Althouse: Audible Althouse #38.

February 26, 2006

Audible Althouse #38.

Religion, chaos, iconoclasm, originalism, the Golden Mosque, what God wants, and "if it feels good do it."

Here. Live-stream here.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...: Related to the Golden Mosque, check out what your self-proclaimed fellow traveler Stephen Green is saying about Iraq tonight.

Ann and I arrived at the same conclusion, even though we chew on different slices of the political pie.

Tonight "moderate" Green the VodkaMain is more like this: A civil war is the nastiest way to get a good result. The United States hasn't faced a succession crisis since we settled that ugly business at Appomattox in 1865, and no one to the left of the Ku Klux Klan has since advocated we bring back slavery. Getting there cost 600,000 American lives, but obviously they were not lost in vain.

While over here Illudium Q36 is telling me that I am a sicko for daring to wonder if it is a civil war, your fellow moderates are already to destroy the village in order to save the village.; 2/26/06, 9:00 PM
reader_iam said...: Quxxo:

You know, I do actually try to follow your thinking, and thus your links (yeah, yeah, yeah--I know you're so not into it).

But your first link AND point is a non-sequitur, as presented.

The second link doesn't--quite literally--go where you want it to go, much less rhetorically.

Your final point is about "moderates destroying the village bit" is just weird. You haven't established that. Your demonstrated intent regarding individuals, is quite clear, however.

Tell me, how is what you do saving a single villager, much less village, anywhere?; 2/26/06, 11:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Whoops, sorry about that, the second link to Moderate Steve, Ann's buddy, the Vodka Mainliner is as follows:

Now for the good news.

If we're looking at an Islamic civil war, then vast numbers of good people will die, from Libya to Oman. Luckily, they won't have to be our people. In the very worst-case scenario, the Middle East could blow up – and we could bug out, pronto. "This is the good news?" you ask. Yes

I think this should clear up the destroy the village to save the village analogy. (You have heard that one before, right?)

My point to Ann being the question, is this really what "moderates" think?; 2/26/06, 11:35 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Wickedpinto: Your sense that the podcast is part of the art project that is this blog is correct. As to other speaking events, I have linked to them over the years. They don't usually exist on the web, but here is an event you can watch that includes me. (Scroll down to the bottom for a set of links to the video.); 2/27/06, 8:00 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Quxxo: Why are you connecting me to Stephen Green like that? Just because we once reached the same conclusion about something? You link to a post of mine where I said "Vodkapundit joins the conversation." Where did I call him a moderate? Where did he call himself a moderate? Your willingness to distort things on this one is quite blatant. Why should anyone take you seriously?; 2/27/06, 8:09 AM
vbspurs said...: Why should anyone take you seriously?

So why do you, by constantly answering him?

This troll almost single-handedly ruins reading your blog, and I say that with heavy heart, not with self-righteous glee.

Cheers,
Victoria; 2/27/06, 1:47 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Victoria: I choose to answer for my own reasons, when I do so choose. You're perfectly free to jump over his comments with no effort. The charge that he "ruins" the blog is thoroughly overblown. I happen to like that this is a blog where people with different viewpoints can converse. You're free to be more exclusionary on your own blog.; 2/27/06, 3:43 PM
Icepick said...: Victoria, you should know by now that Ann views blogging as a kind of performance art, and performance artists do weird things sometimes. Hell, she even put one of my comments in her banner for a day or so, and that's far more strange than engaging various forms of comment section fauna in conversation.

Besides, we'd all miss Quxxo if s/he were gone. It's like with tree-frogs: once they stop making all that noise the silence becomes unbearable. Thanks for saving us from that still night air, Quxxo!; 2/27/06, 5:01 PM
vbspurs said...: Victoria: I choose to answer for my own reasons, when I do so choose. You're perfectly free to jump over his comments with no effort. The charge that he "ruins" the blog is thoroughly overblown. I happen to like that this is a blog where people with different viewpoints can converse. You're free to be more exclusionary on your own blog.

In one sense, I realise you are completely right.

This is your blog, and you are its complete mistress over it, as you allude correctly I am over mine.

Furthermore, you are one of the few major quasi-Conservative bloggers who doesn't have a "board" type blog -- but one where the neat interchange of comments makes your blog, highly readable, daily.

But spare me your above-it-all dismissive tone.

It's people like Sippican, like Reader_Iam, like Peter Hoh, like Ron, and you bet, like me, as well as many many other commenters that make your blog hum and churn out gems every day.

Even the silliness, is silliness of the most enjoyable kind.

But that person detracts, in each and every post.

Further, when you became a major blogger, you relinquished a part of that exclusive "it's my blog and I'll answer if I want to" sniffiness.

In short, this blog is only as good as your commenters.

And it's a sad state of affairs, when you choose to tolerate the trolls because it gives you and only you, pleasure.

I would never be so callous of my readership, on my own blog.

A quick word to all who read this:

If you think this is the makings of some kind of Battle Royale, forget it.

I'm not that kind of person. I stated my opinion. I will continue to state it, if I so desire.

But the Alexis-Crystal catfights which make the pulses race, leave me cold.

Besides, of which, I can't swim.

Cheers,
Victoria; 2/27/06, 5:18 PM
Ann Althouse said...: This comment thread is another monument to the fact that no one gives a damn about the podcast!; 2/27/06, 7:14 PM
Ruth Anne Adams said...: Hey! I like the podcasts, too, but my comments about the podcast get overshadowed by the ancillary stuff, or ignored. All the time.

By the way, my 3.5 year old sings "POD--CAST!!" when he hears that part of the theme music. [Or when I sing it, which I do often, because it's so darned catchy].

I disagree that this blog is only as good as the commenters. It's intrinsically good with or without comments. Try it. Turn off the comment feature on the podcast posts. See if you don't enjoy your podcasting experience more.; 2/27/06, 10:29 PM
vbspurs said...: This comment thread is another monument to the fact that no one gives a damn about the podcast!

We care, you big silly!

Sure, I'm still on Podcast #5, but people care.

Mind you, they'd care more if you had an Alexis-Crystal catfight on them. Just a thought.

Cheers,
Victoria; 2/27/06, 11:36 PM
vbspurs said...: I disagree that this blog is only as good as the commenters. It's intrinsically good with or without comments. Try it. Turn off the comment feature on the podcast posts. See if you don't enjoy your podcasting experience more.

Instapundit is intrinsically good with or without comments (the ones he deigns to share with us, I mean).

Althouse is intrinsically good when she blogs about legal matters, great when she blogs about her life, and sublime when she touches on pop culture.

But puh-leaze...the comments are like the sequins on Dolly Parton's tight-fitting dress.

Take them out, and all you have are jinormous boobs.

Cheers,
Victoria; 2/27/06, 11:40 PM
Ruth Anne Adams said...: Victoria:
She's an artist who doesn't need the critics or the crowd. She does what she does for the sheer love of it.

Comments are superfluous. Just like sequins.; 2/27/06, 11:50 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Mary: Ironically, you just argued for the "if it feels good, do it" principle with respect to religion. You might want to do a logic check on your commens before hitting publish!; 2/28/06, 9:03 AM
Ann Althouse said...: Mary, you argued that people should pursue religion to fulfill their personal emotional needs. Face it!; 2/28/06, 10:05 AM
vbspurs said...: Comments are superfluous. Just like sequins.

Sacrilege!

You're lucky you're not outside the Grand Ole Opry.

Cheers,
Victoria; 2/28/06, 11:44 AM
Derve Swanson said...: "Mary, you argued that people should pursue religion to fulfill their personal emotional needs. Face it!"

No. You suggested that in this podcast, not me. You are simply emoting and deliberately misunderstanding my point. (Insert exclamation point if necessary)

I have never ascribed to the "if it feels good do it" hippie nonsense you spout.

I tried to offer you another opinion to understand the importance of religion in people's lives. Obviously, you prefer to distort my words, rather than try to understand or respect them.; 2/28/06, 11:53 AM