Monday Miscellany: Some Odds, Ends and Personals

Happy Monday

Readers Write. . .

From Byter Nic K, in response to the quotation and comments on the “If by Whiskey” speech of Noah S “Soggy” Sweat Jnr:

Hi, Otto, 

First, I should thank you for your continued labours. It is a great service you provide. I know it takes a lot of time. I look forward to it every day. 

Secondly, I want to disagree that "If by whisky" is an example of political doublespeak. Rather, it is an example of a rare and rousing call for compromise. In his poetically crafted speech, he eloquently tells - with equal passion - both sides of an old and heated debate. In doing so, he points out the truth in both arguments and, thereby, makes a mockery of the dogma intrinsic in each. He subtly and ironically showed up everyone. More's the pity - but no wonder - he didn't get a second term. 

Nic.

Thanks, Nic.

If when you say compromise you mean unwillingness to commit to a position; the lack of moral fibre to make a stand and stay with it; the cowardly adopted position of the quisling, the profiteer, the betrayer of those who have entrusted their faith in the person who then compromises their ideals and wishes, then I am against it.

If however when you say compromise you mean an attempt to achieve a workable solution that, whilst not being 100% of what was sought is still a viable and realistic solution to a problem, the middle of the road position that avoids extremism, the sacrifice of some of what is sought to achieve a favourable overall result, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

In the words of Byter Giovanni’s neck tattoo, that’s how I roll.

However, to also quote Groucho Marx, "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." 

Sent to me by son homas

At first when I saw this cartoon I understood it to be another version of Napoleon’s observation that "Religious wars are basically people killing each other over who has the better imaginary friend." 

I couldn’t understand, though, why the opposing army in the cartoon had the same emblem on their banners as that of the speaker so I simply assumed that the speaker was addressing his own ranks with the opposing army not shown.

Then I came across a different explanation that gave an even greater level nd deeper meaning to the cartoon.

Note the following:

Here is the Duck God featured on the banners of the army in the above cartoon:

However, is it not also a rabbit looking upwards?

Look at these:

So what does that do to the cartoon? 

Is the message of the cartoon that whether you see a duck or a rabbit depends on your perspective, much like the doctrines of religions? 

You will have to work it out yourself from here, I will simply quote another comment from an anonymous author: "And on the 8th day God created a bunch of other religions. Just to fuck with mankind."