Dan Fagan, Billy Muldoon, and Bogus Quotations on the Internet

After reading today's Comment by Dan Fagan, my first reaction was, "Wow, after last week's rambling condemnation of surrendering (and my having to read it carefully to post on it), this week's piece is well organized and actually has an argument, with supporting statements." Basically it's a worthy replacement of the VECO space since it tells us we shouldn't mess with the oil companies. I thought it interesting too, after telling us last week that we shouldn't surrender to bullies, this week he's telling us to roll over to the gang who told Alaskan legislators (taped by the FBI) "I own your ass." He talks about alleged (no specific names here) bureaucratic harassment of small businesses and then extrapolates that to harassing the big three oil companies. These are the guys who made more profit than our state budget last year. Given the radical difference in writing style between last week's Comment and this week's I can't help wondering if he had some help writing this one.

As I was starting to google around to check on what he wrote, the first site I found was Tribal Fires who wrote under the title " He could of looked it up!":

If, like Billy [Muldoon, the blogger], you ripped open this morning's ADN to read the latest from Dandy Dan Fagan, you may have thrilled to the righteous thunder of this passage in his opening paragraph:

In 1797, George Washington said it this way; "Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. Government is force; like fire it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.

?Hay problema? !Si!

As mentioned previously on the Fires, any time Dan gets within spittin' distance of a testable proposition, he's apt to get it wrong, and this is another such case. It turns out that the Father of Our Country never said no such of a thang! You can read the debunker here at an excellent reality-check site called Bartleby.com

I went to comment on the good catch and read Anonymous' comment:

Methinks Billy is wrong. Here's a link for ya: http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/george_washington/

So, I googled "Government is not reason" and found that there are lots of people quoting George on this. No precise sources, in fact very few sources at all.

I did find this site which said it was a bogus quote:

Bogus Quotes Attributed to the Founders

SAF [The Second Amendment Foundation] mentions another fabricated George Washington quote:

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.

SAF's analysis from the same page follows:

While this quote is often attributed to George Washington in his Farewell Address, this quote cannot be found there. Many people have tried to verify its origin, but cannot confirm its authenticity.

Dan Gifford tried to track this quote down but was unsuccessful for his article. See: "The Conceptual Foundations of Anglo-American Jurisprudence in Religion and Reason", The Tennessee Law Review: A Second Amendment Symposium Issue, Page 801, footnote 201. This issue of the Tennessee Law Review is part of the SAF bookshelf.

Perhaps the American Freedom Library available from Laissez Faire Books features the best history of this alleged quote on their Version 3.1 CD-ROM. The searchable CD-ROM notes that the above statement is:

"Attributed to George Washington.--Frank J. Wilstach, A Dictionary of Similes, 2d ed., p. 526 (1924). This can be found with minor variations in wording and in punctuation, and with 'fearful' for 'troublesome,' in George Seldes, The Great Quotations, p. 727 (1966). Unverified. In his most recent book of quotations, The Great Thoughts (1985), Seldes Says, p. 441, col. 2, footnote, this paragraph 'although credited to the 'Farewell' [address] cannot be found in it. Lawson Hamblin, who owns a facsimile, and Horace Peck, America's foremost authority on quotations, informed me this paragraph is apocryphal [fake].'"

http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html

This is from a site that is AGAINST gun control but they debunked this quote and some others touting gun use, so I give them credit for not perpetuating these bogus quotations that would help their cause. And this is pretty similar to the Bartleby citation that Tribal Fires first used to say it was a fake.


But I finally found one with a source.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a
troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
-- George Washington, in a speech of January 7, 1790
http://www.catb.org/~esr/fortunes/liberty

So I looked for George Washington speeches of January 7, 1790. Couldn't find such a speech, though a number of people actually cited "George Washington, speech of January 7, 1790 in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790"

So everyone is blindly quoting each other when they find something they like.

But Washington did give (well I found it on several sites, two from major universities so I'm guessing it's accurate) what is now listed under the first "State of the Union" speech, then called his "First Annual Message to Congress" on January 8, 1790 (not January 7). I'm not an expert on that time of American history, but as I recall, things were still pretty shaky, and the government was far from strong. The British were going to return in 1812 to burn Washington DC. In fact he spoke in this address about the need for government. Here's a part:

Knowledge is in every Country the surest basis of public happiness. In one, in which the measures of Government recieve their impression so immediately from the sense of the Community as in our's, it is proportionably essential. To the security of a free Constitution it contributes in various ways: . . . And by teaching the people themselves to know and to value their own rights; to discern and provide against invasions of them; to distinguish between oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority; between burthens proceeding from a disregard to their convenience and those resulting from the inevitable exigencies of Society; to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness, cherishing the first, avoiding the last, and uniting a speedy, but temperate vigilence against encroachments, with an inviolable respect to the laws. [Emphasis mine]

http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/documents/union/state1.html

So in this case I think Billy Muldoon may be a little harsh on Dan Fagan. It's pretty easy to get sucked into that quote - it's all over the place. But then my standards may have been lowered by last week's Fagan Comment. At least he didn't totally make it up. Others are also confused. But my hat's off to Billy for spotting it.

Almost Solstice, Midnight Scum Finale

The Sopranos ended last Sunday after, what, five years? Well, Midnight Soapscum, ended after its ninth episode this morning. And as we walked out of Out North theater at 1am, the sky was still light. The longest day is just a few days away.

And how did it end? Spoiler Warning. There was a KQED panel discussion on porn with Svetlana Smirnoff, head of Smirnoff Studios porn empire, Maya Hansberry, UCB feminist professor, and Father Aubrey Khepera of the Catholic Church. Philippe and Luka get married. Smirnoff Studies win a Golden Palme at Cannes. Karl Lagerfeld and Bridget Bardot make appearances. And they fly to Alaska from Cannes to free Maggie the elephant with the help of the Space Aliens from the planet Barbarella. And Gov. Sarah Palin gets a new look. And Brie Savage and Narciso sing "Born Free."

Each individual act was well acted and scripted - definitely the best episode we saw. They didn't necessarily all need to be there. The acts were almost their own Saturday Night Live skits, though they did all loosely fit into an overall plot. The porn panel discussion was a great spoof on pretentious talk shows, though it was reasonably serious about the topic. But it didn't particularly move the plot along. The singing was a surprise - that it was there and that the voices were so good. Heppinstall kept up his Svetlana accent throughout and was a strong presence holding things together. The announcer, David Haynes, was also outstanding. And the space aliens had a language and jerky motions that both made some sort of perfect cosmic sense and spoofed every alien in every tv show and movie. Even the elephants were good. But 10pm to 1am with one intermission is a long show.

So life soap opera has had its first go in Anchorage, getting stronger as it went along. Like Tony Soprano, the characters of Midnight Soapscum, were becoming real people and we'll miss them. For videos from Soapscum, click here.

Sierra Leone Refugee All Star Band Rolls Anchorage

The movie didn't really prepare us for how fantastic this concert would be. These guys have come a long way from their first concerts at the refugee camp in Guinea after they fled the slaughter in Freetown, Sierra Leone. But the movie had introduced us to the story of how they formed and we felt we knew most of those on stage.

The concert was incredible. From the very first note, there were people in front and some in the audience dancing. By the two encore pieces, only the deaf and lame were still in their seats, the rest of us were up and moving to the music. I'd strongly recommend checking out their schedule and going to see them when they are nearby. They have a very busy travel schedule, through the US - west coast from here - with some stops in Europe as well. It's an interesting mix of venues from the University here to the Hollywood Bowl in LA. Get their CD Living Like a Refugee

The video just captures a few snippets. Remember, this is with a little Canon digital camera, so the video and audio are just a hint at what we experienced.















After the show, members of the band came out of the auditorium and talked with audience members in the parking lot. Reuben wrote most of the songs and was the original leader of the band.






Ashade Pearce just bubbled with warmth as we talked.



Signing autographs on posters and CD covers.

Save Energy, Get Exercise, Reduce Noise Pollution

Sierra Leone Refugee All Star Band

This is not a hollywood movie. [added link 6/16/07] It reaches, with low production quality, into the lives of Sierra Leone refugees. We get to meet people most of us never would meet and to get to know them as people. As people who put together a band in the refugee camp and through their own energy and pluck create music that not only inspires their fellow camp residents, but also the rest of the world.

Tomorrow we see them live. [Click here for the post-concert post]

Catholic Social Services and a few other groups that work with refugees here in Anchorage sponsored the showing of this film.

Good Bye Bea Rose

I don't remember meeting Bea. And after we became aware of each other, I don't know how long it took until we had the special connection we had. At services I would seek her out or she me for a hug and catch up. Where have you been? What are you reading? What projects are you working on? And Bea always had so many interesting observations about things, or had just returned from an interesting trip. And she always wanted to know what we were up to. She'd been a teacher, active in political campaigns, and generally involved in community projects. And she looked at me when we talked with love and admiration - we were the only two people there. I guess she had special relationships with lots of people. And I think that is a wonderful gift. The ability to have many good friends, and each friendship in no way lessens the other friendships. Love isn't zero sum. And in Anchorage there are so many other interconnections. Beth, Bea's daughter was a student for a while in our program at the University. Sam's (her son) wife was our daughter's dance teacher. And we came to know and love Phil too when he came into her life. It's sad, of course, when we lose someone so warm, so involved, so nurturing. But Bea had, overall, a good life. And she leaves the world a much better place than she found it. Good bye, Bea, just knowing that you were in my life, makes my life better.










After the service, Joan and I wandered around the cemetery to say hello to other old friends. Lidia and Fred Selkregg were nearby. And then we looked for Rosanne and John Alexander. We finally had to ask where they were. It turns out John isn't here. And as I recalled, Rosanne was near her father. But I have to check on what happened to John.

You could call today Two Funerals, No Weddings, because this evening we went to services for Mark Ertischek. We weren't close friends with Mark, but we've known him and his family for a long time. His daughter went to school with our son. Good bye, Mark, you left us too soon. But you too have left a family that carries on your values.


[A note on the pictures. I only took pictures before or after the service and checked with Sam and Beth before posting them. And some will enlarge if you click on them.]

Jehovah's Witnesses were back

Micah and Jim knocked at the door about 10am this morning. They were very pleasant. They gave me a flier for a three day District Convention of Jehovah's Witnesses later this month.

Actually, I was wondering if Jim wasn't the guy who came by last February. Check his picture. I think he was. Surely he would have remembered the guy who took his picture, you'd think. He was surprised at the time.

I didn't have time today to invite them in - besides, Jonathan, Mary, and Otto had left about 9am and the painting ladder is still up - to ask them why they think this is the answer and why they are knocking on doors to invite people to their convention. I understand the idea that when you have found the 'answer' you might want to share it. And I'm really not disturbed that they come by the door and knock, though I would be embarrassed myself to disturb other people in their homes to tell them about my religious beliefs. They weren't pushy. They didn't talk to me about religion. They just said hello and invited me to come and gave me the flier. I asked if I could take their picture. That was it. Maybe we'll even drop in to see what they do.

It still interests me that so many people from so many different religions, and subgroups of the same religion, believe that they have the answer and that they must share it. There's a certain arrogance in believing that you have found the right path, when there are so many others around who are certain that they've found the right path. It would seem to me that someone would have to study all the other religions before deciding that one is the right one. I tend to be skeptical of all religious claims, though there are some valuable precepts in most religions. Unfortunately, there are people who use religion for their own personal gain, and much harm has been done in the name of religion - whether it's Protestants and Catholics fighting or Sunnis and Shiites.

Perhaps I feel this way because I was born into a religion that doesn't proselytize.

The New Christian Confederacy: How Would Americans Act if Our Country Were Iraq’d?

It seems hard for some Americans to understand why Iraqis might not be too happy with American soldiers in their country. But what would happen if we were occupied by military forces from other countries? How would we react? Would some of us side with the occupying force as a way to gain advantages? Would we start guerrilla warfare against the occupiers? Would people take advantage of the unrest to settle old feuds? Would gangs and drug lords help lead insurrections? It’s worth thinking about what things might look like if we were occupied.


Impossible you say. Aside from the fact of our great military strength, our geography also makes it extremely difficult for any other nation or group of nations to conquer us. Maybe. But what if we conquered ourselves?

Suppose that after the 2006 elections the Bush administration began to plot out their permanent control of the United States. They start making lists of generals who have been loyal and those who questioned Rumsfeld and the Bush administration. Among the many documents captured in Iraq are Saddam Hussein’s strategy for holding power in Iraq, for stifling political dissent. Imagine how interesting that would be to Robert Gates – an actual plan to quell the violence. How useful it would be to Karl Rove – an actual plan to stifle dissent. And when Saddam Hussein was executed in Baghdad with a leaked video as proof, unbeknown to all but a few, the dead man was one of Saddam’s doubles, and the real Saddam is now safely hidden in Wyoming ranch where he can give advice on how he kept the relative peace in Iraq all those years and how the Bush administration can take care of the traitors in the military, in Congress, in the media, in academia. and elsewhere.

The list of suspect military is now expanded to all sectors of the population. Torture techniques have already been approved and we already have prisons where these techniques are practiced. Handy for finding out who’s loyal and who isn’t. Some get called up on morals charges – lots more illicit IM logs come to light. An aneurysm here, a car accident there, an attempted robbery. Slowly enemies disappear. Dark skinned men with beards. Gays. Atheists. Environmentalists. Parents of the dead or injured US troops who dared to question official reports. And anyone who stands up for any of these people. Life becomes more difficult. Air travel becomes an ordeal. Telephones make strange noises. Police put down ‘riots’ at hip-hop concerts and other events where undesirables gather. The dead and wounded brought it on themselves.

Things get murky. Journalists find out there are consequences for aiding and abetting the enemy with their traitorous stories and printing and broadcasting classified material – even if it is already publicly available. A string of explosions at military bases inside the United States is the last straw. The President mourns the loss of our courageous fighting men and women and vows to find and destroy the perpetrators of this outrage. The terrorist alert color scheme has now gone past red to purple. The media, even if they have connected the dots between the enemy lists and the bases destroyed, do not even think about reporting the story. With his loyalists now firmly in charge of all the military branches, and with Blackwater mercenaries deployed to potential hotspots, Bush declares martial law. There are curfews in place. People don't come back from foraging for food. But staying home isn't safe either. All United Nations personnel from countries that have not supported the United States in at least 90% of all votes, and 100% of all votes the Bush administration deems critical, are ordered to leave the country in 24 hours. US troops then take over the United Nations headquarters in New York.

Germany, Holland, and Denmark are the first European countries to break off diplomatic relations with the US. Most Muslim countries also cut ties. The Chinese and the Russians are both nervous and smiling. They always knew that democracy couldn’t work. They understand dictators much more than they understand democrats. Across the nation there is panic. Most of the people who own guns and know how to use them are siding with the government. The liberals take to their computers and begin hacking the government systems. In some cases they find and post internal documents and plans. In other cases they are able to shut down vital systems. The power goes out in Washington DC and the surrounding areas. Troops occupy Microsoft, Google, and other critical computer centers and internet use is severely restricted.

The disruption to trade caused by the United States crisis threatens to topple the world economy. NATO, minus the US, but with help from Russia and China, and dissident US generals and troops overseas, begin to meet to determine what to do. Pakistan, having broken all ties with the US, is now working closely with North Korea to nuke Alaska.

Bush rallies his support. A new Confederacy is authorized to establish a semi-autonomous region in the South, ruled by fundamentalist Christians. The insurgents - a mix of liberals, libertarians, and true conservatives - are using what internet is left to appeal for help from NATO. Many have slipped into Canada or Mexico to start resistance movements.

Do I think this might happen? Of course not. We live in the United States of America, with the oldest constitutional democracy in the world, a constitution that guarantees such things as freedom of speech, freedom from religious prosecution, habeas corpus, due process. But I just spin this scenario so people can start to imagine what life might be like for Iraqis. So people can start to imagine the kinds of choices they would have to make if our cities' streets were ruled by violent militia and you couldn’t count on the police for safety, or the markets for food, or the corner gas station for fuel. When electricity and running water can no longer be taken for granted.

What would your options be? How would you protect your home, your family? What would you do if someone got sick or hurt, but the hospitals were occupied by drug dealers and looters?

So, when NATO - including China and Russia - troops finally landed, what would you do? Would you volunteer to join the new police? Would you join up with your ethnic, religious, or professional compatriots? Would you try to flee across the border? Would you join the insurgency? This is the life every day Iraqis would appear to be facing right now.

Jonathan, Mary, and Otto Visit

We knew our friends Mary and Jonathan would be in Anchorage sometime in June, but we didn't know exactly when. Joan had decided yesterday she needed to paint the entry way to the house. So they arrived by camper van from Juneau this today with everything out and the painting only partially done.



But no problem. They brought along Otto, their new pup. Taz, their Great Dane died at 10 1/2 recently. So after the parking lot at Moose's Tooth was packed - including a fire truck and lots of people outside - we decided to go to Thai Kitchen. You can see from the pictures that both Otto and Jonathan are always moving.

Don't Surrender to Dan Fagan

Dan Fagan’s first piece as a regular journalist in the ADN appeared to today. This is part of preserving the ‘diversity’ of opinions offered by the agreement that gave the long defunct Anchorage Times a half page in the Opinion section of the ADN. Of course, that was basically a diversity of right wing opinions, that became an oil industry platform when VECO took it over. Now that the top two people at VECO have pled guilty to bribery, extortion, etc. the ADN finally ended the deal. One wonders how much they were paid to drag that deal out so long. Anyway, I’ve only heard Dan Fagan’s radio talk show a few times, so rather than lean on the opinions of others, I’ll just work from what he wrote today.

Basically his message was:

Surrender has become mainstream.
The school districts teach students to surrender (to walk away from bullies.)
We surrender to the thought police. (Can’t say lots of words or T.P. call you bad things)
We surrender our rights to government to think for us. And pay for it with 1/3 of our income.

We surrender to Muslim terrorists. "War is hell. Surrender is easy."
We surrender to personal vices.

Surrender is the path to bondage, slavery, oppression

This piece is short on facts and long on unsubstantiated opinion. . One of his rants here is against ‘thought police.’ If you’re against redefining marriage, he writes, “the thought police call you a homophobe, bigot, someone who discriminates.” So, is he saying that someone who stands up for what he believes is the ‘thought police?’ Someone who doesn’t surrender to what he sees as injustice is the ‘thought police?’ Why isn’t that free speech? Or is it ‘thought police’ and ‘political correctness’ only when the ideas are those Dan doesn’t agree with?

My idea of thought police comes from George Orwell’s book, 1984.

Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.

This is a far cry from someone calling you a homophobe. But we do have people working hard to shape how people think today. The best funded and most disciplined attempt to shape thought I know comes from the well organized Republican Party’s Talking Points where right wing politicians and media repeat the same message agreed upon by the Party tacticians each day. Yes, there are now Democratic Talking Points too, as they copied what they see as a too effective form of Republican thought control.

Given Dan’s repetition of the word ‘surrender’ 21 times ('is' 16 times, 'and' 17 times) in this 700 word essay, one has to wonder whether Dan is part of the Republican thought control program, since ‘surrender’ is one of their current favored terms. As in, “Withdrawal from Iraq is surrender to the terrorists.” In this piece he made everything so called liberals believe an act of surrender, then finally writing, "Surrender is the path to bondage, slavery, oppression." If we believe this as an absolute, then, yeah, surrender is the worst thing you could do. If he, along with countless other foot soldiers for the right wing, can get this to stick, then whenever the word ‘surrender’ is used, people will think of Democrats and bondage, slavery, oppression. Now, that is thought control.

The essay begins with the schools teaching kids to walk away from bullies as an example of everyone being taught to surrender. Then he goes on to say that we surrender everything to let government take over our lives and that we surrender 1/3 of our income in taxes for them to do it with. If Dan’s paying 1/3 of his income in taxes, he needs a new accountant. And it seems to me a lot of the tax money is going to fight that war in Iraq he doesn’t want us to ‘surrender.’ But I agree to a certain extent that Republicans generally can’t spend too much on police or national defense and bridges, while Democrats can’t spend too much to help the helpless.

But the whole idea of surrender here is being distorted. First, surrender isn’t all or nothing. But after making it an all or nothing concept, Fagan stretches it to cover all sorts of situations of negotiation and compromise. He seems to live in a world where if he doesn’t get his way 100%, he has surrendered, which leads to bondage, etc. Dan might want to look up game theory and the ideas of zero-sum and variable-sum games as game theory defines them. It’s Dan’s zero-sum type of thinking that has kept the Israelis and Palestinians killing each other rather than starting to move toward peace and security and economic prosperity. If every single insult is returned, there is no end to the feud. But, I understand the reasoning that says you have to stand up to a bully and partially accept it. But there are different ways to take down a bully. While there isn't agreement on bullying, it does seem reasonable that in many cases "[b]ullying is a learned behavior, not a character trait. Bullies can learn new ways to curb their aggression and handle conflicts." And for the cases of psychopaths, the community, not victims need to intervene. One option is the one Dan implies – beat the shit out of the bully and he leaves you alone. But what if he thrashes you? But even if you win, the bully goes on to pick on someone else. Another option is to give the non-psychopath bully some ways to gain respect, be fairly treated, and to have some power over his world.

But let me get back to the idea of thought police. If you read Dan’s piece carefully, it appears that people who disagree with Dan Fagan are ‘thought police,’ but when Dan tries to insinuate 'they' are all surrendering sissies, Dan isn't a 'thought policeman' he's just standing up for what he believes. Neat trick, but it doesn’t work. Nor does the following twisted logic. “Voters agreed and upheld the smoking ban. They said you can’t trust people…Government knows best.” Excuse me? Actually, it is Dan Fagan saying that you can’t trust the people, because they stupidly surrendered by voting for a smoking ban.

This piece is a lot of emotional words strung together in a way that should fire up Dan Fagan’s co-believers and piss off the rest. There’s no cohesive logical argument, nothing you could actually act on since ‘surrender’ is such a vague term. There’s no attempt to understand or explain, rather it is all declarative sentences or rhetorical questions about what Dan generally feels is good and what he generally feels is bad. The Veco Times may be gone in name, but Dan Fagan is now in place to carry on their tradition.