From Jeff Guhin

Okay. I recognize that faith-based initiatives have a vast amount of philisophical problems accompanying them RE: religion and the state, role of gov’t in resposibility to the poor, etc, but stories like this one can be intereprted as a bit hysterical. I mean, yes, it’s good to know that these folks are crooks, but, really, this is shocking? Corrupt use of gov’t money? Don’t make it a faith-based problem.

From Jeff Guhin

Well it worked in Iraq! Oh wait–it didn’t. I appreciate the need for creative solutions, but for godsakes people, the UN NEEDS a backbone and China’s got to admit that lives are more important than oil (I know, I know, so does the US, but help me out here).

From Jeff Guhin

So, people love monks. Why? We watch movies about Chinese monks, we’re fascinated by nuns, etc, etc. Priests might creep us out post-scandal, but I don’t think that prejudice extends to monks. Why not? Because we all sense there’s something deeper going on in our selves, and monks (and nuns) have the guts to go for it…

From Jeff Guhin

Okay folks, so I’m using my real name on the blog now. And The Economist is free online! How cool is that?

Anyways, a great story on civil war in Palestine:

Hamas may pull back from a final showdown in Gaza, forcing Fatah to sit down and negotiate. But some predict a total split between a “Hamastan” in Gaza and a West Bank ruled by Fatah. No Israeli leader—including Ehud Barak, the former prime minister, who this week won the Labour party’s primary election and could return to power next year—will feel any pressure to talk peace with a Palestinian leadership that is so definitively divided.

from Jeff Guhin

So engagement rings are ridiculous. Diamonds are so sexist, materialistic, and stupid. Why not just have all men kill a mammoth and bring it to their women. SEXIST CRAP!

But there’s a powerful case to be made that in an age of equitable marriage the engagement ring is an outmoded commodity—starting with the obvious fact that only the woman gets one. The diamond ring is the site of retrograde fantasies about gender roles. What makes it pernicious—as opposed to tackily fun—is its cost (these days you don’t need just a diamond; you need a good diamond), its dubious origins, and the cynical blandishments of TV and print ads designed to suggest a ring’s allure through the crassest of stereotypes. Case in point: An American couple stands in a plaza in Europe. The man shouts, “I love this woman!” The woman appears mortified. He then pulls out a diamond ring and offers it to her. She says, in heartfelt tones, “I love this man.” And you’ve probably noticed that these days diamonds really are forever: Men are informed that their beautiful wife needs a “Twenty-Fifth Anniversary” ring (note this ad’s reduction of a life to copulation and child-rearing), and single women are told not to wait around for guys but to go ahead and get themselves a “right-finger ring.” Live to be 100 and a woman of a certain class might find her entire hand crusted over with diamonds. A diamond company, you see, is unrelenting. In their parlance, “the desire is there; we just want to breathe more life into it.”

From Jeff Guhin

I love this man. I want him to be president. I would vote for him in a second. He’s pragmatic, results-oriented, non-ideological, with strong leadership experience and a brilliant mind.

Vote Bloomberg, I say.

From Jeff Guhin

1. A fantastic profile of a woman talking about class differences in education. It does seem a bit stereotypical, but, as a teacher, this stuff is useful. Wise criticism, though, that the structural problems underpinning this stuff are not addressed.

2. Bob Sumners: Not just a sexist who ticks off Harvard profs! Also a damn fine economist coming around to the problems of globalization….

3. Can Johnny Edwards stop class inequality?

4. How is inequality going to change? God, this stuff is good.

FROM NOTACOMMIE

We’ll go to Chicago, where we can have a good time.

FROM NOTACOMMIE

I wrote about this for BustedHalo a while ago, but I like the idea that faith must be grounded in doubt….Bush is just too certain. This is a great article.

FROM NOTACOMMIE

Harold Bloom is quite a guy–he has English departments across the country either hating him or loving him (mostly hating–in fact, he had to create himself a different department at Yale) and, while he’s probably pretty politically liberal, he’s got intellectual conservatives in love with him. He’s brilliant on religion, culture, and, most importantly, just being a human being–I love his work, because he remembers that literature is fundamentally about the human experience.

Anyways, his reflections on Judaism are vital–and also important for us Catholics, particularly as we come to wonder what our post-Vatican II identity is.