In the New Yorker...

[Jeff Wrangler]

I'm reading the Julian Assange article in the Aug. 21 issue, and, while I find it interesting, I find it another one of those articles that is way too long. TNY is a weekly. Why not run an article of this length in multiple parts?

[serious crayons]

I'd say the same thing about the Carl Icahn profile in the issue that came yesterday. Normally I'd never read a profile of Carl Icahn even if it were a reasonable length. But in this case I might try to, because years ago I interviewed Carl Icahn.

I was writing about what people do who get bachelor's degrees in philosophy. So one was a chef in a nice New Orleans restaurant and I can't remember any of the others except Carl Icahn. I can't remember how I'd heard that Icahn, who was CEO of TWA Airlines at the time, had a degree in philosophy.

So this is how long ago it was: I called the main number of TWA. A human operator answered. I asked for Carl Icahn's office. Ring ring, answer.

Gruff growling voice: Hello?

Me (not even having identified myself yet): You answer your own phone?

Icahn: Oh, there's some kind of fire drill going on, and everyone else ran out.

So then we proceed to do the interview. We hadn't even made an appointment. I just cold called him and we talked for a while about how his degree in philosophy had helped him become ... well, I guess a major figure in the Trump Administration!

In between, he was ... what do you call those guys again? Tycoons who buy companies and lay everyone off? Corporate raider? He was one of those for many years. Maybe Kierkegaard or Nietzsche endorsed that strategy. I wouldn't know, having taken only one class in philosophy.

Nowadays I fairly frequently interview CEOs of small local companies or HR people at bigger ones. It invariably takes at least two or three calls and emails just to set up an appointment to talk to the owner of a lawn and garden service.

So I'll give the New Yorker piece at try. But it seems like it might be easier to just read his Wikipedia page.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Woo-eee! How about David Remnick's editorial in the Aug. 28 issue?

"This is the inescapable fact: on November 9th, the United States elected a dishonest, inept, unbalanced, and immoral human being as its President and Commander-in-Chief. Trump has daily proven unyielding to appeals of decency, unity, moderation, or fact. He is willing to imperil the civil peace and the social fabric of his country simply to satisfy his narcissism and to excite the worst inclinations of his core followers."

The whole editorial is worth repeating.

Wow. "Immoral human being." Wow. Perhaps Remnick covers it by "dishonest," but I'd add "pathological liar.'

Far be it for me to advocate violence against anyone, but I wouldn't be sorry to see this President's head on top of the Washington Monument.

After this editorial, I hope The New Yorker provides Remnick with a security detail. He might need one.

[serious crayons]

After this editorial, I hope The New Yorker provides Remnick with a security detail. He might need one.

Guess it depends on how many Nazis and Klan members are New Yorker readers.

[Front-Ranger]

... It invariably takes at least two or three calls and emails just to set up an appointment to talk to the owner of a lawn and garden service.

So I'll give the New Yorker piece at try. But it seems like it might be easier to just read his Wikipedia page.

 

[Jeff Wrangler]

Guess it depends on how many Nazis and Klan members are New Yorker readers.

Reminds me. I meant to ask. I read that the Anne Frank Center camp with a list of similarities between Hitler/the Nazis and Trump.

So does this mean if you bring up Hitler and the Nazis in a argument about Trump you DO NOT automatically lose the argument?

[serious crayons]

Reminds me. I meant to ask. I read that the Anne Frank Center camp with a list of similarities between Hitler/the Nazis and Trump.

So does this mean if you bring up Hitler and the Nazis in a argument about Trump you DO NOT automatically lose the argument?

I feel like there are one or more words missing from your third sentence (or was "camp" originally "came up"?). Are you saying the AF Center produced such a list?

I think it means that if you're Anne Frank (or a center named after her), you can pretty much do whatever you want when it comes to Godwin's Law.

But it would be interesting to see how many more times Hitler has entered online conversations since November and January. Google and Facebook, get on it! 

[Jeff Wrangler]

I feel like there are one or more words missing from your third sentence (or was "camp" originally "came up"?). Are you saying the AF Center produced such a list?

Yeah, I can't type anymore unless I do it very slowly and use the Columbus method (hunt for something and land on it). Yes, that was supposed to be "came up."

[Jeff Wrangler]

It's a wonder I didn't choke on my lunch reading Calvin Trillin's piece in the Sept. 11 issue. He certainly hasn't lost his touch.

Spoiler alert: I am still laughing over the three rabbis from Kansas wearing red and blue yarmulkes with the University of Kansas Jayhawks logo, and the fake beards "making the Kansas rabbis appear even more rabbinical."

 

[serious crayons]

It's a wonder I didn't choke on my lunch reading Calvin Trillin's piece in the Sept. 11 issue. He certainly hasn't lost his touch.

Spoiler alert: I am still laughing over the three rabbis from Kansas wearing red and blue yarmulkes with the University of Kansas Jayhawks logo, and the fake beards "making the Kansas rabbis appear even more rabbinical."

 

Oh good. I haven't read it yet, but from the headline I feared it was going to be sad.

I suppose I've already bragged about meeting Calvin Trillin. Well, not quite "meeting," but sitting a few feet away at a conference table where he regaled people at my newspaper with tales. This was a few years ago -- he stopped by the paper when he was in town for some other event.