“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who couldn’t hear the music.” –Friedrich Nietzsche
Good morning,
A potpourri today…
Above is the photo taken from Apollo 17 back in the 1970s, which I believe was the first “full view” photo of the Earth from space. We’re all living on that ball hurtling through empty space…
MARRIAGE BELONGS TO EVERYONE
Bipartisan legislation protecting interracial marriage and same sex marriage passed the House today by a vote of 258-169. States would be required to recognize marriages regardless of "sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin."
Republicans and Democrats alike told moving personal stories and commented on the historic strides we have made to reach this point. That said, 169 Republicans voted against the bill. Similar to the arguments against abortion rights, the arguments here were religious in nature. It is disconcerting that we have such controversy regarding basic human rights. Check out these comments in opposition to the bill:
"God's perfect design is indeed marriage between one man and one woman for life," said Rep. Bob Good, R-Va. "And it doesn't matter what you think or what I think, that's what the Bible says."
Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., choked up as she begged colleagues to vote against the bill, which she said undermines "natural marriage" between a man and a woman.
"I'll tell you my priorities," Hartzler said. "Protect religious liberty, protect people of faith and protect Americans who believe in the true meaning of marriage.”
CONTRONYMS
Contranyms are words that have two, contradictory, meanings. There aren’t many of these. Here is a list of a few, some of which aren’t exact opposites but close enough!
Apology: a statement of contrition for an action or a defense of one
Bolt: to secure or to fee
Bound: heading to a destination or restrained from movement
Cleave: to adhere or to separate
Dust: to add fine particles or to remove them
Fast: quick or stuck or make stable
Left: remain or departed
Peer: a person of the nobility or an equal
Sanction: to approve or to boycott
Weather: to withstand or wear away
PHILANTHROPY
I have been writing on-and-off over the past year regarding nonprofit organizations and their challenges. These can be found in a single compilation HERE.
On the subject of philanthropy, I remember that, when I was a student leader at USC, I was introduced to several trustees whose resumes described them as “philanthropists.” At that tender age, I dismissed this descriptor as “rich person with money.” Some might refer to some of these people as “the ladies who lunch.” These are naïve and unjust labels for people who stand up and contribute money, devote time, and volunteer their talents freely. As I grew up, I began to see that philanthropy is an essential part of the American culture and a critical catalyst to the work done by nonprofit agencies every day. The work they do and that they fund is critical.
ELECTIONS AND REVERBERATIONS
The elections are in the rear-view mirror. But before we move on to the mania of the 2024 presidential election, it’s worth a few last unrelated thoughts.
We are going to have to deal with Trump for the next two years. Hopefully they’re the last two years. I worry that the more reasonable wing of the party will have multiple candidates running, allowing Mr. Trump the advantage of benefiting from the disproportionate allocation of delegates. The Republican party’s primaries are largely “winner take all” formats, allowing the winner of a mere plurality in a crowded field to amass votes in large chunks early in the process. This is the risk that not only Democrats fear, but so do many Republicans. Let’s not forget that in 2016 he won the lion’s share of the early delegates in primaries and caucuses where he received pluralities in the 30-40% range.
There are some candidates who lost in the last election whom I hope will not be done with their elective careers. All of them conceded after hotly contested campaigns and did so quickly, graciously and with dignity. Here is a short list based upon where I live and whom I know (I know three of these folks very well and can’t believe I don’t know the fourth—but I’m going to reach out to him). Even if you supported one of their opponents, I think you can appreciate their attributes:
Rick Caruso. Rick offered a compelling case for Mayor of Los Angeles. This successful businessman is loaded with ideas and understands many of the problems facing our cities. He lost to an accomplished legislator, whom I think has the goodwill and desire to make a difference. Losing may turn out to be better than winning, with the challenges of our city and its “weak mayor” system.
Nathan Hochman. Nathan lost his race for California Attorney General. He presented a compelling campaign. But he also is part of the civic and charitable fabric of our community, who gives back in ways few politicians do.
Sam Yebri. Sam lost his race for Los Angeles City Council. I’ve known Sam for many years from serving together on the board of a charitable agency. He is a community leader with his hand in many initiatives and organizations that try to make the world a better place. He lost to Katy Yaroslavsky, who offers many of these similar attributes.
Adam Frisch. Adam is the only person on this list who held prior elective office (he was on the Aspen City Council). He ran for Congress against Lauren Boebert, the election denier, because someone had to. He almost pulled off an upset. I hope he will run again in Colorado (perhaps against Ms. Boebert again).
Have a great day,
Glenn
From the archives:
I enjoyed musing over the list of contronyms. Although not contronyms, I had occasion to look into the word gauntlet.
This morning my brother-in-law informed me, as he does daily, of his WORDLE score. Today he scored a 2/6 (dammit!). I commented that he had thrown down the gauntlet with force. But one can also run the gauntlet, in a variety of settings. So I google it, and I found a nice piece in History.com
https://www.history.com/news/what-does-it-mean-to-throw-down-the-gauntlet
Another enjoyable post. Thanks. I have two comments.
First: you mentioned that the earth is hurtling through space. A fun calculation for high school level geometry is the estimation of the velocity.
Assume that the earth's path is a circle, and not an ellipse (oval), centered at the sun.
Assume the radius of the circle is the old, well-known grade school figure, of 93 million miles.
Assume that the earth completes the path in 365.25 days.
Use the equation rate x time = distance.
Calculate the circumference (distance travelled: C = 2 pi x r), divide by the time (days to go once around), and you have the rate.
This rate will be in miles/day. Do the conversion of units to arrive at the rate in miles/second.
Allowing for the approximated figures, the earth has a velocity of: a little more than
18.5 miles per second.