[Insert Name Here] Save Us

Now, the Solipsist is not a fan of the goings on at Gunatanamo Bay, but, seriously, aren't mullets a sign of suspicious behavior (see picture on the front page of today's New York Times)?

Of course, not many people look good in mugshots, and those who do have presumably had way too much practice.

Another article in today's Times discusses a moderate Islamic televangelist (for want of a better word), who advocates a more tolerant (dare we say, modern) attitude toward the religion.  Wonderful news, but it's sad that this is still so surprising.  Shouldn't this be the default attitude of all religious leaders?  Mind you, this is not aimed solely at Muslims.  Frankly, the Solipsist is more concerned with the right-wing Christian fundamentalist element ("Christianists" as one pundit labeled them) here in the US.  They pose a far greater immediate threat to the republic.

At any rate, one tries in vain to get into the mindset of these people.  What must have happened (or not happened) to all these folks--Christian fundamentalists, Islamic hatemongers, Zionist totalitarians, Buddhist stormtroopers (it's possible)--while growing up.  Don't they have better things to worry about?  Seriously, what would the world be like--not just for US but for THEM--if everyone suddenly "fell in line" and agreed with them?  They'd be pretty bored for one thing. 

But maybe we should all try it.  Yes, let's pick one religion--any one will do--and, worldwide, agree to live by its precepts for, say, a week.  Then, when the world is still filled with suffering--maybe not religious strife, but, y'know, all those old standards like hunger and disease and natural disasters and poverty--when the world is still filled with all these things, we can go back to the proselytizers and ask them what went wrong. "Where's your Vishnu now, eh?"

And, in that way, one at a time, we can scratch out all the world's great religions one by one and get on with the business of actually making the world a better place and not waiting around for some messiah to save us.

Here endeth the rant.

Solipsist Seeks Federal Bailout

Cyberspace, January 2--The venerable (by Internet standards) freeform blog The Solipsist has applied for federal relief to fend off the ravages of the economic meltdown.  Like many sectors of the American economy, the web-based newsgathering and disseminating and babbling about site, known far and wide as the first page visited by the guy who writes it, is suffering the effects of the global credit crunch.  Recently, the founder (who wishes to remain anonymous in case he pisses someone off)  was reduced to riffling through his sofa cushions to scrape up enough loose change to buy a bag of dog food.  The founder owns no dogs.

Sol Ipsist, a spokesman for the website, when asked why federal monies should be allocated to support this dubious enterprise, pointed to the recent rescues of the insurance, financial, automotive, steel, and baked goods industries (it's coming!).  "I'm not saying we're as vital to the continued functioning of the American economy as some of those guys," Ipsist mumbled through chutney-stained lips, "but I'm NOT saying we're NOT as NOT vital either.  After all, the American economy has not functioned ONE DAY this year without a posting from The Solipsist," he continued italically, "and one is reluctant simply to ASSUME the continued smoothish functioning of the economy without this vital contributor."

President-elect Barack Obama could not be reached for comment.  But someone who has heard of Mr. Obama (and who requested anonymity on the grounds that a news release without at least one anonymous source would seem like the kind of thing that somebody just made up) was quoted as saying, "The Solipsist is, certainly, not too big to fail.  It is, however, not too SMALL to fail either.  In fact, it may be JUST THE RIGHT SIZE to fail.  According, therefore, to the Goldilocks theory of governmental spending, it needs to be rescued before it. . . well, fails." 

In order to meet operating expenses for the next three to four weeks, The Solipsist is requesting an immediate line of credit--or, even better, a large suitcase stuffed with fifties--in the amount of $7.3 million.  Mr.  Ipsist was quoted as saying that he will also accept vouchers to the Cheese Steak Shop.

Pardon Me

So the pardon season is upon us again.  It's good to be the king, dispensing pardons for crimes large and small.  Though sometimes it seems the main characteristic of a pardonable offense is that it is boring.  How many of you remember or, if you remember, care what Marc Rich was guilty of before being pardoned by Bill Clinton?  Not that a number of these cases are not worthy, particularly those involving victims of mandatory sentencing laws--those folks languishing in prisons for possessing small amounts of illegal drugs (which should, by the way, generally be legal, but that's a subject for another day) or similarly victimless crimes.  But then what we really need is a revamping of that whole system.  If presidents extend pardons to SOME of these people, doesn't it suggest some inherent problem with the sentencing in the first place?  Some inherent problem of which the powers-that-be are NOT unaware.  Heaven forbid, though, that any of these powers-that-be actually speak out against such a system.

Wouldn't want to be seen as soft on crime now, would we?

Question: If Senate Democrats somehow block the seating of Roland Burris, is it an example of racism?  No.  Before the announcement, it had been pretty clearly stated that the establishment would refuse to honor any appointment made by Gov. Rod Blagojevich.  So it's pretty clear that any rejection of Burriss would merely represent the fulfillment of a promise (something rare enough in politics, admittedly, but no less logical for that).  One can assume that black leaders, who are warning against a backlash if Burriss is not seated, would not be up in arms if Burriss were on black.

The problem, actually, stems from the hasty (if understandable) promise made NOT to seat anyone Blagojevich appoints, presumably out of fear that anyone selected would be somehow a crony of the governor.  It seems clear that Burriss is not.  Guilt-by-association is never a good policy, and it especially problematic if there does not even seem to be association.  If the man is qualified, seat him.  Deal with the image problems when the time comes.  After all, anyone who is appointed has to run for re-election in a couple of years anyway.  Let the voters decide and move on.

Blagojevich!

So, the governor of Illinois has gone ahead and named someone to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat, in defiance of virtually every Democrat in the land.  Well, really, what did people expect?  With Blagojevich accused of essentially everything short of third-degree murder (and, I think, illegal transport of livestock across state lines), what has the man got to lose?  And are people really surprised by his chutzpah?  At the same time, it seems a shame for this Burriss guy.  It sounds like he's your basic low-key , civil servant type who might actually be a good senator.  Good luck there, though.  One wonders, though, if the US Senate could just refuse to seat someone who, for all intents and purposes, has earned the job legitimately (if under dubious and less-than-ideal circumstances).  Yes, yes: This country cannot afford to allow someone elected under dubious circumstances to hold public office.  Just ask President Gore.

(Aside: Doesn't "blagojevich!" sound like something a Czech tennis player should shout when serving?)

And the fighting continues in the Middle East.  Again, at the risk of sounding partisan, this space would like to point out that, while Israel continues to attack Hamas in Gaza, the country is also sending in truckloads of humanitarian relief.  One cannot help but wonder how those truck drivers are being treated.

On a lighter note, the Solipsist would like to wish everyone a happy new year.  Make sure to designate a driver.  And make sure those resolutions are fun!

Pre-New Year's Resolutions

It's never too early to get a jump on one's New Year's Resolutions.  All right, NOVEMBER might be a bit early--or ridiculously late--but December 29th seems to fall within a range of reasonableness, like the Department of Motor Vehicles' allowing one to renew a license within a few months of the actual birthday.  Why wait until the last minute?  That just runs the risk of long lines, frustration, and the inevitable ticket for driving without a license from the quota-hungry cop on your way home after you've given up and decided to make sure you get there REALLY early tomorrow.  No doubt Blogger.com and its ilk will be inundated by the resolute come January 1st.  Now seems the ideal time to beat the rush.

Initial Thoughts

Blogging is the democratization of narcissism.  And this is a good thing.  Time was that the subjecting of others to one's thoughts was the privilege of the idle rich.  Now it's the pastime of the idle everyman.  And while an overabundance of speech is certainly no marker of its quality, the law of averages suggests that somewhere amongst the trillions of words being posted every day, someone will, if only accidentally, publish something truly profound.  It's a realtime experiment testing the hypothesis of the infinite Shakespeare-typing monkeys.  Who wouldn't want to attempt a new Hamlet?  (Or at least Timon of Athens?)  (No, your not-so-humble correspondent hasn't read it either, but it sounds good, no?)

Manifesto

What this will be:  Wait and see, dear reader.  The solipsist is unsure himself.  From the title, one may fairly conclude that this will be a rather self-centered, self-absorbed page. Enjoy!  But seriously, folks, what is more important is

What this will not be: A diary.  The solipsist promises that he will try his very best to refrain from airing his own personal dirty laundry or whines or complaints here.  (Why would ANYONE want to read that, anyway?)  Rather, this will be a platform for reflections, thoughts, rants, and inanities.  It is hoped that someone(s) somewhere(s) will stumble across this page and find something(s) worth responding to.  And if this page continues on for years and years, and if even only ONE person on even only ONE day finds even only ONE sentence worth responding to. . . 

. . . well that will be majorly depressing, really.

Still, nothing ventured nothing gained!  See you tomorrow!