Category: The Dish

The UK Secret Service files on one Eric Blair have just been made public. They were worried he was a commie. Summary:

The file essentially consists of reports of Orwell’s activities between 1929 and his death in 1950. It gives some insight into Orwell’s financial position while in Paris and includes a 1929 MI6 report to the Special Branch on his activities there, and various subsequent Special Branch reports. One of these by police Sergeant Ewing, from January 1942 (serial 7a), asserts that:

"This man has advanced Communist views, and several of his Indian friends say that they have often seen him at Communist meetings. He dresses in a bohemian fashion both at his office and in his leisure hours."

A Service officer rang Ewing’s Inspector to challenge this view (minute 9). Wartime enquiries as to Orwell and his wife’s suitability for employment as a journalist and with the Ministry of Food were all approved. It is of some interest to note the part Orwell’s answers to a published Left magazine survey had in convincing the Service that Orwell should not be considered a Communist. The file includes a copy of Orwell’s passport papers and original passport photographs.

A fascinating discussion of "abrogation" in Islam.

It’s an obvious one, but I hadn’t thought of it until a friend asked. Could someone ask which flights Senator Craig was taking during his lay-over, so to speak, at the Minneapolis airport? If we had that, we could see which gates he had to get to and from and also see if the restroom he used was en route or out of the way. His account of his actions would make much less sense if the restrooms were way off his obvious itinerary, no? So where were they in relation to his trip? If anyone knows, drop me a line.

The Dish has been having a discussion of "inattention blindness" here and here. The best demonstration of it I’ve seen was sent in by a reader. See if you can figure out the "Color Changing Card Trick." I missed it entirely.

Here’s a fascinating tidbit from CNN about a meeting of Republican senators yesterday to discuss the Larry Craig case. They were not all angry at Craig:

Sen. Ted. Stevens of Alaska, whose home was recently raided as part of a federal corruption probe, stood up to say it’s wrong to prejudge these matters.

He was joined by Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky and Sen. Michael Enzi of Wyoming, who also "wagged their finger" at the leadership, in the words of one of the aides.

And Cheney was there, for good measure.

The contrasts are striking.

Hugh Hewitt plays it against Fred Thompson the day after he announces. Classy as ever. Did Mitt send him a memo?

Since many of you asked, yes, the first wedding pic is like Dukakis debating Bush I. I’m standing on the sea-wall where we married and Aaron is next to me. I get a few inches leg-up. In reality, I’m 5’9" and he’s closing on 6’5". Hence the the last pic. Climb every mountain …

The anti-illegal right has a problem:

Some votes are likely to draw scrutiny, particularly a series of votes in the 1990s against cracking down on illegal aliens. Those include a 1995 vote against limiting services other than emergency care and public education to illegal aliens — he was one of just six senators to oppose that proposal — and a 1996 vote against creating an employer verification system to help businesses filter out illegal aliens who apply for jobs.

Ambers has more on Thompson’s legislative record on immigration. It looks to me as if the Washington Times is right.

A reader writes:

I remember discussing the gay marriage issue with a friend in 2004 when many states, including my home state of Utah, were rolling out amendments preventing marriage equality. My friend, who had been married for a year at the time, pulled out the old Christianist saw defending the amendment, claiming that the sanctity of marriage must be defended.

I asked him how allowing two people to marry each other would affect his marriage. He said something along the lines that just knowing that anyone could get married made his marriage less special somehow. Of course he couldn’t explain why. At the time, I argued that there was no way a gay wedding could have no impact on my own hypothetical wedding.

Now, however, having been married for 9 months to a wonderful woman, I’ve been surprised to realize my bigoted friend was right: gay marriage actually does affect mine. But not, however, in the negative way he thought it would.

Seeing the pictures of your wedding – so obviously filled with love and happiness – reminded me of the joy I felt on my wedding day. I remember being overwhelmed – in a good way – by the notion that I was choosing to spend the rest of my life with someone I loved dearly, and that all of our closest friends and relatives were with us simply to share that joy with us. Knowing that two people who love each other and are committed to each other can be married, regardless of gender, and experience the joy, strength and companionship I’ve experienced in my own marriage, makes my marriage all the more sacred to me.

Another writes:

I am 31 and have been with my partner Brian for three and a half years. I’m going to relish the day I get to have pictures such as these taken during a ceremony for marriage in California. Thanks for keeping the dream living on.

Next stop: Iowa!