Thursday, April 8, 2010
The most interesting commercial, I think, I have ever seen
The voice-over is a recording of his dead father.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Tell that bench to be cool.
I just became aware of something very interesting. As I am sure you all know, Justice Stevens of the Supreme Court has been making some noise recently about retiring sometime soon. If he were to do that during the Obama administration, he would be giving President Obama a second opportunity to put a liberal judge on the bench.
But that's not what is interesting! The interesting thing is that Stevens happens to be the only Protestant currently on the bench. The court, it turns out, is overwhelmingly Catholic, and disproportionately Jewish. Since the court was founded by Hammurabi (or someone like that) in 1492 (give or take) , there have been a total of 12 Catholic supremes - 6 of them are currently serving on the court. There have been 7 total Jews, two of whom are currently on the bench. If Steven's replacement is not a Protestant, the court could be entirely without a Protestant for the first time since the Spanish Inquisition (or thereabouts.)
I did some quick wikipedia research and found that 51% of the country is Protestant, 23% Catholic and 1.7% Jewish. I also happen to know that nearly all of our Presidents have been Protestant, the single exception being President Kennedy. So why so few Protestants?
I don't point this out as a problem. The Supreme Court has no obligation to maintain any sort of representative sample of the American religious landscape. I point it out simply because it is a remarkable statistical anomaly.
I have a few possible explanations, but I am interested to hear yours. Anyone got a theory that might explain this?
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
But that's not what is interesting! The interesting thing is that Stevens happens to be the only Protestant currently on the bench. The court, it turns out, is overwhelmingly Catholic, and disproportionately Jewish. Since the court was founded by Hammurabi (or someone like that) in 1492 (give or take) , there have been a total of 12 Catholic supremes - 6 of them are currently serving on the court. There have been 7 total Jews, two of whom are currently on the bench. If Steven's replacement is not a Protestant, the court could be entirely without a Protestant for the first time since the Spanish Inquisition (or thereabouts.)
I did some quick wikipedia research and found that 51% of the country is Protestant, 23% Catholic and 1.7% Jewish. I also happen to know that nearly all of our Presidents have been Protestant, the single exception being President Kennedy. So why so few Protestants?
I don't point this out as a problem. The Supreme Court has no obligation to maintain any sort of representative sample of the American religious landscape. I point it out simply because it is a remarkable statistical anomaly.
I have a few possible explanations, but I am interested to hear yours. Anyone got a theory that might explain this?
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Indiana, and other stories.
I have spent the last few minutes trying to come up with a word which I am pretty sure doesn’t exist, at least not in English. I am looking for a word which is like the word “Americana” except for India instead of America. The best I have been able to come up with so far is “Indiana,” but I think that might already mean something else. No matter. I am undaunted. I have come across a fun bit of trivia about India: a little morsel of Indiana which I found absolutely incredible.
It concerns the Indian railroad system. These numbers are vague, but I am quite sure they are accurate. I am sure a few minutes of research could produce more exact figures, but I liked the way this information was conveyed to me so I will pass it on to you unaltered.
A) If you were to pull up all the railroad tracks in India and lay them along the equator in one long single track, there would be enough of it to go around the world one-and-a-half times!
B) The railway system is all government-owned. The number of people employed by the government to run the railroad system is larger than the number of people in the US Military.
A couple of things immediately sprang to mind when I heard these numbers.
The first was a reaffirmation of my belief that there has never been, in the history of the world, a logistical enterprise to equal the British Empire. God only knows what horrible methods they used on the Indian population to construct this colossal web of railways, but there is a sort of morbid magnificence to the brutal efficiency of the world’s first capitalist empire.
The second was a sudden realization of the incredible weight of the Indian government bureaucracy. If they have that many people working for the railroad alone, how large must the government payroll be if you include the military and all the ministries? It must be gigantic.
In a related story*, it seems that Google has decided to change its name from Google to Topeka.
* I use the term "related" somewhat loosely. These two stories are related geographically because Indiana and Kansas are both corn-spangled Midwestern states, and temporally because I happened to become aware of them both within roughly the same time period.
In a totally unrelated story, I am very excited about this weekend. Twitter confirms.
It concerns the Indian railroad system. These numbers are vague, but I am quite sure they are accurate. I am sure a few minutes of research could produce more exact figures, but I liked the way this information was conveyed to me so I will pass it on to you unaltered.
A) If you were to pull up all the railroad tracks in India and lay them along the equator in one long single track, there would be enough of it to go around the world one-and-a-half times!
B) The railway system is all government-owned. The number of people employed by the government to run the railroad system is larger than the number of people in the US Military.
A couple of things immediately sprang to mind when I heard these numbers.
The first was a reaffirmation of my belief that there has never been, in the history of the world, a logistical enterprise to equal the British Empire. God only knows what horrible methods they used on the Indian population to construct this colossal web of railways, but there is a sort of morbid magnificence to the brutal efficiency of the world’s first capitalist empire.
The second was a sudden realization of the incredible weight of the Indian government bureaucracy. If they have that many people working for the railroad alone, how large must the government payroll be if you include the military and all the ministries? It must be gigantic.
In a related story*, it seems that Google has decided to change its name from Google to Topeka.
* I use the term "related" somewhat loosely. These two stories are related geographically because Indiana and Kansas are both corn-spangled Midwestern states, and temporally because I happened to become aware of them both within roughly the same time period.
In a totally unrelated story, I am very excited about this weekend. Twitter confirms.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)