A Curious Little Blog

The following are links to images to accompany the book  Westphalia: The Last Christian Peace Chapter 1 p.1: Portrait of  Queen Christina , source of many of the quotations in this book and reigning Swedish monarch at the time of the Peace of Westphalia. 7: Witch scares : alive and well in the 1640's. 9: D'Artagnan and  Cyrano de Bergerac were both duelists as well as French couriers at the Congress of Westphalia 10: Galileo died under house arrest in 1642. Rembrandt as a young man and as an old man 11: Michelangelo's statue of David (left) next to Bernini's Bernini's Ecstasy of St. Theresa Fall of the Damned by Rubens Van Dyck's portrait of Charles I Velazquez, The Surrender of Breda Marie de Medici as the Roman goddess Bellona, by Rubens The coronation of Marie de Medici by Rubens 12: Map showing the disparate realms of the elector of Brandenburg Map showing the divided realms ruled by Philip IV -- and this just includes

The liberal argument against George Zimmerman is based on the premise that he was profiling Martin because Martin was black.  Everything else about their defense depends on the idea that Zimmerman was wrongly "stalking" or even "hunting" Martin based on the colour of his skin.  I have seen liberals who, in other circumstances, would argue that it is never right to initiate violence, admit that Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman but exonerate him because of his right to "self-defense" against this suspicious person stalking him.  If there was no racial angle to this case, there would be no argument about self-defense against someone who was merely observing.  Indeed, if a white person had tried to claim self-defense to justify an attack against a black person who he thought was stalking him, liberals would be singing an entirely different tune. The thing that strikes is that the idea that George Zimmerman is a racist is prima facie absurd.  He is one-quart

Not much has happened to cause me to change my original interpretation of the George Zimmerman case .  We now know that Trayvon Martin described Zimmerman as "a creepy-ass cracker," and we have definitive evidence that Zimmerman was seriously injured in the struggle.  (I have heard people question whether Martin inflicted the wounds to Zimmerman, but I haven't heard a plausible alternative scenario.  Do they think Zimmerman broke his own nose to create a cover story?  Do they think he was on neighbourhood watch with a broken and bleeding nose?) We still don't know how the encounter between the two of them went, having only Zimmerman's statement that he was ambushed and little else to go on.  Some people claim he was the one on top in the struggle, and it was Martin screaming for help.  This is only credible to me if Martin managed to turn the tables on him, because I don't see why Zimmerman would have pulled a gun when he was on top.  If he wanted to shoot M

Many items from the link below aimed at pro-life Texas legislators, e.g. "I will drown @Scott_SanfordTX in blood & bile then feed his corpse to territorial crows," but mostly of the more mundane sort -- I hope you die, I hope your daughters get raped.  Repulsive, and enough to make some representatives feel physically threatened.  Of course, I don't blame Democratic legislators for the actions of these crazies, but I do think it is incumbent upon them to denounce it, just as Republicans are expected to denounce violent statements and actions against abortion clinics. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/352711/texas-pro-life-legislator-receives-violent-threat-betsy-woodruff

Stoicism is such an attractive philosophy. How can anyone object to being calm in the face of adversity, undisturbed by the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune? It is not only personally promising, but also appealling in others, because we all admire someone with grace under pressure, someone who is always cool, calm, and collected. I have always admired stoicism and aspired to be more stoic myself (without much success, I admit).  There seems something fundamentally wrong about railing against fate, whether you are religious or not.  If you are, surely God knows better than you; if not, the actions of inanimate forces are not worthy of your anger.  I think of the line from "The Color of Money," when Paul Newman's opponent loses and says, "I didn't deserve that."  Paul Newman just asks, "Is this your first tournament, Duke?"  What is the point of saying you didn't "deserve" to lose a pool game or to miss a particular shot?