If you've never read Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, you've missed out.  Though the book has inspired centuries of romance novel dreck, it deserves its place as a classic of the English language.  The story of middle class Elizabeth Bennet's mutually reluctant courtship by upper class Fitzwilliam Darcy has almost everything one could want in a novel: comedies of error, manners, and misunderstanding; a keen appreciation of class; insight into human nature that holds up despite its age; and a happy ending.

But there are three great things that Pride and Prejudice lacks: endless hordes of the Living Dead; Hong Kong cinematic violence, whether unarmed, by swordplay, or with firearms; and a lengthy discussion of the relative merits of various schools of Asian martial arts.

Those defects are remedied by Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, a newly published collaboration between Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith.  Oh, the key themes of Pride and Prejudice are all there, as is Austen's witty and insightful prose, but Grahame-Smith has endlessly improved the novel, by placing it in an alternate history Regency England in which the British isles are afflicted by a "strange plague" that causes the dead to walk, mindlessly hungering for the flesh of the living.  London is a walled city besieged by the dead, who are described as "zombies" by the lower classes, or "unmentionables" by the better sort of people.  Upper class Englishmen study kenjutsu in the salons of Kyoto, while the middle gentry hope to train their sons and daughters in kung fu at the Shao Lin temple.  The conflict between these schools, not to mention the conflict of society with the walking dead, is incorporated into the larger class conflicts so crucial to Austen's work.

And Austen's work it remains.  None of her prose, plot, or characters are removed.  Merely … rewritten slightly, with a few key scenes added.  It's as though Grahame-Smith was a literary historian, who'd found an early draft of this classic, from which brutal editors later removed its heart.

And devoured it.  I highly recommend Pride and Prejudice and Zombies to anyone.  Whether you're a fan of the work of Jane Austen, George A. Romero, John Woo, or Quentin Tarantino, there's something here for everyone.

Dateline: Pennsylvania. Story: a staffer to a Republican state senator is arrested for soliciting a 14-year-old boy for sex.

Boooooo! Old! Derivative! Predictable! They weren't even in the shitter, for Pete's sake! Make it more interesting!

Okay.

. . . . a legislative staffer wanted to dress up in a panda costume and have sex with a 15-year-old boy.

Attorney General Tom Corbett says 40-year-old Alan David Berlin, of Carlisle, was charged Thursday with attempted sexual exploitation of children and related crimes.

A Corbett spokesman says the boy's parents alerted authorities after finding graphic messages on his computer. He says agents found wolf- and cat-type costumes in Berlin's home.

The Republican Party: offering you one-stop shopping for denouncing, and raising the bar on, sexual perversity.

Bush? Not so much. Bush always looked like he sort of knew that he sounded like an ass.

Dateline: Venezuela. Hugo Chavez, whose love affair with Hugo Chavez will live on as one of the most dreamy in geopolitical history, has decided to start a reality TV program. The reality in question is that Hugo Chavez is a a narcissistic tyrannical freak.

CARACAS (Reuters) – Venezuela's garrulous President Hugo Chavez on Thursday began a marathon four-day edition of his trademark television show to mark 10 years since the influential and widely watched program first hit the airwaves.

Chavez is a tireless talker who uses frequent television appearances to make policy announcements, berate opponents and even sing during rambling speeches often delivered in the florid vernacular of working class Venezuelans.

. . .

"'Alo Presidente' starts today and finishes this Sunday, we don't know at what time," Chavez said at the start of Thursday's program broadcast from an electricity plant in Venezuela's oil heartland state Zulia.

He may need all that time. As P.J. O'Rourke once commented, there are no short apologies for socialism.

The Egyptian Culture (or should that be Kultur?) Minister Faruq Hosni, now that his nomination to head UNESCO is about to be blocked, wants the world to know that he is deeply, tragically sorry for all those remarks about burning "Hebrew" books, and "the infiltration of Jews in international media".

He never meant a word of it.

Oddly, many Egyptians and other Arabs oppose him on the ground that he is too liberal.  Perhaps that's because he only called for burning Hebrew books, rather than burning Hebrews themselves.

Even more strangely, Reuters, arm of the Jewish international media that it is, willfully and stubbornly refuses to provide the exact book-burning quote but instead only paraphrases it.  As a non-Hebrew, I take to mean that the statement was rather more inflammatory than just what's paraphrased.

Perhaps most strangely of all, Israel itself does not oppose his nomination.

Them Jews are subtle.

(Via Fark)

On the heels of closing over 800 Chrysler dealerships, with untold numbers more to close once the GM bankruptcy hammer drops on Monday, the Obama administration has announced a brilliant new stimulus plan: Subsidies for auto dealers.

The Obama administration will offer U.S. auto dealerships loans of up to $2 million to help buy vehicles and maintain inventories, the top members of the Senate's Small Business Committee said on Thursday.

The U.S. Small Business Administration's pilot program will provide loans of $500,000 up to $2 million that are repayable over five years and backed by a 75 percent government guarantee, according to Senator Mary Landrieu, the Democrat who chairs the committee, and Senator Olympia Snowe, the top Republican on the panel.

"The SBA's plan to offer floor plan loans to America's dealerships will help small businesses stay open in this uncertain economy," the senators said in a joint statement. "These loans will enable dealerships to maintain their inventory and save jobs."

We've been informed time and again that a major problem facing the Big Three is an overabundance of auto dealers in the chain, auto dealers whose irrevocable (outside the bankruptcy system) contracts forced the auto makers to overproduce; auto dealers who prevented the manufacturers from economizing in supply and distribution chains.

So the administration handed the remaining Chrysler dealers (as it will soon give lucky or politically connected GM dealers) the greatest gift a government can offer: it killed their competition.

It's a truism that if you reward a behavior, you will have more of it.  As the administration now intends to reward the behavior of auto dealers, through subsidies, logically we will have more auto dealers.  Oh sure, they'll be Toyota and Honda and Ford dealers, once the government swings the axe on GM, but…

Wouldn't it have been less expensive, and more efficient, to have let the market kill non-competitive auto dealers in the first place?

Via the John Locke Foundation.

Perhaps it's working in San Francisco, but I am a little surprised that no one batted an eye when a co-worker just admitted that her pets were a duck and a sparrow. I'm pretty sure no one else can claim that combination. I'll admit I'm fascinated by this now. To the point that she probably regrets telling me.

Actually, from the sound of it, the duck is a pretty lousy pet. And, the mental image of a duck wearing a diaper is making me smile still, two hours after I first heard it.

Police officers are occasionally forced to make split-second choices about the use of force, sometimes with tragic results.  The results are rarely so tragic as in the case of the late Officer Omar Edwards, killed in the line of duty by a fellow police officer.

"Police! Stop! Drop it!" cops from the 25th Precinct shouted at Omar Edwards, 25.

As he started to turn toward him – the gun still in his hand – an officer opened fire, sources said.

The officer involved in the shooting is white, Edwards is black and had no visible NYPD identification on him, sources said. It was unclear if Edwards identified himself.

"This is always a black cop's fear, that he'd be mistaken for a [suspect]," a source said.

Although Police sources and the Daily News have described Edwards as, "off-duty," it should be noted that Edwards was chasing a suspected car thief at the time of his death.  Question whether, had it been Edwards forced to use his weapon against a suspected car thief who turned on him brandishing a shiny piece of metal, he would have been described as "off-duty" or not.

[Omar Edwards'] father couldn't fathom how such a fatal mistake could happen.

"If a police officer sees someone with a gun, you don't just fire without asking questions or trying to apprehend the person," said Ricardo Edwards, 72. "If the person was firing at a police officer, I understand."

Unfortunately, the elder Mr. Edwards is mistaken.  All too often officers use force, sometimes extreme force, against people who carry shiny metal objects that aren't dangerous at all, such as unbladed box cutters, or digital cameras, or ambulances.  In the case of a black man carrying a weapon while not wearing a blue uniform, it's surprising that only six shots had to be fired.

To the credit of the New York Police Department, the car thief was apprehended without the use of deadly force.

Green Slimes, Ochre Jellies, Gray Oozes, and now … Corrosive Goop.

He flew home from a four-day business trip to find his new car covered from hood to taillights with a strange, corrosive, white gunk.

"It looked like bird manure, but like 500 birds, it was so much,"…

"It ate through the paint on my 1-day-old car. I had to have the windows replaced, because it took the laminate off the glass."

Like most such monsters, the Corrosive Goop lives in dark caverns, oozes between walls, and can be difficult to track … until it's too late.

I've been meaning to write about a modest proposal our friend TJIC floated over at his place. His premise: why not have a special category of adulthood, entry to which is strictly voluntary, that carries with it special rights and responsibilities? Here's the idea:

I propose bifurcating current legal adulthood into two designations: “lesser adult” and “full adult”.

Lesser adults would get mortgage bailouts, credit card bailouts, could bail on all sorts of contracts if they find them distasteful, and, in general, would be treated somewhat as wards of the state.

Full adults would be able to sign contracts that the state actually enforces.

A lesser adult could opt, at any time, to become a full adult.

A full adult could opt, at any time, to become a lesser adult, but could not escape contracts that they’ve already signed.

Personally, I prefer "Grownup" for our new category.

Here's some of the other rights and responsibilities of Grownups I would impose:

* Grownups can't cite voluntary intoxication as a defense or mitigating factor in any civil or criminal suit. Grownups know that they chose to get plowed. In fact, if a grownup offers any defense to a criminal or civil matter excusing or justifying conduct based on diminished capacity, they would immediately lose grownup status.

* Cops don't have to Mirandize grownups, because grownups are presumed to know their rights.

* Grownups are presumed as a matter of law to have read warning labels, contracts, and the fine print. There is no exception to the parol evidence rule for grownups. For the non-lawyers among you, that means that if the contract says "x", and warns the reader that it contains all terms of the deal, and the grownup signed the contract, the grownup cannot later argue "oh, but they told me it was also y and z."

* Grownups are presumed to have the knowledge of a high-school graduate with a B average. That includes civil, historical, and scientific knowledge. A grownup would be presumed to know, for instance, that dropping an electrical appliance in the bath could lead to electrocution, and could not complain that they were not warned of that. A grownup could never, like the successful plaintiff in Moran v. Faberge, claim that they should have been warned that pouring perfume on an open flame could be hazardous.

* Grownups would be strictly limited in the amount of mental suffering damages they could collect in a torts case.

* Grownups could sue for punitive damages, but because they recognize that such damages are to deter for the good of society, not to reward them, they would be compelled to donate such damages to charity.

As TJIC points out, most of us would choose to do business only with grown-ups.

More ideas about rights and responsibilities of "grownups"?

Edited to add: a good one from a commenter at TJIC:
* A grownup could get a prescription for non-FDA-approved drugs, but would not be able to sue if the drugs killed him.

We don't often endorse products, but this earns the Popehat Seal of Approval:

There is a nifty story of craftivists fighting the good fight against mass-murder supporting dipshits at the link above.

Via TrinlayK, our favorite maker of plush elder gods.

And the answer is . . . . CRIMINAL!

39-year-old Christopher Handley, an office worker, was brought up on charges of possessing child pornography in 2006 when customs officials seized a package for him. It contained several manga, some of which were "lolicon" that showed what officials said were children being sexually abused. There were also images of bestiality. Handley has a huge collection of manga, and only a few are lolicon. He also had absolutely no child pornography of any description in his house or on his computer.

And the key question:

How exactly can a court determine whether a comic book character is a "minor" or not?

Once you begin criminalizing trafficking in or possession of cartoons, that's going to be an issue. How old is a Pokemon? Also, is Bart Simpson his apparent age of 10, or his calendar age of — what, about 35 now?

This past Sunday, at Dodger Stadium:

There was beer. And there were Dodger Dogs.

This evening:

The beer was good, but I had more fun this evening.

We have a number of bloggers who read these pages.  This question, and it's a legitimate question, not a rhetorical one, is directed primarily to them, though comments from others are appreciated.

What keeps you doing it?  How do you motivate yourself to post day after day?  How does a Walter Olson, who is about to celebrate his 10th anniversary as a blogger, and maintains one of the oldest blogs on the web, keep doing it?  How does a Patterico, who's also getting rather long in the tooth, keep doing it?

I go through phases in blogging and in internet activity generally.  Sometimes, usually in fact, I'm enthusiastic for the hobby, and sometimes everything is perfect.  I write something that I think (and ultimately my opinion is the only one that matters, though I appreciate and enjoy good comment discussions) hits on all cylinders.

But at other times I can't think of a word to say.  Sometimes I just participate in comments at other folks' blogs.  Sometimes work takes me away.  Sometimes, in a misguided attempt to recover the initial enthusiasm, I start my own site.  I thought my last attempt was a good one, but ultimately it was doomed to fail.  So I returned to blogging "full-time" here.

Which isn't to dismiss my co-bloggers here, principally Ken and Ezra, but including a number of other friends who, for one reason or another, don't often post.  And including Charles, our newest author, who I wish would post more often, as I've enjoyed his output here.  I like each and every co-author at Popehat, some of whom I've met, and think that a group blog is ultimately a better environment for me.  I'm glad to write here, and enjoy reading what my fellow authors post more than what I write myself.

But currently I'm going though one of my phases.  If it weren't for my co-authors, this site would be on the verge of shutting down.  I pre-wrote and pre-scheduled my last post, which was a trifle about "Towel Day," weeks before it appeared.  And sometimes, maybe most of the time, what I write is filler.

I write the filler because I recognize that blog needs new content, preferably every day, to keep moving forward.  And I want the blog to move forward, because in one of the rare weeks when I have a post that I think is a big hit, I want people to read it.  I also write it because I enjoy discussing it with our commenters, whom I quite like, more sometimes than I enjoy writing it.

Unlike some bloggers, who get to appear on tv or radio, who have some small trace of actual political power, or who must enjoy some decent income for plugging stuff on commercial websites, we're not seeking attention (and of course, in my case, I'm nowhere near as good at it as they are).  We don't post using our last names.  We're just in it for discussion and the small narcissistic thrill that comes from a good comment or a link.

So how does one remain a full-time, part-time blogger?  How does one avoid the fate of the blogs mentioned at One Post Wonder, which itself now appears to be almost dead?

I worked like hell in high school, and got into a good college. I worked like hell in college and got into a good law school. I worked like hell for two of three years of law school, ensuring good opportunities thereafter. (I found it psychologically impossible to take law school seriously my third year. I paid the price. Bye bye, magna!)

Why work hard all that time? Well, money is part of it. I want to be comfortable and provide well for my family. Opportunity is part of it. I wanted to be able to work at exciting and rewarding jobs.

But most important of all, I wanted — and now have — the incalculably delicious freedom to say "fuck off."

Continue Reading »

I'm on a half-hour phone call with a deputy U.S. Marshal right now. I've tried to writ this guy back to court so he can get his new trial in light of the court granting my motion to vacate his conviction and sentence. This Deputy left me a message saying that I'm an idiot because he's already been paroled to another state. I called back to explain to the deputy that this is unlikely because (a) he was sentenced to life, (b) it's a guidelines sentence, so no parole, and (c) he's never been to that particular state.

The Deputy's verbatim response: "SHUT the fuck UP!"

She's now holding the phone with me on the line in one hand, and with the other hand yelling into a second phone at somebody at the Bureau of Prisons. I'm learning new words. A recent one involved combining the word "stain" with a word referring to an act which should not, if performed reasonably carefully, yield a stain. Every now and then I as a polite question to assure she is not yelling at me. She very sweetly tells me no.

I love this job.

Edit: Okay, they found him. They were looking in the state system rather than the federal system. But now they are worried because they don't know how to fly him here from there. It's a two-hour drive.