carol Mosely Braun or Eleanor Holmes Norton.

    Like

  5. If Obama should desist from nominating a new justice based on the “voice” issue, then by the same constitutional logic, only Senators elected or re-elected this fall should be able to participate in the advise and consent process. That would be an exercise in disruptive innovation and post-modern interpretation that would get a guy like Scalia up and out of the ground faster than you can say Easter Bunny.

    Like

Let me have it!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s