Goodenough Gismo

  • Gismo39
    This is the classic children's book, Goodenough Gismo, by Richmond I. Kelsey, published in 1948. Nearly unavailable in libraries and the collector's market, it is posted here with love as an "orphan work" so that it may be seen and appreciated -- and perhaps even republished, as it deserves to be. After you read this book, it won't surprise you to learn that Richmond Irwin Kelsey (1905-1987) was an accomplished artist, or that as Dick Kelsey, he was one of the great Disney art directors, breaking your heart with "Pinocchio," "Dumbo," and "Bambi."

  • 74%How Addicted to Blogging Are You?

  • Google

Blogs I love and/or learn from

« "I Really Don't Care" | Main | Eleven Questions About the War »



That's, funny: I tried listening to it on the radio and simply couldn't stand it: it seemed to me to be full of completely unoriginal obfuscations, spoken in that irritating Will-Rogers-on-steroids twang that's supposed to make everything sound direct and authentic.

Maybe seeing him conveys a portion of the message I missed, but I only had the audio, and it seemed pathetic to me: strident but unoriginal, bereft of ideas, shorn of honesty, concocted totally of spin and Rovean calculation.

I agree with you in this respect: the most meaningful words, when put through the Bush linguistic meatgrinder, lose all meaning. Freedom, for example.


michael reynolds

I'm with AmbivaBro on this. It was a false, dishonest speech aimed at the base that did not move the ball forward at all. We'll stand down as the Iraqis stand up? So our salvation lies in the hands of the Iraqis? We're conceding that all we can do is keep on keepin' on until the Iraqi government (current location: cringing under their desks in the Green Zone) somehow pulls it all together and releases us?


Ditto -- and I don't mean that in the Limbaughean sense. I'm far from objective, but the speech was nauseating, dishonest, manipulative. I like today's NYT editorial on the subject.


P.S. -- Being reasonable and moderate about dangerously manipulative and immoderate people like Bush and Co. skews the debate in their favor. If they've managed to shift the center of gravity way over to the right, then trying to hit up the middle puts you in right field. IMHO.


There are two problems:

1) The mess he's gotten us into over there cannot now be resolved by just getting out.

2) Being unreasonable and immoderate only drives the majority of Americans into the arms of the Bushies. Letting them hang themselves, while standing by sorrowfully, would be MUCH more effective. DON'T play into their characterization of liberals and Democrats! You're taking the bait in the trap.

Be glad that Kerry didn't get elected. The Dems would have gotten the blame for everything. As it is, this crowd is getting in so deep that we may have seen the last of them for a long time, starting in 2006. Their tricks (decoying people off onto gay marriage, etc.) are starting to wear thin.


I'm not suggesting that we all act like Howard Dean. I'm suggesting that we never falter in telling it like it is with Bush -- he's a dangerous demagogue backed by dangerous extremists. And I agree that we're stuck in Iraq for the indefinite future, and I'd rather see Bush forced to clean up his own mess than Kerry or anyone else saddled with it.


Wish I had heard that speech. Does it matter? Everone knew they would be disappointed (nauseated) by the twang and the *freedom* overuse. Too bad he didn't say all that Kerry said he should in the NYT op-ed. But, I suppose even that wouldn't have been good enough. I actually don't blame him for using what he *knows* in making an appearence for primetime. The Left hate his guts. His twang, his smile, his beady eyes and his commonality.

Awwwhh, hell. What can I say except the big picture must be clearer than we can see from here. I believe there is a big picture. Time is the answer. Patience.

Spud thinks it's just ridiculous that Bin Laden attacked us because he hates our freedom. "He hates America because it's free. That's stupidity. What the hell does that mean??" says Spud.

I asked how the women were treated in Iraq. Are they *free*? How about education? Is everyone able to become equally educated? Are people dragged to be shot for no good reason or women raped in *rape rooms* in this country or was that the norm only in Iraq? Voting? Democracy?

If it were only cultural, then why the Towers? It's personal. And it's too late to turn back.


I'm right there with you, amba. He does the same thing with "Democracy" too. Also, have you ever noticed the weird smirk he makes--as if laughing to himself?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

New on FacTotem, my Natural History Blog

Jacques' Story: Escape From the Gulag

The AmbivAbortion Rant

Debating Intelligent Design


  • Listed on Blogwise

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2004