An Orange St. Patrick’s Day
Long time readers of ITA know that we have several recurring posts which reappear on holidays and notable anniversaries. One such annual post is the explanation for wearing orange on St. Patrick’s Day. I’ve published this, or some variation of it, every year since 2005. Last year it also ran in the Evansville Courier & Press and was featured on the Issues, etc. radio program. But the movement to wear orange continues to gain steam, and this year the Examiner picks up on the emerging tradition by noting that in many ways it has its roots right here at ITA. And so, without further ado, here is ITA’s annual St. Patrick’s Day piece.
This St. Patrick’s Day you’re likely to take part in that time honored tradition of wearing green. If not, you risk punishment-by-pinch, an especially popular custom on schoolyards and around office water coolers. Thus, wearing green on St. Patrick’s Day is not only widely practiced, it’s virtually required. It’s hard to imagine the holiday without green.
But for a growing number of people, taking part in the fun means wearing orange. According to this increasingly popular tradition, Protestants wear orange, and the green clothing attire is left to Catholics. Thus, the color you wear is actually dependent on your religious denomination. Admittedly, this color tradition is not well known, but it has deep roots in Irish history.
Protestant Irish have been known as “orange” ever since 1690 when William of Orange (William III), the King of England, Scotland, and Ireland, defeated King James II, a Roman Catholic, in the Battle of the Boyne near Dublin. William’s victory would ensure Protestant military dominance on the island and has been a source of tension ever since. Although the “Orange” in William’s name actually referred to a province in southern France, the color reference stuck. This is why orange now appears in the Irish flag – to symbolize the Protestant minority in Ireland.
Thus, “Orange Protestants” have been around for quite a while, but wearing the color on St. Patrick’s is a relatively new phenomenon. The first group to take part in the tradition appears to have been the Orange Institution, a Protestant fraternal organization more commonly known as the Orange Order. Some members of the order wore orange in various parades on St. Patrick’s Day as a mark of defiance.
Ironically, St. Patrick himself would have been surprised by all of the fuss. Patrick wasn’t even Irish; he came to Celtic Ireland as a British missionary. But more importantly, Patrick did most of his work in the 5th century at a time when Christians were simply Christians, long before any division between Roman Catholics and Protestants.
Therefore St. Patrick belongs to the whole church, not just Rome, and people of all colors and creeds should take part in the festivities. Yet for some Protestants, part of that fun involves wearing orange. So before the green-wearing Irish among you get into a pinching craze, think twice. Some of us wear orange for a reason.
Samuel Barber
Today is the 100th birthday of Samuel Barber, an American composer best known for the Adagio for Strings. The Adagio, while profoundly beautiful, is also extremely well known, so here’s an equally good sample of Barber’s work – the 2nd movement of his marvelous Violin Concerto. Enjoy!
The Ghost of Chirstmas Past
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois speaking on the filibuster and reconciliation during remarks at the National Press Club on 4/26/05:
“You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating [as] it is, to make sure that there’s a broad consensus before the country moves forward. . . . And what we have now is a president who . . . [h]asn’t gotten his way. And that is now prompting, you know, a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate forever. . . . And what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended”
Registering a Firearm in DC – Cumbersome and Expensive!
As one might expect from a process designed by the government, especially given that the authorities behind it never wanted to allow such a purchase at all, buying and registering a gun as a resident of our nation’s capital is both time consuming and more expensive than necessary. This article in the DC Examiner explains it all in detail - I was particularly struck by the list of the added cost. And the comparison with the Virginia process.
If a firearm is purchased for $450, the new owner must thereafter contend with the following expenses:
- $22.50 Virginia sales tax
- $25 shipment fee
- $125 gun class fee (may be more depending on the instructor)
- $125 gun dealer transfer fee
- $12 passport photos
- $13 application fee
- $12 ballistics test fee
- $35 fingerprinting / FBI background check fee
The total fees and taxes are $369.50, nearly doubling the actual cost of a $450 firearm to $819.50.
Meanwhile, the process for obtaining a gun in Virginia involves three steps: (1) walk into a store, (2) pay for the gun while submitting to an instant background check, and (3) walk out of the store with the gun, which may be carried outside of a personal residence.
Long Term Scientific Studies – What’s the Best Course?
From the New York Time’s, an interesting article about the National Children’s Study, which was authorized by Congress in 2000 and began in earnest last January. It is meant to become the world’s largest long-term study of the health of children by tracking 100,000 babies in 105 counties from fetus to age 21.
But while the idea is praised by many experts, the study has also stirred controversy over its cost and content.
In August, the Senate committee overseeing financing for the study accused it of “a serious breach of trust” for not disclosing that the initial price tag of $3.1 billion would more than double, and said the study needed to release more information if it wanted to get “any” financing in the next budget year.
And an independent panel of experts and some members of the study’s own advisory committee say it misses important opportunities to help people and communities — emphasizing narrower medical questions over concerns like racial and ethnic health differences, leaving unresolved crucial ethical questions concerning what to tell participants and communities about test results.
“This study is of the magnitude of the accelerator in CERN, or a trip to the moon — a really big science issue,” said Milton Kotelchuck, a professor at the Boston University School of Public Health and a member of the independent panel. “But if you have a flawed beginning, then you’ve got 20 years of working on a flawed study.”
A Look at Obama Administration Officials
I found this post by Peter Jones, “Who’s Prompting the Teleprompter?” to be really interesting, especially the list below:
- Cass Sunstein (“Regulation Czar”), who thinks animals should have the right to sue in court;
- Mark Lloyd (Associate General Counsel and Chief Diversity Officer of the Federal Communications Commission), who believes the Government should control all media;
- Steven Chu (Secretary of Energy), a strong believer in the anthropogenic causes of global warming;
- Janet Napolitano (Head of the Department of Homeland Security), who calls pro-life advocates terrorists;
- Harold Koh (State Department voice in foreign policy), who is a globalist/trans-nationalist;
- Sonya Sotomayor (Supreme Court Justice), who has “never thought about” whether the unborn fetus has any rights;
- Hilda Solis (Secretary of Labor), a union organizer who supports the suppression of secret ballot for workers;
- Kathleen Sebelius (Secretary of Health and Human Services), active supporter of partial-birth abortionist, George Tiller;
- Kevin Jennings (Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Department of Education and founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network), who favors teaching homosexual techniques to children;
- Van Jones (White House environmental adviser), a self-described “rowdy black nationalist,” and “communist,” founder of STORM (Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, recently resigned);
- Carol M. Browner, global warming czar, was a member of Socialist International and on itsCommission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for “global governance” and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.
- Barack Obama (President of the USA), with the most radical voting record in the history of the Senate, promotes the Freedom of Choice Act, a pro-abortion legislation that goes far beyond Roe v. Wade, and who promises gays all that they demand, dismissing their opponents for using “worn arguments and old attitudes.”
However, I disagree with part of the statement concerning the President – there are a lot of things I don’t like about the man and his policies but his promises to the gay community aren’t on my list. In fact, I think he hasn’t treated them well at all – he’s talked a good game but not followed through on any of it. Which is a pattern of his in almost all areas of governance.
Security theater–now rated R!
Bollywood star Shahrukh Khan has claimed that while passing through the London airport on a publicity tour, he was subjected to a revealing millimeter wave body scan, which female security staff printed out and he good-naturedly autographed.
The airport has denied Khan’s claim, saying that the images generated by the scanners cannot be printed, stored, or distributed in any form. Nevertheless, the images generated by the scanners are rather explicit, and while the TSA claims that image storage will be disabled on the machines and the person viewing the scan will not be able to see the person being scanned, the potential for abuse of this technology is huge.
Critics have referred to millimeter wave scanning as a “virtual strip search.” And while being scanned with one’s clothing on is not as humiliating as an actual strip search, the relative convenience of this technology is sure to make it used much more often. And to what end? While the scanners can easily detect weapons like guns and knives, are they going to be able to detect a blob of explosives hidden in someone’s underwear?
Perhaps this will make Americans finally stand up and say “Enough!” I just hope it doesn’t take the discovery of a cache of scanner-porn on the internet to do it.
Happy Birthday, Maestro!
Today is John Williams’ 78th birthday! Rather than the traditional ‘Happy Birthday’ song, I suggest we all sing the theme to Star Wars. Don’t know the words? Just follow Bill Murray’s lead…
 |
 |
 |
 |
Taxpayer-funded super bowl ad
While we’re talking about super bowl ads, did anyone else notice the ad for the 2010 US Census? The $3 million* for that 30-second spot was funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a.k.a. the stimulus plan. In fact, $100 million of the $1 billion given to the 2010 census by the stimulus plan was earmarked for additional advertising, making for a total of $258.7 million in paid media advertising, according to this document on the census web site.
Anyone know if a taxpayer-funded advertisement has ever appeared during the Super Bowl before? (Perhaps one of those “Just say no to drugs” ads from the 80’s?)
Like so many other recipients of stimulus funding, this advertising campaign seems like a complete waste of money. Advertising Age says the television spots are “misguided, misleading and miss the point.” But at least we can say that this project created jobs…for Ed Begley Jr. and a handful of other semi-obscure actors.
*according to Wikipedia
The union paradigm explained
In a post about teachers’ unions’ opposition to merit pay, Megan McArdle made some very incisive comments on why unions work the way they do:
The unhappy corollary of this is that the metrics [for determining employee compensation] will not only tend towards simplicity and ease of measurement; they will also tend to reward mediocrity. Again, this is not an accident of history. A collective bargaining unit run by a “majority rules” system is always going to look for a system that rewards the median or modal worker, not the best…
Unions are set up to minimize frictions and maximize benefits for the bottom 55%. That’s how they work everywhere–in schools, and out. That’s how they have to work. No amount of cajoling, no number of white papers, is going to change that.
