{"id":6907,"date":"2004-11-21T15:58:47","date_gmt":"2004-11-21T19:58:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2004\/11\/21\/lifting-the-hammer-2\/"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:58:13","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:58:13","slug":"lifting-the-hammer-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2004\/11\/21\/lifting-the-hammer-2\/","title":{"rendered":"lifting the hammer"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n


\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
the bounce
of raindrops
on the basketball<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"hammerNail<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
lifting the hammer
the old carpenter’s hand
stops shaking<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n
W.F. Owen<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> <\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
credits: “the bounce” – Frogpond<\/EM> XXIII:3 (2000)<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“lifting the hammer” Mayfly<\/EM> No. 30 (2000); <\/FONT>A New Resonance 2: Emerging Voices<\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
by dagosan<\/FONT><\/A><\/STRONG>:<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/EM><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

<\/FONT>
\n


\n
<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

<\/FONT><\/P>
\n

rainy-night drive —<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
no generation gap <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in sight<\/FONT><\/DIV>                                    [Nov 21, 2004]<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/EM><\/FONT> <\/FONT><\/EM><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
one-breath pundit<\/STRONG><\/EM><\/FONT><\/A><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/SPAN> <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny<\/STRONG> In<\/EM> re Tom Delay<\/EM>: Scrivener <\/FONT>C.E. Petit joins<\/FONT><\/A> Prof. Bainbridge’s plea for consistently-applied ethics, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
confessing to be “one of <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>those weirdos who actually expects enforcement of ethical standards on <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
those who have (or seek) power, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>which is why I distrust pure-market solutions to anything.”  Non <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
sequitur<\/EM> or not, we weirdos concur in both <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>sentiments.<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"movie <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny  Citing Leon <\/FONT>Panetta’s quote<\/FONT><\/A> that (in Election 2004) “the party of Roosevelt became the party <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of Michael Moore and Fahrenheit 9\/11<\/EM>,” Schenectady (NY) <\/FONT>Gazette<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A> columnist <\/FONT>Dan DiNicola<\/FONT><\/A>, best<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
known for his movie reviews, says “If you are a traditional Democrat, you know that you are not<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a Michael Moore liberal, even if you liked his movie.” [Dan did, and reviewed it <\/FONT>here<\/FONT><\/A>.]  DiNicola adds <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that “the contingent of Hollywood liberals” has been greatly damaged by this election.  He concludes:<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
[I]f Hollywood liberals want to gain<\/FONT> some cachet with the American public, they need<\/EM><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
some ‘gentlemen’ spokesmen.  Considering the dismal turnout of voters between 18 and<\/EM><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
30, perhaps shrill rhetoric works only with Americans who do not get to the ballot box.<\/EM><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
The Gazette<\/EM> is only available <\/FONT>online <\/FONT><\/A>by subscription.  However, the entire article can be seen <\/FONT>here<\/FONT><\/A>, by<\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
by scrolling to Reply 5.  <\/SPAN><\/FONT>(“Hollywood liberals need more gentlemanly tone,” Nov. 21, 2004)<\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n