The Parable of the Talents...and Politics

I don't usually blog about the Bible and religion unless it is to point out hypocrisy, which I eagerly and gleefully love to rip into.

See, I believe that one's faith or absence thereof is a personal issue, unless somebody trots it out first and cloaks themselves in the mantle of sanctimony.  Then it's fair game.

Anyway, I think I've figured it out: the real reason why conservatives (like those who are vying for the Republican presidential nomination) are so very staunchly in favor of tax cuts for the wealthiest of the wealthy.

For to every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. (Matthew 25:29, Revised Standard Version)

See, it's Biblical.  Thus unerring, infallible, etc.  Not only do the rich get more as their just due, this verse also addresses the flip side of screwing the poor as well, in one neat little package.  Oh, and lest you think this verse is taken out of context, it's the capstone summary sentence to the famous parable of the talents, which is all about...creating and protecting wealth.

But Gary, you may say, what about helping the poor?  See, Jesus also said these things: 

Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" (Matthew 19:21)

"Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys."  (Luke 12:33)

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" (Luke 18:22)

But not to worry.  Since the Bible says both things, you can practice situational ethics and select the verse(s) that you wish to adhere to.   Invoking the first verse gives plausible deniability against those liberals who would point to the last three verses about helping the needy and downtrodden.

Actually, conservatives don't overtly invoke the first verse--that'd be a bit too crass, to speak of it aloud.  They just act on it like it's the Prime Directive in Star Trek.

 

An Arctic Fox...and Ultrarunning

 Image credit National Geographic.

I’ve blogged before about the prodigious swimming feat of a certain polar bear.  Well, I’m back with a tale of another denizen of the Arctic--this time an Arctic fox, which via the magic of satellite telemetry now is known for a prodigious feat of walking and running.

You know, sorta like Ultrarunning.

Per the Feb/March issue of National Wildlife, in 2008 one female Arctic fox was tagged and monitored from its home on Bylot Island, just north of Baffin Island, 250 miles west of Greenland.  I’m tempted to use the term “God-forsaken” but I guess the foxes are happy there.

In the fall of 2008 she began to wander, all over the place: onto the ice cap, back onto land, repeat.  Over the course of one year, she covered some 3,100 miles.  That’s nearly 3 times my meager running total in a typical year.  And unlike this fox, I don’t run in -40F temperatures, and over 90 days in total darkness, and hunt for my food along the way.

Per the article:

Arctic foxes that decide not to stay in one area during the long winter appear to be true nomads, roaming distances that are continental in scale.

I am simply in awe of this critter in comparison to our humble Ultrarunning efforts.

 

Boners Vs. the Unborn

This is an appropriate post for Valentine's Day.

Some blog posts I run across stand alone and are better without any additional commentary from me.

This comes from Lindsay Beyerstein's blog, Duly Noted, where she comments upon the news that researchers in Louisiana used stem cell therapy to reverse erectile dysfunction in rats:

If this therapy proves effective for humans, expect conservative opposition to stem cell research to rapidly deflate. If it comes down to boners vs. the unborn, boners will win.

 

Deadliest Catch...and Ultrarunning

I've been worried that I could not seem to find any evidence that the 8th season of Deadliest Catch (image credit above) would be returning in 2012 on the Discovery Channel. Then I read where it traditionally airs in April for the fishing season just completed that winter, and that Discovery Channel has said it was coming back.

When Deadliest Catch does finally end its run, it'll be a bummer because the bride and I are longtime regular watchers of the show.  We were hooked even before it became a popular near-cult phenomenon.

The show follows various boats and crews fishing for king and opilio crabs in the Bering Sea, a God-forsaken piece of freezing water between Alaska and Russia.  It's a brutally tough and dangerous way to make a living.  The boats are based out of Dutch Harbor, AK, which is about the last outpost of civilization halfway out the chain of Aleutian Islands, with the Bering Sea to the north.

Per Wikipedia:

Each episode focuses on a story, situation, or theme that occurs on one or more boats, while side stories delve into the backgrounds and particular activities of one or two crew members, in particular the "greenhorns" (rookie crew members) on several boats. The fleets' captains are featured prominently throughout the episodes, highlighting their camaraderie with their fellow captains and relationships with their crew, as well as their competitive nature against the other boats in the fleet regarding the hunt for crab throughout the fishing grounds.

As the story moves from boat to boat during an episode, they flash a map with dots indicating boat positions, and say something like, "Meanwhile, 200 miles northeast of Dutch Harbor, the crew of the Cornelia Marie is exhausted from 24 straight hours of pulling crab pots."

So I like to say to the bride, for instance, in talking about a trail run, "Meanwhile, 4000 miles southeast of Dutch Harbor, Gary was fighting muddy terrain at the Blues Cruise 50K near Reading, PA."

I do it often enough that she is past the eye-rolling stage and is moving into active annoyance.  Maybe for the sake of our marriage I'd better back off.  Otherwise my Ultrarunning might suffer.

 

Cats in Art: Girl With a Cat (2 variations, by Perronneau)

From my continuing weekly Sunday series of cats in art. I am using some ideas from the coffee table book, The Cat in Art, by Stefano Zuffi.

Today's post is somewhat different.  When I went to the net to snag an image of Perronneau's Girl With a Cat, I found another version, and will reproduce both here.  I've encountered this several times previously, where apparently an artist will do multiple versions of a painting.  Or we have an original, then perhaps a student paints a slightly different study.  Regardless, it's fascinating, and with these paintings in question having been done some 250+ years ago, the truth of the matter will likely never be known.

So, first the Zuffi version called Young Girl With a Cat, held by the Louvre (although Zuffi omits the initial word "young"):

Image credit Wikimedia.org, Young Girl With a Cat, Jean-Baptiste Perronneau, 1757, pastel on parchment, 18" x 15", held by Musee du Louvre, Paris, France.

 Zuffi's comment:

In this adorable girl, and in the little gray cat that peeps out from a corner of the picture, Perronneau's gifts for intimacy and precise definition, along with the notable sense of color that characterize his work...are clearly visible.

And the second version:

Image credit National Museum, A Girl With a Kitten, attributed to Jean-Baptiste Perronneau, 1745?, pastel on paper, 23" x 20", held by The National Gallery, London, England.


My comment: Same girl, same clothes, different poses, and most importantly, different cat.  Whichever work came first, and whether both were by Perronneau, the first cat must have misbehaved and needed to be replaced by a better cat.

I think the second image must have been the first one painted, because that cat just looks bad.  The cat at in the first image actually looks like it is enjoying being held by the girl.

Conservative Politics, 2012...and Ultrarunning

Via David Atkins at Hullabaloo on 7 Feb 2012:

Forget all the other insanity this year and simply focus on this: Republicans are poised to take a stand this year against contraception, Medicare, and middle class tax cuts. If that doesn't seem bizarre to you, step back, and focus your lens out to the past 40 years of American politics. Try to picture those stances being taken openly by a majority of Republicans during, say, the first Bush Administration in 1989. It's hard to fathom. That Republican Party was alive and well only 20 years ago.

--SNIP--

Threatening to end Medicare, middle-class tax cuts and contraception? No problem--that's just politics as usual. But threatening even mild forms of protectionism, or even the slightest corrections to the behavior of out-of-control capital markets? That's scary crazy talk.

As long as no one gets in the way of the almighty bond markets, the Very Serious People couldn't care less. It's not like they're middle class, need Medicare, or can't get their contraceptives from overseas. So why worry?

The connection to Ultrarunning is that, as I have stated many times, is that we UR types tend to be more-laid back and open-minded than the populace at large.  However, when it comes to the erosion of rights of the regular folk to the benefit of the already-haves, maybe it's time to break out the torches and pitchforks.

For gutting Medicare is wrong (likewise gutting Social Security).  Contraception?--that's a no-brainer--the absolute right of a woman to control her reproduction should never be under political discussion.  Never.

 

Ego and Ambition...and Ultrarunning

Posted to the Ultra List on 25 Jan by Dana Rouche, who makes an excellent point on understanding why we decide to do things.  My comments follow at the end.

Deb, while reading this thread, I am reminded of one of my favorite pieces about running which took me almost 40 yrs of running to learn.  While planning your 100 mile run barefoot, make sure you spend time really understanding your reason for doing it.

From the Zen of Running, 1974, Fred Rohe

you can be victimized
by your imagination
if you imagine yourself
astonishing your world
with your progress and prowess.

we know this mechanism as Ego.

we know this state as Ambition.

being Great Runners
is not the attainment we need.

it is self control.

without it, ego forces us into ambition
and the price of ambition
is pain.

let's not be egotistical,
let's take it easy.

I can freely admit that at least part of the allure of Ultrarunning for me is the reaction of astonishment that I get from more sedentary folks about my ability to run vast distances.  Now, we Ultrarunners don't think of it as a big deal, it's just a predisposition and skill set that we came with and/or cultivated.  But to the uninitiated, it's kinda superhuman. 

For me, for maybe many of us, Ultrarunning is perhaps the single area in my life that I can confidently assert that I really KNOW, can be looked to as a sort of expert, and am comfortable in defending my opinions.  I'm a quiet sort of person.  In most other areas of my life I am rather deferential, seek to stay below the radar, and above all else avoid controversy, since I am a terrible arguer.  I can't think well or quickly on my feet and just stay away from that vulnerability.

Climate Change...and Ultrarunning

No sir, global warming is a hoax!  From the U.S. Government itself:

WASHINGTON-The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today [25 Jan 2012] released the new version of its Plant Hardiness Zone Map (PHZM), updating a useful tool for gardeners and researchers for the first time since 1990 with greater accuracy and detail. The new map-jointly developed by USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and Oregon State University's (OSU) PRISM Climate Group-is available online. ARS is the chief intramural scientific research agency of USDA.

Compared to the 1990 version, zone boundaries in this edition of the map have shifted in many areas. The new map is generally one 5-degree Fahrenheit half-zone warmer than the previous map throughout much of the United States.

Human-caused global climate change has the potential to render moot all of our leisure pursuits, such as Ultrarunning, in deference to sheer survival.  While naysayers exist, the vast preponderance of climate scientists all concur that climate change is real, it's human-caused, and could spell doom for the planet.

Given what's at stake, one would think that the conservative point of view would logically be, "It'd be safest to plan on worst-case."  Yet their general position seems to be the exact opposite.  Have they no children?  No grandchildren?

I think it's a case of follow the money, and not wanting to sacrifice present standards of wealth and living.  To quote Upton Sinclair,

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.