I guess this is the closest thing we have to an open thread at the moment? I find it hard to know for sure.
Anyway, I just wanted to say that on the Epstein emails release, I think the most interesting thing so far is the correspondence between Bannon and Epstein. It's an astonishing illustration of moral bankruptcy on Bannon's part, and to the extent that he is such an integral part of MAGA world I do think it really keeps the heat on.
On a lighter note, while thinking of examples of rightwingers only showing compassion to suffering encountered in their own circles (remembering that Dick Cheney's support for gay marriage was undoubtedly to do with having a lesbian daughter), I was reading various pieces about DC and smiled to see this:
Former US vice-president Dick Cheney, who has died, had intimidating power. For instance, when Cheney shot a friend while hunting, an apology was made by the friend to Cheney. His fearful aura made it all the more amusing when CNN accidentally published an obituary of Cheney in 2003, but it was unfinished and had been based on a template used for the Queen Mother. Cheney was described as “the UK’s favourite grandmother”.
2025-11-05 18:46:02
I have speculated before that what seems to me obvious from personal observation, i.e. rightwing inability to appreciate injustice and suffering unless in their own immediate family, circle etc, may be a missing or limited capacity of something analogous to imagination. From having to sit numerous IQ tests in my childhood, it was clear to me that the thing I was uniformly worst at was spatial conceptionalisation/manipulation, and although results seemed to support that it wasn't bad enough to materially alter the results, nonetheless I was perfectly conscious of finding it much more difficult than any other category. It's hard to know whether to blame people for possessing less of a desirable talent.
2025-11-05 11:28:11
russell's uncle Charlie doesn't sound the least bit superficial to me. He sounds like someone formed (as most of us are) by his life experiences, for better and worse. We don't know too much about how his particular combination of beliefs came about, which would certainly be interesting and useful in trying to make sense of the world, but the upside of that is that he and his nephew/godson continued to have an affectionate and joyful time with each other for many decades. And, at least in my opinion, affection and joy between good people weigh heavily on the desirable side of the balance in a dark and worrying world.
2025-11-04 21:38:31
russell, I've been thinking about this post all day. Given that Charlie died at 90, and you are almost 70, I couldn't help wondering whether, at some stage of your young to later manhood, you ever tried to find out how such an otherwise lovely person conceptualised his political opinions, and expressed what was important to him. Obviously, you wouldn't have wanted to fight with him, or make him (or yourself) feel bad, and maybe you never went there. And maybe you wouldn't want to go into it now either, in which case fair enough. But if you ever did discuss it, delicately or not (in my family we never argued delicately, but argumentation was considered an unavoidable part of life and we never questioned our love for each other), and if you felt like giving an idea of the discussions, that would be very interesting indeed.
2025-11-04 01:02:41
The Eddie aspect is even more moving, if that's even the right word. No wonder you miss them.
2025-11-03 21:49:17
Charlie and his wife (and the rest of them) sound like wonderful people. It's so valuable to hear the specifics, and to be reminded (and one needs to be reminded) that people are complicated, and that they contain multitudes. Sometimes, like in that old Dirk Bogarde movie, you have to focus on the singer not the song.
I guess this is the closest thing we have to an open thread at the moment? I find it hard to know for sure.
Anyway, I just wanted to say that on the Epstein emails release, I think the most interesting thing so far is the correspondence between Bannon and Epstein. It's an astonishing illustration of moral bankruptcy on Bannon's part, and to the extent that he is such an integral part of MAGA world I do think it really keeps the heat on.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/15/steve-bannon-jeffrey-epstein-text-messages-publicity
On a lighter note, while thinking of examples of rightwingers only showing compassion to suffering encountered in their own circles (remembering that Dick Cheney's support for gay marriage was undoubtedly to do with having a lesbian daughter), I was reading various pieces about DC and smiled to see this:
Former US vice-president Dick Cheney, who has died, had intimidating power. For instance, when Cheney shot a friend while hunting, an apology was made by the friend to Cheney. His fearful aura made it all the more amusing when CNN accidentally published an obituary of Cheney in 2003, but it was unfinished and had been based on a template used for the Queen Mother. Cheney was described as “the UK’s favourite grandmother”.
I have speculated before that what seems to me obvious from personal observation, i.e. rightwing inability to appreciate injustice and suffering unless in their own immediate family, circle etc, may be a missing or limited capacity of something analogous to imagination. From having to sit numerous IQ tests in my childhood, it was clear to me that the thing I was uniformly worst at was spatial conceptionalisation/manipulation, and although results seemed to support that it wasn't bad enough to materially alter the results, nonetheless I was perfectly conscious of finding it much more difficult than any other category. It's hard to know whether to blame people for possessing less of a desirable talent.
russell's uncle Charlie doesn't sound the least bit superficial to me. He sounds like someone formed (as most of us are) by his life experiences, for better and worse. We don't know too much about how his particular combination of beliefs came about, which would certainly be interesting and useful in trying to make sense of the world, but the upside of that is that he and his nephew/godson continued to have an affectionate and joyful time with each other for many decades. And, at least in my opinion, affection and joy between good people weigh heavily on the desirable side of the balance in a dark and worrying world.
russell, I've been thinking about this post all day. Given that Charlie died at 90, and you are almost 70, I couldn't help wondering whether, at some stage of your young to later manhood, you ever tried to find out how such an otherwise lovely person conceptualised his political opinions, and expressed what was important to him. Obviously, you wouldn't have wanted to fight with him, or make him (or yourself) feel bad, and maybe you never went there. And maybe you wouldn't want to go into it now either, in which case fair enough. But if you ever did discuss it, delicately or not (in my family we never argued delicately, but argumentation was considered an unavoidable part of life and we never questioned our love for each other), and if you felt like giving an idea of the discussions, that would be very interesting indeed.
The Eddie aspect is even more moving, if that's even the right word. No wonder you miss them.
Charlie and his wife (and the rest of them) sound like wonderful people. It's so valuable to hear the specifics, and to be reminded (and one needs to be reminded) that people are complicated, and that they contain multitudes. Sometimes, like in that old Dirk Bogarde movie, you have to focus on the singer not the song.