As the President should have learned during his attempt to ban trans* servicemembers by Tweet, comments on Twitter do not constitute a lawful order even when you have otherwise lawful authority. On this occasion, I'm not at all clear on the degree of lawful authority that exists via more formal processes. Probably there is some sort of authority, held over from World War II and/or World War I, to issue orders even to privately-held American companies in a time of war. Of course, we are not in fact at war.
Here again, as with the birthright citizenship stuff and for that matter the trans* servicemember ban, the President may be broadly right on the desirable policy. I'm reasonably sanguine about a trade war with China. It will hurt, but it will hurt them more, and they can less afford it. It may expose the structural faults in their economy, which are much more severe than anyone really wants to admit. If so, it may cripple Chinese power designs via mass investment projects like the "New Silk Road." Even if not, it may weaken their hand to undertake new oppression against Hong Kong, and may limit the resources they have for their ongoing cultural genocide against the Uighur in what they like to call their New Frontier ("Xinjiang"). This may be the most we can do for the freedom fighters there, given China's powerful nuclear umbrella. Possibly even some of the longer-term positive effects may come to pass that the President, and some others, have decided can be gained on this road. I'm agnostic about that; but breaking totalitarian China is worth the candle. Humanity may long thank us for once again paying the price to break another totalitarian system of authority that has been creeping out further and further.
President Trump still has to be held to constitutional and legal limits on his power. Even if one trusts him (which not everyone does, to put it mildly), the forms exist to restrain the ones you don't trust who may get their hands on that power later. That might come any day, as health is uncertain for anyone, and he is engendering enemies both wealthy and powerful with these moves.
Cortez and the Aztecs
As a partial antidote to the NYT's "1619 Project" (which attempts to portray everything exceptional about America as a product of slavery, in order to de-legitimize America as a whole), The Federalist has published an article called "The 1519 Project: How Early Spanish Explorers Took Down A Mass-Murdering Indigenous Cult."
The Aztecs brutal system depended on a steady supply of prisoners of war and human children collected from the empire’s subjects as “taxes.” The scale of the murder one could find in just a single outlying Aztec city was astounding. Abbot relays, “they witnessed the most appalling indications of the horrid atrocities of pagan idolatry. They found, piled in order, as they judged, one hundred thousand skulls of human victims who had been offered in sacrifice to their gods.”...Chesterton wrote of this moral conflict in The Everlasting Man.
Cortez ended the grotesque practice of human sacrifice and, according to Abbott, “treated the vanquished natives with great courtesy and kindness.”
Cortez was no saint. He lusted after women, gold, and adventure—so much he missed his first chance at battle due to injuries sustained after falling from a great height trying to sneak into the bedroom of a villager’s daughter. As Abbott concedes, his “love of plunder was a latent motive omnipotent in his soul, and he saw undreamed of wealth lavishly spread before him.”
Cortez will never satisfy a 21st century standard of human rights, and many not even be an exemplary leader. Nor did he set out to liberate anyone. Yet, regardless of his motives in Mexico, the outcome must be conceded: Cortez toppled a mass-murdering cult with the assistance of the oppressed.
[T]here are the remains of civilizations in Mexico and South America and other places, some of them apparently so high in civilization as to have reached the most refined forms of devil-worship.I wonder how well that idea will hold up to the examination it's being put to today.
Now it is very right to rebuke our own race or religion for falling short of our own standards and ideals.... There is a very real sense in which the Christian is worse than the heathen, the Spaniard worse than the Red Indian, or even the Roman potentially worse than the Carthaginian. But there is only one sense in which he is worse; and that is not in being positively worse. The Christian is only worse because it is his business to be better.
The father of her child
I was actually looking for good versions of the Child Ballad "Tam Lin" when I stumbled on "The Dark Island" and got distracted. But here's an unusual Tam Lin, drastically shortened from the traditional version, leaving out the Queen of Fairies and the wild Halloween ride, and concentrating on the central drama of the unsanctioned pregnancy. These lyrics get set to a lot of different tunes, this version being close to one of the more common ones. The "Willie of Winsbury" tune also is common, perhaps because of the similarity in narrative themes; another is the tune that Steeleye Span used.
Something else I stumbled on is a 1970 Ava Gardner movie with an amazingly young and callow Ian McShane called "The Ballad of Tam Lin," which I'll have to watch now. I assume the movie will concentrate more on the Queen of Fairies and her captive never-aging human lover/ghost.
A more traditional version of the lyrics:
“I forbid you maidens all that wear gold in your hair
To travel to Carterhaugh, for young Tam Lin is there
None that go by Carterhaugh but they leave him a pledge
Either their mantles of green or else their maidenhead”
Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to Carterhaugh as fast as go can she
She'd not pulled a double rose, a rose but only two
When up then came young Tam Lin, says, “Lady, pull no more”
“And why come you to Carterhaugh without command from me?”
“I'll come and go,” young Janet said, “and ask no leave of thee”
Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to her father as fast as go can she
Well, up then spoke her father dear and he spoke meek and mild
“Oh, and alas, Janet,” he said, “I think you go with child”
“Well, if that be so,” Janet said, “myself shall bear the blame
There's not a knight in all your hall shall get the baby's name
For if my love were an earthly knight, as he is an elfin grey
I'd not change my own true love for any knight you have”
So Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to Carterhaugh as fast as go can she
“Oh, tell to me, Tam Lin,” she said, “why came you here to dwell?”
“The Queen of Fairies caught me when from my horse I fell"
And at the end of seven years she pays a tithe to hell
I so fair and full of flesh and fear it be myself
But tonight is Halloween and the fairy folk ride
Those that would let true love win at Mile's Cross they must bide
So first let pass the horses black and then let pass the brown
Quickly run to the white steed and pull the rider down
For I'll ride on the white steed, the nearest to the town
For I was an earthly knight, they give me that renown
Oh, they will turn me in your arms to a newt or a snake
But hold me tight and fear not, I am your baby's father
And they will turn me in your arms into a lion bold
But hold me tight and fear not and you will love your child
And they will turn me in your arms into a naked knight
But cloak me in your mantle and keep me out of sight”
In the middle of the night she heard the bridle ring
She heeded what he did say and young Tam Lin did win
Then up spoke the Fairy Queen, an angry queen was she
Woe betide her ill-far'd face, an ill death may she die
“Oh, had I known, Tam Lin,” she said, “what this night I did see
I'd have looked him in the eyes and turned him to a tree”
The lyrics are said to have been printed in broadsides as early as the 16th century; the story echoes Peleus's capture of Thetis, the mother of Achilles.
Something else I stumbled on is a 1970 Ava Gardner movie with an amazingly young and callow Ian McShane called "The Ballad of Tam Lin," which I'll have to watch now. I assume the movie will concentrate more on the Queen of Fairies and her captive never-aging human lover/ghost.
A more traditional version of the lyrics:
“I forbid you maidens all that wear gold in your hair
To travel to Carterhaugh, for young Tam Lin is there
None that go by Carterhaugh but they leave him a pledge
Either their mantles of green or else their maidenhead”
Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to Carterhaugh as fast as go can she
She'd not pulled a double rose, a rose but only two
When up then came young Tam Lin, says, “Lady, pull no more”
“And why come you to Carterhaugh without command from me?”
“I'll come and go,” young Janet said, “and ask no leave of thee”
Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to her father as fast as go can she
Well, up then spoke her father dear and he spoke meek and mild
“Oh, and alas, Janet,” he said, “I think you go with child”
“Well, if that be so,” Janet said, “myself shall bear the blame
There's not a knight in all your hall shall get the baby's name
For if my love were an earthly knight, as he is an elfin grey
I'd not change my own true love for any knight you have”
So Janet tied her kirtle green a bit above her knee
And she's gone to Carterhaugh as fast as go can she
“Oh, tell to me, Tam Lin,” she said, “why came you here to dwell?”
“The Queen of Fairies caught me when from my horse I fell"
And at the end of seven years she pays a tithe to hell
I so fair and full of flesh and fear it be myself
But tonight is Halloween and the fairy folk ride
Those that would let true love win at Mile's Cross they must bide
So first let pass the horses black and then let pass the brown
Quickly run to the white steed and pull the rider down
For I'll ride on the white steed, the nearest to the town
For I was an earthly knight, they give me that renown
Oh, they will turn me in your arms to a newt or a snake
But hold me tight and fear not, I am your baby's father
And they will turn me in your arms into a lion bold
But hold me tight and fear not and you will love your child
And they will turn me in your arms into a naked knight
But cloak me in your mantle and keep me out of sight”
In the middle of the night she heard the bridle ring
She heeded what he did say and young Tam Lin did win
Then up spoke the Fairy Queen, an angry queen was she
Woe betide her ill-far'd face, an ill death may she die
“Oh, had I known, Tam Lin,” she said, “what this night I did see
I'd have looked him in the eyes and turned him to a tree”
The lyrics are said to have been printed in broadsides as early as the 16th century; the story echoes Peleus's capture of Thetis, the mother of Achilles.
Limited Powers of Government
My guess is that an Executive Order is insufficient for this plan.
Speaking outside the White House Wednesday, Trump told reporters he plans to do away with the Constitutional right, which he called “frankly ridiculous,” through an executive order. This isn’t the first time he’s made that claim: In 2018, he told Axios he had plans to issue an executive order preventing automatic citizenship for the children of non-citizens, including undocumented immigrants, but nothing came of it.That's not a terrible idea, but the power of the pen is not unlimited -- and good that it's not.
“We’re looking at that very seriously, birthright citizenship, where you have a baby on our land, you walk over the border, have a baby — congratulations, the baby is now a U.S. citizen.”
A Primer on Gory Sounds
It turns out that the horrifying noises accompanying some of the goriest video games come from vegetables. Bell peppers are particularly useful.
A lot of non-gamers might not be aware that Mortal Kombat is still being produced. In the early 90s, the game was at the edge of realistic, digitized violence, and the franchise was so controversial that Congress held hearings about it. Believe it or not, the series has only gotten more violent since then....I find the irony that these horrible sounds are created by perfectly ordinary salad preparations somewhat amusing, although we might have to rethink just how ironic it really is. Trees have feelings, you know.
The unsung heroes of Mortal Kombat might really be the sound designers who sit in a room for hours, trying to smash household objects, fruits, and vegetables together in a way that sounds like a convincing disembowelment.
Merle Haggard is Cool Again
According to Whitey Morgan (and the '78s). He may be right. I heard a live act do this same bit just Friday, although they weren't hipsters. Whitey does it better though.
Mild language warning for those of you watching this from an office, just at the beginning when he's talking about the hipsters of East Nashville. After that, it's just a solid rendition of "Swinging Doors."
Mild language warning for those of you watching this from an office, just at the beginning when he's talking about the hipsters of East Nashville. After that, it's just a solid rendition of "Swinging Doors."
Easy Rider
"In honor of Peter, please raise a glass to freedom."
Now that I can do.
Here's the scene that made his career.
Now that I can do.
Here's the scene that made his career.
"No Politician in Living Memory has been Treated as Badly as Ilhan Omar"
Even if we restrict the class to American Federal politicians, that's not even close to true. Heck, it's not even true if we restrict "living memory" to the last few years, so as to leave out assassination victims like JFK and RFK. Steve Scalise was shot, as part of a plot to assassinate a whole bunch of Republican Congressmen. Gabby Giffords was shot. Rand Paul was brutally beaten, as was Harry Reid (for reasons that we never really learned, now that I think about it). If we include judges who have to undergo Senate confirmation in the class of 'politicians,' Brett Kavanaugh -- whom RBG describes as a very kind, upstanding man, and credits with the Supreme Court's sudden shift in favor of female clerks -- was publicly savaged as a rapist, gang-rapist, drugger of women, blackout drunk, and these ridiculous charges were broadcast worldwide in front of screaming mobs.
But, OK, 'some people did something' to Omar. Or said something, actually. Nobody's done anything to her, even though she spends enough of her time running down our country that I literally can't recall her ever saying anything else.
If you're ever in my company, you're perfectly safe. I wouldn't hurt you or let anyone else hurt you. But come on, now. Ilhan Omar isn't being hurt. She's being challenged, and that is not because she wears a hijab or because of the color of her skin. It's because she's constantly insulting the nation that took her in and elevated her to power, wealth, and comfort.
As far as I can tell, Ilhan really is an American and really does belong here. She married her brother, after all -- that's American like Jerry Lee Lewis, who married his 13-year-old second-cousin because he wanted to and nobody could stop him. Jerry Lee Lewis did a lot of things like that.
In fact, they're also alike in the 'not actually getting a divorce before marrying again' department.
Speaking of Jerry Lee Lewis and crazy American stuff, here's another story from that series -- Tales from the Tour Bus, the whole first season of which is about Outlaw Country stars.
Maybe it's only America where you can live a life as wild as that, or as wild as the one Ms. Omar seems embarked upon. I don't have a problem with her being here, or with her being in Congress: if that's what the people of MN-5 want representing them, well, that's on them. It's not my business.
But if she wants to be treated with respect and friendship, she might start by showing a little of either or both. Loyalty is a two-way street. She's not shown the first bit of actual loyalty to us, to say nothing of friendship. If she wants a defense, she might defend us once in a while. She's the Congressperson, after all. She is the one with power and access and money, who can literally write laws if she can just write them sane enough to get enough other people to sign off on them. I'm not going to shed tears for her if she has to put up with some hard words once in a while, after her latest rendition of How Awful America Is to the World.
But, OK, 'some people did something' to Omar. Or said something, actually. Nobody's done anything to her, even though she spends enough of her time running down our country that I literally can't recall her ever saying anything else.
Like Omar, I am a Muslim American who also happens to be a person of colour. The combination of hijab and being brown does not always go down well in our predominantly white society. Because of my appearance, I am all too often subjected to judgement. This makes me feel like anything I say, like Omar, has the potential to be taken out of context. It makes me feel that I, like Omar, am also under the magnifying glass. I should not have to fear for my life or that of any other Muslim. If we allow such cruel rhetoric to snowball, we are contributing towards our own demise.Look, I don't know what you mean by 'normalizing,' lady, but you can wear the thing if you want to do. Nobody's going to rip it off your head and beat you up for it. It's not like it's a MAGA hat or something.
Moving forward, normalizing the hijab would be the first step towards removing stigma and pressure against women like myself and Ilhan. Engaging in dialogue about topics that make us uncomfortable, such as the hijab, can also help to dismantle stereotypes and increase understanding.
If you're ever in my company, you're perfectly safe. I wouldn't hurt you or let anyone else hurt you. But come on, now. Ilhan Omar isn't being hurt. She's being challenged, and that is not because she wears a hijab or because of the color of her skin. It's because she's constantly insulting the nation that took her in and elevated her to power, wealth, and comfort.
As far as I can tell, Ilhan really is an American and really does belong here. She married her brother, after all -- that's American like Jerry Lee Lewis, who married his 13-year-old second-cousin because he wanted to and nobody could stop him. Jerry Lee Lewis did a lot of things like that.
In fact, they're also alike in the 'not actually getting a divorce before marrying again' department.
Speaking of Jerry Lee Lewis and crazy American stuff, here's another story from that series -- Tales from the Tour Bus, the whole first season of which is about Outlaw Country stars.
Maybe it's only America where you can live a life as wild as that, or as wild as the one Ms. Omar seems embarked upon. I don't have a problem with her being here, or with her being in Congress: if that's what the people of MN-5 want representing them, well, that's on them. It's not my business.
But if she wants to be treated with respect and friendship, she might start by showing a little of either or both. Loyalty is a two-way street. She's not shown the first bit of actual loyalty to us, to say nothing of friendship. If she wants a defense, she might defend us once in a while. She's the Congressperson, after all. She is the one with power and access and money, who can literally write laws if she can just write them sane enough to get enough other people to sign off on them. I'm not going to shed tears for her if she has to put up with some hard words once in a while, after her latest rendition of How Awful America Is to the World.
Swinging for the Fences
An assault weapons ban is picking up steam in the House and on the 2020 campaign trail...And how are we defining 'assault weapons' this time?
...nearly 200 House Democrats have now signed on to legislation... banning semi-automatic firearms and large-capacity magazines. With 198 co-sponsors, the bill is just 20 votes shy of the number needed to push it through the lower chamber.Oh. All semi-automatic firearms, which includes the most popular pistols and rifles in America.
The Heller standard is that the Second Amendment protects firearms that are in common use for lawful purposes. This approach seems to have adopted the same category that the Supreme Court declared protected to be the first thing to ban. You can call that what you like, but 'common sense' it is not. 'Common sense' means that people have the sense in common. When people differ this sharply, there's no common sense to which to refer.
Waiting for the Facts
Turns out several of Epstein's neck bones were broken. The model on offer is that he tied a bedsheet to a bunk and then knelt down to strangle himself. I'm not sure that's really possible -- it would require a degree of self-discipline that transcends the fight-or-flight instinct, since all you'd have to do to stop it is stand back up. But it doesn't strike me as likely to break several bones.
But hey, as Colonel Kurt points out, why worry about it? Our elite's got this.
But hey, as Colonel Kurt points out, why worry about it? Our elite's got this.
This Is What They Think is Legal Now
A 57-year-old man is jailed for "a terroristic threat."
Whom did he threaten? Well, no one exactly; it's more that he was 'threatening.'
Whom did he threaten? Well, no one exactly; it's more that he was 'threatening.'
Court documents said Marr walked into the Morgan County Public Library last Thursday and asked staff there why the flags were flying at half-staff. An employee replied it was in honor of the victims in the El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio shootings.At one point in my youth I worked in a library. We didn't even ask for trespass orders or arrests for the people who came in and searched for internet pornography. This guy was reading a document of legitimate public interest. He's doubtless a jerk with nasty opinions, but that's first amendment stuff. You're allowed freedom of conscience, which includes the freedom not to have much of a conscience.
The probable cause statement signed by Captain J.D. Williams of the Morgan County Sheriff's Office said Marr replied, "If you ask me Patrick did us a favor." Authorities have accused Patrick Crusius of entering a Walmart in El Paso and shooting and killing 22 people.
Deputies said the librarian who reported the incident told them Marr then logged onto a library computer and searched "exclusively" for the manifesto written by Crusius prior to the shooting and articles related to the incident....
Morgan County Prosecuting Attorney Dustin Dunkley signed off on the charge of second-degree making a terroristic threat. In his complaint, he wrote Marr, "knowingly caused a false fear that a condition involving danger to life existed" by entering the library and asking about the flags, then responding with his comment about Crusius.
Additionally, the complaint stated Marr did this with a "reckless disregard of the risk of causing the evacuation or closure" of the library.
Joe Bob Briggs: Where's the Apology for the Ghostbusters Remake?
A Chinese director makes the mistake of apologizing.
If this is now a thing, he notes, other apologies are very much due.
If this is now a thing, he notes, other apologies are very much due.
Okay, your turn, Marcus Nispel. I didn’t say a word when you remade the greatest movie in the history of the world, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre,... [b]ut Conan the Barbarian is a different matter. You should be hauled into court and forced to repay every cent of that $110 million, and Jason Momoa should be required to bring you clean socks every day should you fall behind and get sentenced to Fantasy Remake Jail, but I’ll settle for a lengthy humiliating public apology. This would not include any remarks about what you were trying to do. If you utter the words “the art of Frank Frazetta” at any moment, you will be executed.It's true that the 2011 Conan was definitely not up to the standards of the 1982 classic, to say nothing of the books.
Gun Control Doesn't Work Anyway
As AVI points out, this is the conclusion of a Washington Post piece citing a 538 author -- but they try to mask it with an attractive, easy to watch video arguing the other way on emotional grounds.
Guns and Black Markets
So yesterday in Philadelphia a man with a long gun held off like 50 police officers for hours -- although, it should be said, this was mostly because of their election of restraint. They certainly could have assaulted his position much sooner had they chosen to do so, and I think the whole department deserves praise for their choice to take the time to bring the matter to an end with no deaths. That was a good, moral choice and I appreciate them for having the discipline to carry it out.
Today the politicians are calling for gun control again, because that's always their answer no matter the question. The gunman in this case, though, had priors that prevented him from legally owning a gun. There are strong laws -- Federal laws -- against him possessing a gun. There are also such laws against possession of the narcotics that the officers showed up at that house to arrest people for possessing and distributing. Turns out they had guns and drugs too.
The big story is not that laws don't work, but just why they don't work. Crowds spent the afternoon jeering at the police officers after they were chased off by gunfire. At least one young man got arrested for mocking and harassing the cops. The ability of the police to stop a black market's operation, always limited, depends on their respect and friendship with the community. Here they clearly do not have such friendship, and thus the black market will be unstoppable even if they can manage the occasional raid on good information. What Mao says of guerrillas is as true of gangsters: the population is the sea in which they swim. If that sea is friendly waters to them, there's no way an occupying army (or police force) can finally root them out.
What the gun control politicians don't see is that the ultimate effect of their actions -- should they be successful -- will be to create a much bigger black market, this time for deadly weapons. They'll convert a much larger part of the population into a friendly sea for that black market. They'll alienate the people from the police, and thus make large parts of the nation hostile to their own authority.
More to the point, the People won't be wrong. The People are the sovereigns, after all, and they are free to decide when the government no longer legitimately represents them. It may well be that the drug war itself represents a kind of violation of popular sovereignty, proven by its unenforceability. The 2nd Amendment is encoded in the Constitution. Violations of your right to do what you want with your body isn't as plainly unconstitutional as infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Beware, politicians. Much more than you appreciate is at stake in your lust to take the people's arms.
Today the politicians are calling for gun control again, because that's always their answer no matter the question. The gunman in this case, though, had priors that prevented him from legally owning a gun. There are strong laws -- Federal laws -- against him possessing a gun. There are also such laws against possession of the narcotics that the officers showed up at that house to arrest people for possessing and distributing. Turns out they had guns and drugs too.
The big story is not that laws don't work, but just why they don't work. Crowds spent the afternoon jeering at the police officers after they were chased off by gunfire. At least one young man got arrested for mocking and harassing the cops. The ability of the police to stop a black market's operation, always limited, depends on their respect and friendship with the community. Here they clearly do not have such friendship, and thus the black market will be unstoppable even if they can manage the occasional raid on good information. What Mao says of guerrillas is as true of gangsters: the population is the sea in which they swim. If that sea is friendly waters to them, there's no way an occupying army (or police force) can finally root them out.
What the gun control politicians don't see is that the ultimate effect of their actions -- should they be successful -- will be to create a much bigger black market, this time for deadly weapons. They'll convert a much larger part of the population into a friendly sea for that black market. They'll alienate the people from the police, and thus make large parts of the nation hostile to their own authority.
More to the point, the People won't be wrong. The People are the sovereigns, after all, and they are free to decide when the government no longer legitimately represents them. It may well be that the drug war itself represents a kind of violation of popular sovereignty, proven by its unenforceability. The 2nd Amendment is encoded in the Constitution. Violations of your right to do what you want with your body isn't as plainly unconstitutional as infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Beware, politicians. Much more than you appreciate is at stake in your lust to take the people's arms.
Economics & Politics
I honestly doubt that anyone really understands the economy well enough to discuss it. Here's an article on the weak points of the current economy by a Keynesian.
Meanwhile, the low unemployment levels mean that wages have to keep rising -- at least as long as we can avoid any new globalization agreements, or any amnesty deals that legalize vast sectors of new labor for domestic concerns. In other words, the Trump agenda seems to be arranged around attacking the same basic concern that the first article describes as undermining the economy.
The author of the first piece was "Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor at Columbia University and Chief Economist at the Roosevelt Institute." He's the kind of guy who should understand if anyone does, at least if credentials matter. Economics is so complex, though, I doubt that anyone does. I've touched on just one way in which the fundamentals seem to be shifting in defiance of theory; but that's only one small part of the economy as a whole. Trade wars with China, for example, pose another set of challenges. The national debt poses another, though exactly what sort of challenge it poses is a subject of fundamental disagreement even among theorists. Some seem to think we can print money past Doomsday; others, that debt is going to destroy the whole thing. Both have arguments. Which are right?
The US economy has not been working for most Americans, whose incomes have been stagnating – or worse – for decades. These adverse trends are reflected in declining life expectancy. The Trump tax bill made matters worse by compounding the problem of decaying infrastructure, weakening the ability of the more progressive states to support education, depriving millions more people of health insurance, and, when fully implemented, leading to an increase in taxes for middle-income Americans, worsening their plight.Here's a simple report on conditions:
Redistribution from the bottom to the top – the hallmark not only of Trump’s presidency, but also of preceding Republican administrations – reduces aggregate demand, because those at the top spend a smaller fraction of their income than those below. This weakens the economy in a way that cannot be offset even by a massive giveaway to corporations and billionaires.
Monthly reports on the number of new jobs and the unemployment rate can drown out important trends like these two: After four decades of worsening, wage inequality has started shrinking. And in a twist, America’s blue-collar workers are playing the biggest role in driving that reversal.Now, if 'aggregate demand' is the problem, raising taxes on the rich and redistributing to the working class is taken to be the solution. But what about cutting taxes on the rich, combined with raising the wages of the working class? In principle that should lead to inflation, as there will be more dollars across the board. But these dollars aren't chasing the same things, which is what causes price inflation. The richer are going to spend their dollars chasing things they've been putting off; things like building a second home, or re-roofing their first home, or buying a luxury car, or higher-end foods. The working class are going to be spending their increased wealth on better used cars, mid-range foodstuffs, etc.
This may come as a surprise, because education is classically seen as a ladder up the income scale. Despite blue-collar workers often lacking college degrees, their wages have been accelerating faster than those of their white-collar counterparts.
Meanwhile, the low unemployment levels mean that wages have to keep rising -- at least as long as we can avoid any new globalization agreements, or any amnesty deals that legalize vast sectors of new labor for domestic concerns. In other words, the Trump agenda seems to be arranged around attacking the same basic concern that the first article describes as undermining the economy.
The author of the first piece was "Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor at Columbia University and Chief Economist at the Roosevelt Institute." He's the kind of guy who should understand if anyone does, at least if credentials matter. Economics is so complex, though, I doubt that anyone does. I've touched on just one way in which the fundamentals seem to be shifting in defiance of theory; but that's only one small part of the economy as a whole. Trade wars with China, for example, pose another set of challenges. The national debt poses another, though exactly what sort of challenge it poses is a subject of fundamental disagreement even among theorists. Some seem to think we can print money past Doomsday; others, that debt is going to destroy the whole thing. Both have arguments. Which are right?
SLAM
The big explosion in Russia last week is thought to have been a nuclear-powered rocket. The US developed one in the early Cold War, but never tested it.
SLAM was never built because it was too dangerous to even test. The dangerous levels of radioactivity unleashed by the nuclear engine was a big plus in some apocalyptic wartime scenario, but it couldn't even be tested in the skies over the U.S. SLAM was also overtaken by intercontinental ballistic missile development, which could deliver a thermonuclear warhead against a target in Russia in half an hour.I did just read an article suggesting that similar rockets could be used in space, though, to allow transit around the solar system in a reasonable period of time. Here's another article on the subject of why such rockets offer advantages over traditional designs.
Ten Thousand Rounds
At first this sounds like a very alarming story.
Oh, actually, he didn't own them. His father owned them, and kept them responsibly locked in a safe.
This is somewhat like the red flag laws under discussion, only it turns out you wouldn't actually have to be the red flag yourself. What's the procedure for recovering your property from FBI seizure if it turns out you didn't do anything wrong, nor even contemplate anything wrong?
[H]e went by the name “ArmyOfChrist,” and praised the Oklahoma City bombing, mass shootings and attacks on Planned Parenthood, the FBI says. When the deadly siege in Waco, Tex., came up, he allegedly offered one lesson: “Shoot every federal agent on sight.” “Don’t comply with gun laws, stock up on stuff they could ban,” he allegedly wrote...Wow! Except, where did an 18 year old get enough money to buy all that stuff?
And when agents raided a home where the 18-year-old lived earlier this month, they found about 10,000 rounds of ammunition and a vault full of assault-type weapons and shotguns.
Oh, actually, he didn't own them. His father owned them, and kept them responsibly locked in a safe.
On Aug. 7, agents swarmed Olsen’s mother’s house, but learned that he’d recently moved to live with his father. Later that day, they found Olsen and arrested him. He soon admitted to making the posts, the FBI says, but claimed the comments were all in jest.So what we have here is a father who was a responsible gun owner, and a teenager who liked to run his mouth on the internet. Apparently that's enough to justify seizing the father's firearms and ammunition -- permanently? If the boy is jailed for making threats, it's not likely the father is going to shoot anything up if he's reached middle age without doing so.
“That’s a hyperbolic conclusion based on the results of the Waco siege,” he said of his instruction to shoot federal agents. He added that the “ATF slaughtered families” in the incident, in which 76 people died as federal agencies raided a religious sect’s compound.
Agents found plenty of firepower in Olsen’s father’s home, though it’s unclear how much of it the 18-year-old could access. There were about 300 rounds of ammunition on a stairway, the FBI says, and thousands of rounds of ammo, camouflage clothing and a gun vault in another bedroom in the house. Agents eventually seized about 15 rifles and shotguns and 10 semiautomatic pistols.
This is somewhat like the red flag laws under discussion, only it turns out you wouldn't actually have to be the red flag yourself. What's the procedure for recovering your property from FBI seizure if it turns out you didn't do anything wrong, nor even contemplate anything wrong?
Real News Today
Tulsi Gabbard really has been called up to active duty, just in time to be kept out of the next Presidential debates. She'll be in Indonesia.
Tulsi Gabbard, Democrat from Hawaii and presidential candidate, will be taking a two-week absence from her campaign Monday to report for active duty with the Hawaiian Army National Guard in Indonesia, she said in an interview with CBSN's Caitlin Huey-Burns.Pretty Presidential, if you ask me.
"I'm stepping off of the campaign trail for a couple of weeks and putting on my army uniform to go on a joint training exercise mission in Indonesia," she said. Gabbard has also taken two weeks off to report for active service in 2017.
"I love our country. I love being able to serve our country in so many ways including as a soldier," she said. "And so while some people are telling me, like gosh this is a terrible time to leave the campaign, can't you find a way out of it? You know that's not what this is about."
Fake News Today
DB: "Maj. Tulsi Gabbard Receives Surprise Deployment Orders to Antarctica"
Gabbard will be deploying to Antarctica within the week, and is expected to return next summer, shortly after the Democratic National Convention has concluded.Spectator (US): "Titania McGrath’s Edinburgh Fringe show is the most important live event since the Women’s March"
“It’s unfortunate that Congresswoman Gabbard’s presidential aspirations have been thwarted by her upcoming deployment,” said Sen. Kamala Harris.... winking dramatically and making finger guns long after the cameras stopped taking pictures.
Inevitably, white male critics have entirely misunderstood Mxnifesto. One described it as ‘venomous satire’, another as ‘iconic comedy’. Brian Logan in the Guardian inexplicably awarded the show just one star. This was a crushing blow for me, because Logan is one of my all-time favorite writers and theater practitioners. For over 15years he was co-director of the improvisation troupe Cartoon de Salvo, objectively acclaimed on their own website as ‘storytellers, shape-shifters and theater pioneers’. I mention Logan’s troupe by name only because I know how difficult it must be to maintain a reputation for being a pioneer when no one has actually heard of anything you’ve ever done.TO: "Nation Informs Body-Positive Advertisers It Ready To Go Back To Staring At Unattainably Attractive People"
"We got the message loud and clear, but if I wanted to see a slightly overweight person with frizzy hair and yellow, crooked teeth, I would look in the mirror."Mutatis mutandis, I imagine that last is a very common sentiment.
Conspiracy Theories and Fake News
I suppose it's been interesting watching the competing conspiracy theories erupt, and I suppose it represents a kind of challenge to our society that we no longer have a way of determining mutually-agreed facts. Not enough blame is being placed upon the ordinary press for that; as awful as Twitter is, and it is terrible, the fact is that the press cut its own throat through increasingly-partisan activity over decades.
Still, this is not the problem:
However, this time, Occam's razor points toward a conspiracy to commit murder. Corruption happens to be the simplest explanation for the cascade failure of obvious protections against the death of the most valuable prisoner in the entire system. It is much easier to believe that one of the many extremely rich and powerful people to whom he posed a threat called in a favor from the mafia, and that the mafia called in a series of favors (or extended offers of new ones) to its extensive set of contacts within the prison system in New York. If all the payoffs were favors, there will be no money trail, and we'll likely never find out which billionaire or millionaire made the request.
That may not be true, but its plausibility doesn't hang on people being participants in a poisoned information stream. It's more plausible even today than it was two days ago: new details have emerged that he was just recently taken off suicide watch; that his cellmate was just removed, unusually leaving him completely alone; that he happened to have been moved from cells that were constantly monitored by CCTV to cells without any such monitoring; that guards left him alone and unsupervised for hours at a stretch, in spite of procedures calling for 30 minute checks....
This is a problem that is akin to the one that happened when Lee Harvey Oswald was shot down by Jack Ruby, in full view of everyone and while under the direct protection of US officers. We've waited a long time now for better information, but ultimately no better explanation has emerged. It's possible he was really not part of any sort of conspiracy, and there was just a cascade failure of systems in which we had unreasonable confidence. If people choose to believe the simpler explanation, though, it's not irrational to do so. It's an application of a usually-reliable heuristic.
It's just that there are huge consequences to adopting the mental model that follows from the conclusion. Perhaps the best thing is to remain open to both possibilities, as both remain possible. Then you don't have to come to any uncomfortable conclusions with dangerous consequences. You just have to accept an obvious truth, which is that we all live in much greater ignorance than we'd like to think. Ultimately the truth of much of the world is outside our grasp, now and forever.
Still, this is not the problem:
[A] grim testament to our deeply poisoned information ecosystem — one that’s built for speed and designed to reward the most incendiary impulses of its worst actors. It has ushered in a parallel reality unrooted in fact and helped to push conspiratorial thinking into the cultural mainstream. And with each news cycle, the system grows more efficient, entrenching its opposing camps....The problem is that waiting for better information has not made conspiracy theories seem less plausible. It remains possible that Epstein killed himself, just as we are being told: that he was broken-hearted over the loss of a life of wealth and freedom, and the certain prospect of spending the rest of his days in misery. It's possible that every single system that would have monitored him failed, and that they did so all at the same time, and he spotted his moment and used it.
At the heart of Saturday’s fiasco is Twitter, which has come to largely program the political conversation and much of the press. Twitter is magnetic during massive breaking stories; news junkies flock to it for up-to-the-second information. But early on, there’s often a vast discrepancy between the attention that is directed at the platform and the available information about the developing story. That gap is filled by speculation and, via its worst users, rumor-mongering and conspiracy theories.
However, this time, Occam's razor points toward a conspiracy to commit murder. Corruption happens to be the simplest explanation for the cascade failure of obvious protections against the death of the most valuable prisoner in the entire system. It is much easier to believe that one of the many extremely rich and powerful people to whom he posed a threat called in a favor from the mafia, and that the mafia called in a series of favors (or extended offers of new ones) to its extensive set of contacts within the prison system in New York. If all the payoffs were favors, there will be no money trail, and we'll likely never find out which billionaire or millionaire made the request.
That may not be true, but its plausibility doesn't hang on people being participants in a poisoned information stream. It's more plausible even today than it was two days ago: new details have emerged that he was just recently taken off suicide watch; that his cellmate was just removed, unusually leaving him completely alone; that he happened to have been moved from cells that were constantly monitored by CCTV to cells without any such monitoring; that guards left him alone and unsupervised for hours at a stretch, in spite of procedures calling for 30 minute checks....
This is a problem that is akin to the one that happened when Lee Harvey Oswald was shot down by Jack Ruby, in full view of everyone and while under the direct protection of US officers. We've waited a long time now for better information, but ultimately no better explanation has emerged. It's possible he was really not part of any sort of conspiracy, and there was just a cascade failure of systems in which we had unreasonable confidence. If people choose to believe the simpler explanation, though, it's not irrational to do so. It's an application of a usually-reliable heuristic.
It's just that there are huge consequences to adopting the mental model that follows from the conclusion. Perhaps the best thing is to remain open to both possibilities, as both remain possible. Then you don't have to come to any uncomfortable conclusions with dangerous consequences. You just have to accept an obvious truth, which is that we all live in much greater ignorance than we'd like to think. Ultimately the truth of much of the world is outside our grasp, now and forever.
Can Ethics Be Taught?
Peter Singer asks an old question.
Not to steal Tom's thunder, but Aristotle's ethics is the place where the question really gets answered. Aristotle bridges the gap by showing that virtue is taught by habituation. So it's not knowing what is right that constitutes 'teaching ethics,' but practicing doing what is right. In doing that, one develops a character that does right by habit, and thus crosses the gap that Socrates and Plato and Haidt and Singer are worrying about.
To practice what is right, it is helpful first to know what is right. Ethical theory has a place, even if it isn't the place Socrates and Plato hoped it would hold.
In The Righteous Mind, Haidt draws support for his views from research by the philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel of the University of California, Riverside, and Joshua Rust of Stetson University. On a range of ethical issues, Schwitzgebel and Rust show, philosophy professors specializing in ethics behave no better than professors working in other areas of philosophy; nor are they more ethical than professors who don’t work in philosophy at all. If even professors working in ethics are no more ethical than their peers in other disciplines, doesn’t that support the belief that ethical reasoning is powerless to make people behave more ethically?This is a question that Socrates asked with some desperation, according to Plato; he seems to have died without answering it. Plato tried to answer it himself, but ended up with significant problems. In the Protagoras, for example, he has Socrates defending the weird proposition that ethics is a kind of knowledge but that it can't be taught (teachability being an ordinary characteristic of knowledge). He is debating Protagoras, who is defending the equally weird proposition that he can teach the virtues, but that they are not a kind of knowledge.
Perhaps. Yet, despite the evidence, I am not entirely convinced. I have had a lot of anecdotal evidence that my classes in practical ethics changed the lives of at least some students, and in quite fundamental ways. Some became vegetarian or vegan. Others began donating to help people in extreme poverty in low-income countries, and a few changed their career plans so that they could do more to make the world a better place.
Not to steal Tom's thunder, but Aristotle's ethics is the place where the question really gets answered. Aristotle bridges the gap by showing that virtue is taught by habituation. So it's not knowing what is right that constitutes 'teaching ethics,' but practicing doing what is right. In doing that, one develops a character that does right by habit, and thus crosses the gap that Socrates and Plato and Haidt and Singer are worrying about.
To practice what is right, it is helpful first to know what is right. Ethical theory has a place, even if it isn't the place Socrates and Plato hoped it would hold.
BB Opinion: Why Can't We Return to How Peaceful the World Was Before Guns?
In the long, long ago, people lived in harmony. They had no choice but to, as they had nothing to shoot each other with. Theoretically, they had bows and arrows, but if you’ve ever actually tried to use one, they’re basically impossible to hit anything with. So if they had a problem, they just talked things out. If things got really heated, they’d settle things with a riddle competition. And men were respectful to women, as there were no guns to enhance toxic masculinity....
This all changed, though, when the inventor of guns (Bob Gun, I believe) created guns in his racism laboratory while trying to find ways to enhance racism. Since then, gun deaths have increased infinity-fold, from zero to more than zero.
The Freedom Caucus on Gun Rights and Safety
I have an official letter today from Rep. Mark Meadows, the head of the House Freedom Caucus, on the issue of the day. Since such a letter is a public record, I'll reproduce it here as I would not with genuinely private correspondence. I omit the opening and closing courtesies, though his office did not.
On August 3, 2019, a gunman cowardly took the lives of 22 innocent people in El Paso, Texas. Sadly, another gunman murdered 9 individuals in Dayton, Ohio. I continue to pray for the victims and their families, who are undergoing terrible, unexpected loss. I am thankful for the brave men and women of law enforcement that selflessly responded to these tragedies.
Violence committed with firearms is a serious problem in our nation, and it must be addressed with common sense solutions that ensure firearms are used according to our founders’ intentions: self-defense and freedom, not murder and terror.
I agree with President Trump when he said, “In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America.” As Americans, we must stand up against acts of hatred and violence anywhere. The President also tasked the FBI to identify all resources they need to investigate and disrupt hate crimes and domestic terrorism. Earlier this year, the FBI established the Domestic Terrorism-Hate Crimes Fusion Cell to target domestic terrorism influenced by hate. The Department of Justice has launched a centralized website to educate the public on hate crimes and encourage reporting. You may view this website here.
I support proper enforcement of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which licensed gun dealers are required to contact, either directly through the FBI or indirectly through state and local law enforcement, before selling or transferring a firearm. Since its implementation in the 1990s, NICS has stopped over three million-gun sales or transfers from licensed dealers. I have also supported the FIX NICS Act, which improved the federal background checks system. This law requires federal agencies to make annual reports and certifications of compliance regarding the NICS system and it penalizes agencies that fail to comply. It also reauthorized the NICS Improvement Act and increased assistance to states to help them submit complete and accurate records to make the NICS system more thorough. This legislation was signed into law by President Trump on March 23, 2018.
For my part, I have introduced two measures to specifically protect schools in the United States. The Protect America’s Schools Act, which would provide adequate funding to the Community Oriented Policing Services’ School Resource Officer program; and the Veterans Securing Schools Act, which would allow Veterans hired by a state or local agency to serve as School Resource Officer – giving state and local law enforcement agencies greater flexibility in hiring Veterans to protect school campuses. These two bills are the direct results of input from sheriffs and law enforcement officers across Western North Carolina. You can read more about these bills here: https://meadows.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=857.
Additionally, I am a current cosponsor of H.R.1339, the Mass Violence Prevention (MVP) Act of 2019. This bill would establish a Fusion Center at the Department of Justice (DOJ) to better share critical information and intelligence across federal, state, and local channels. The authorities failed to share information about threats at Columbine, Charleston, and Parkland for example. The MVP Act would also strengthen the penalty for a burglary of a Federal Firearms Licensee and authorizes the DOJ to hire attorneys to prosecute cases of violence committed with firearms under Project Safe Neighborhoods. These efforts will give law enforcement additional tools to protect schools and communities and will dismantle gangs and other criminal organizations that trade in violent crime.
Great Moments in American Rhetoric
And that wasn't even the craziest moment that happened in our political discourse today.
As for yesterday, it turns out that "#MassacreMitchMcConnell" is supposed to be a nickname rather than a set of instructions. Like "Cocaine Mitch," only "Massacre Mitch." If you thought they were actually inciting violence instead, you were mistaken (although the one protester at his house calling for him to be stabbed in the heart may have aided your confusion).
I thought the Kavanaugh hearings were going to be a high-water mark for wild-eyed craziness. Apparently they were just getting warmed up.
Correlation
But causation?
Venker goes on to explain that of CNN’s list of the “27 Deadliest Mass Shootings In U.S. History, only one was raised by his biological father since childhood.It's bad news if so. We've been talking about fixing failing families since I've been alive, and the problem has not improved outside of those wealthy and stable elements who were in the least danger to begin. Our culture has turned aside from family, even though family is the source of much of -- and much of the best -- human meaning.
“Indeed, there is a direct correlation between boys who grow up with absent fathers and boys who drop out of school, who drink, who do drugs, who become delinquent and who wind up in prison,” she writes. “And who kill their classmates.”
NYT Accidentally Does Journalism, Repents
New York Times releases a second edition with a different headline after Twitter backlash and liberals announce they’re canceling subscriptions. pic.twitter.com/fxLav5pQHP— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) August 6, 2019
Involuntary Commitment
I think I'd like to get AVI's opinion on this issue.
It's hard for me to imagine trusting the government with the power to involuntarily commit people for "mental issues," given that there's no lab test for mental health and our opponents are eager to assign diagnoses to things like conservatism (or reasoning from principles, rather than from feelings). The potential for abuse is obvious and huge.
On the other hand, I hear AVI saying things periodically that suggest that there are clear-cut cases with no vagueness that might be usefully addressed in this way. Whether these kids who engage in shooting up the world are such cases is another question.
It's hard for me to imagine trusting the government with the power to involuntarily commit people for "mental issues," given that there's no lab test for mental health and our opponents are eager to assign diagnoses to things like conservatism (or reasoning from principles, rather than from feelings). The potential for abuse is obvious and huge.
On the other hand, I hear AVI saying things periodically that suggest that there are clear-cut cases with no vagueness that might be usefully addressed in this way. Whether these kids who engage in shooting up the world are such cases is another question.
Hold the Line
I sent the following letter to my Congressmen:
While recent mass shootings receive tremendous media attention, they are statistically a small fraction of gun violence, which is itself a fraction of criminal violence. It would be irrational to react to the spectacle instead of moving in a reasoned way toward the whole spectrum of criminal violence.After I wrote that, I found out that the folks in Hong Kong agree.
The fact is that the 2nd Amendment protects a free state in a crucial manner. International comparisons cherry pick mono-ethnic states with strong central cultures like Iceland or Japan, where violence is relatively uncommon with or without guns. The proper comparisons are to diverse American nations with a similarly troubled history to our own. Mexico has strict gun control, but is overrun by cartel violence. Brazil has until recently strictly forbid private ownership of firearms, but has recently begun re-introducing private arms as a way of addressing similar criminal violence. These states have found that even a large police force can be dominated by criminal organizations; resisting them requires a distributed capacity for defense of liberty among the citizenry as a whole.
Similarly, a free citizenry can protect itself against tyrannical government if it is properly armed. The people of the Philippines endure extrajudicial killings; the Uighur population in China is undergoing ethnic cleansing and "re-education" because they cannot resist. The people of Hong Kong, though engaged in a noble and enviable defense of their liberty, are likely soon to feel the weight of the People's "Liberation" Army. If they had rifles, they would have less to fear.
The Founders were correct. The militia, meaning the ordinary citizenry's capacity to defend its liberty, is the first and best defense of a free state. I mean to pass every single liberty to my children that was passed to me by our fathers. Hold the line.
OODA Loops
Instapundit today carries a piece from Shooting Illustrated, which describes a five-step attack cycle. As the title of this post is meant to suggest, that's too many steps. John Boyd's OODA loop only needs four: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. The SI piece collapses "orient" into "observe," and then adds two more steps: stalk and close.
The SI piece isn't terrible, but bear in mind that it's about a subset of criminal violence. You don't have to stalk a victim, or take care in choosing a victim, if you are merely interested in chaotic violence. If you want to get inside an attacker's OODA loop, you have to get inside the first three steps. Once they've made their decision, action follows.
It's important to remember, in these moments of heightened emotion, that mass shootings are a tiny fraction of gun homicides; and that most of America is perfectly safe, with a county-level homicide rate that is most likely (54%) exactly zero. Not 'near zero,' not 'zero percent rounded down,' but zero: no murders whatsoever.
Make decisions about how to respond to threats advisedly, and rationally: 'stop feeling, start thinking.' If you decide to carry a weapon and be prepared to respond to threats, do that rationally too.
The SI piece isn't terrible, but bear in mind that it's about a subset of criminal violence. You don't have to stalk a victim, or take care in choosing a victim, if you are merely interested in chaotic violence. If you want to get inside an attacker's OODA loop, you have to get inside the first three steps. Once they've made their decision, action follows.
It's important to remember, in these moments of heightened emotion, that mass shootings are a tiny fraction of gun homicides; and that most of America is perfectly safe, with a county-level homicide rate that is most likely (54%) exactly zero. Not 'near zero,' not 'zero percent rounded down,' but zero: no murders whatsoever.
Make decisions about how to respond to threats advisedly, and rationally: 'stop feeling, start thinking.' If you decide to carry a weapon and be prepared to respond to threats, do that rationally too.
On the Wrongness of Prosecutors
Cato has an article that, apropos of the recent dust-up between Tulsi Gabbard and Kamala Harris, explores several ways in which prosecutors can go wrong. "While these practices are legal and widespread, they are also immoral."
Students Crave Ethics
A teacher observes that his students have no moral compass -- but that they passionately want one, and are easily engaged in discussions on the subject.
Of course. As Tom was explaining to us, Aristotle teaches you to be happy. Virtue is the road. If you have no moral compass, you don't know the way to becoming happy.
Of course. As Tom was explaining to us, Aristotle teaches you to be happy. Virtue is the road. If you have no moral compass, you don't know the way to becoming happy.
Wish They'd Come Up With "Don't Mess With It" Before Their Last Attempt
Vox asks, "Should fixing healthcare be a top priority for Democrats?"
When people ask me why I don't favor this or that Democratic plan to fix some social problem using the government, they don't really like that my answer tuns on how much worse my problems got after their last attempt to fix my problems. Thanks, but no thanks.
In 1993, newly elected President Bill Clinton made an ambitious overhaul of the national health care system his top priority. It ended up getting bogged down in complicated congressional negotiations over the many details of the proposal, became unpopular, and didn’t pass, and Democrats got hammered in the 1994 midterms.The failures were less expensive than the success. My #1 expense month-to-month is now health insurance, purchased on the Exchanges, but I haven't been to a doctor since 2014 because I now have a $13,000 deductible. At least Donald Trump didn't cost me any more. The Republicans just failed to completely repeal the mess that Obama's team put into place.
Then in 2009, newly elected President Barack Obama made an ambitious overhaul of the national health care system his top priority. It ended up getting bogged down in complicated congressional negotiations over the many details of the proposal, became unpopular, did pass despite poor polling, and Democrats got hammered in the 2010 midterms.
But then in 2017, newly elected President Donald Trump made an ambitious overhaul of the national health care system his top priority.... Not coincidentally, Republicans got hammered in the 2018 midterms.
When people ask me why I don't favor this or that Democratic plan to fix some social problem using the government, they don't really like that my answer tuns on how much worse my problems got after their last attempt to fix my problems. Thanks, but no thanks.
Today in Fake News
DB: Thousands of officers with Bronze Stars suddenly concerned about President's attention to BS awards.
BB: Feminist church debuts anti-manspreading pews.
BB: Feminist church debuts anti-manspreading pews.
Tulsi Hits Hard
Far and away my least-favored candidate in this election is Kamala Harris, for exactly the reasons that Tulsi Gabbard brings to bear. Senator Harris is manifestly willing to abuse police powers and robustly violate the rights of American citizens. No one should be willing to entrust her with command of the vast array of police powers that would be available to her as President.
Good for Tulsi. She had a good night some of the time, but keeps tripping up on foreign policy -- her allegedly strong suit. It's a known issue that she's friendly with Assad, but last night she also made a wild claim that President Trump somehow 'supports al Qaeda.' You'd have to be reaching for a pretty metaphorical sort of 'support' for that to be true, e.g., he 'supports' them by being such a bugbear that he's useful as a recruiting tool. Even if so, we've heard that argument before from Barack "Hussein" Obama's team, and his shining example of American tolerance did not in fact serve to reduce al Qaeda or ISIS recruiting power. Obama did kill a lot of people, though; I'm not accusing him of being 'an al Qaeda supporter' either. I'm just pointing out that even the most generous reading of this argument is silly, at this point, given the empirical evidence.
But crushing Sen. Harris? Magnificent.
Good for Tulsi. She had a good night some of the time, but keeps tripping up on foreign policy -- her allegedly strong suit. It's a known issue that she's friendly with Assad, but last night she also made a wild claim that President Trump somehow 'supports al Qaeda.' You'd have to be reaching for a pretty metaphorical sort of 'support' for that to be true, e.g., he 'supports' them by being such a bugbear that he's useful as a recruiting tool. Even if so, we've heard that argument before from Barack "Hussein" Obama's team, and his shining example of American tolerance did not in fact serve to reduce al Qaeda or ISIS recruiting power. Obama did kill a lot of people, though; I'm not accusing him of being 'an al Qaeda supporter' either. I'm just pointing out that even the most generous reading of this argument is silly, at this point, given the empirical evidence.
But crushing Sen. Harris? Magnificent.
Wow, Talk About Toxic
Gillette lost $8 Billion following last year's ad campaign. Apparently customers don't like being told that they don't measure up to the moral vision of international mega-corporations.
Court Orders Are For Little People
Among the ways in which the 'Russia collusion' theory has collapsed is that a Federal judge recently ordered the government to stop claiming it had shown that the Russian government was behind the activities by the cyber firms that ran Facebook ads in 2016. Those firms are private, and the government didn't actually bother to establish a connection in the Mueller report -- nor did it file any indictments against Russian government officials, nor against any American citizens for working with the Russian government.
No Americans were indicted, let alone convicted, for working with any Russians -- government or private citizen.
No Russians were indicted who worked for the Russian government. The Federal government has agreed to stop claiming it established any connections to the Russian government even among Russian nationals working on 2016.
The SDNY investigation into the Trump organization is done, and came up empty on Russia.
Even in the case against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is widely believed to be working for Russia, no indictments have been lain against him for anything to do with Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
Some within the government, even Mueller, continue to talk as if they had something. Every time there's an acid test, though, where they might have to provide actual proof of these claims -- every time, they don't put up, and yet they also don't shut up.
Maybe it's all true, and our intelligence agencies are sitting on the proof because they don't want to expose sources and methods to discovery. That's now how our justice system works, though. You cannot use power against an American citizen without the consent of a jury of his or her peers. You've got to put up to us, or else shut up. If it's true, if any of it is true, the cards have been called.
On July 1, 2019, Judge Dabney L. Friedrich issued an order (to which the government agreed) prohibiting further public statements by the government about the Concord and IRA case, particularly statements alleging that Concord and IRA worked on behalf of the Russian government. A more detailed discussion of this train wreck can be read here.It's amazing how weak the Russia case is, given that House Democrats continue to fulminate around impeachment over it. Carter Page, against whom the FISA warrant was issued and renewed multiple times, faces zero charges. The government will have collected all of his communications and those of those with whom he spoke, but he faces no charges -- especially not for being a Russian spy, but actually not for anything whatsoever.
But Mueller Just Did It Again
This takes us to the Mueller testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees last week. On live television in front of an audience of millions, former special counsel Robert Mueller carefully skirted speculating on the guilt or innocence of Roger Stone due to his ongoing criminal prosecution. But nobody apparently reminded Mueller that Judge Friedrich had ordered Mueller’s team to stop saying Concord and IRA worked for the Russian government.
The government hasn’t alleged that, can’t prove it, and abandoned those allegations in open court. The government had only just barely escaped a criminal contempt citation because Mueller’s report and Barr’s press conference seemed to allege that the Russians (the Russians, as in the Russian government) were behind the troll farms. And that’s not true, according to the government’s own admissions.
No Americans were indicted, let alone convicted, for working with any Russians -- government or private citizen.
No Russians were indicted who worked for the Russian government. The Federal government has agreed to stop claiming it established any connections to the Russian government even among Russian nationals working on 2016.
The SDNY investigation into the Trump organization is done, and came up empty on Russia.
Even in the case against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is widely believed to be working for Russia, no indictments have been lain against him for anything to do with Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
Some within the government, even Mueller, continue to talk as if they had something. Every time there's an acid test, though, where they might have to provide actual proof of these claims -- every time, they don't put up, and yet they also don't shut up.
Maybe it's all true, and our intelligence agencies are sitting on the proof because they don't want to expose sources and methods to discovery. That's now how our justice system works, though. You cannot use power against an American citizen without the consent of a jury of his or her peers. You've got to put up to us, or else shut up. If it's true, if any of it is true, the cards have been called.
Fairy Tales vs. the Good Witch of the West
Last night's debate featured both, apparently. Ironically the Good Witch is not the one peddling the fairy tales.
The criticism that these things are impossible is of course accurate: we can't pay for the Social Security and Medicare we have now, let alone this ever-growing raft of additional plans we keep hearing about. Adding another plan to the pile just means more taxes, more debt, and less liberty to live the way I might prefer than the way she and hers might prefer I do instead.
At least we can contest 'dark psychic forces' without a spending program.
The criticism that these things are impossible is of course accurate: we can't pay for the Social Security and Medicare we have now, let alone this ever-growing raft of additional plans we keep hearing about. Adding another plan to the pile just means more taxes, more debt, and less liberty to live the way I might prefer than the way she and hers might prefer I do instead.
At least we can contest 'dark psychic forces' without a spending program.
Viral charm
A little 8-year-old girl and her musical family are having one of those YouTube explosions that happen when nearly everyone who watches a video clip feels an irresistible urge to share it. I first saw it without any explanatory comments and couldn't figure out her accent. At first it seemed it might be European Spanish, not the New World variant I'm more familiar with, but the family looked Indian. But then they were dressed so warmly, and the hint of architecture in the background was European. That made me think the mountains of South America.
It turns out the family are French, with a dad who was born in South Korea, so that explains the Asian look as well as the accent that online Spanish-speaking fans describe as "exotic." She gets going on a trilled R and just doesn't stop. They're appearing at festivals now, under the name "Isaac et Nora," and cutting a CD.
Veinte Años is a Cuban torch song from the 1930s.
What's it matter if I love you
If you don't want me any more
A love that's over
Should be forgotten
If what one wants
Could be won
You'd want me the same
As twenty years ago
Veinte Años
¿Qué te importa que te ame
Si tú no me quieres ya?
El amor que ya ha pasado
No se debe recordar
Fui la ilusión de tu vida
Un dÃa lejano ya
Hoy represento el pasado
No me puedo conformar
Si las cosas que uno quiere
Se pudieran alcanzar
Tú me quisieras lo mismo
Que veinte años atrás
Con qué tristeza miramos
Un amor que se nos va
Es un pedazo del alma
Que se arranca sin piedad
It turns out the family are French, with a dad who was born in South Korea, so that explains the Asian look as well as the accent that online Spanish-speaking fans describe as "exotic." She gets going on a trilled R and just doesn't stop. They're appearing at festivals now, under the name "Isaac et Nora," and cutting a CD.
Veinte Años is a Cuban torch song from the 1930s.
What's it matter if I love you
If you don't want me any more
A love that's over
Should be forgotten
If what one wants
Could be won
You'd want me the same
As twenty years ago
Veinte Años
¿Qué te importa que te ame
Si tú no me quieres ya?
El amor que ya ha pasado
No se debe recordar
Fui la ilusión de tu vida
Un dÃa lejano ya
Hoy represento el pasado
No me puedo conformar
Si las cosas que uno quiere
Se pudieran alcanzar
Tú me quisieras lo mismo
Que veinte años atrás
Con qué tristeza miramos
Un amor que se nos va
Es un pedazo del alma
Que se arranca sin piedad
Good for IBM
It's not what I expect a corporation to do, but IBM just made its cancer-fighting AIs open source.
That is deeply humane, although one wonders how you fund continued future AI development without profit.
That is deeply humane, although one wonders how you fund continued future AI development without profit.
La Guerre en France
EU: Motorcycles "Most Antisocial" Means of Transportation, Should Probably Be Banned
UPDATE: They don't like your cars, either.
So motorcycles are small, easy to park even in urban conditions, and quite fuel-efficient which is supposedly a virtue in these carbon-sensitive times. 'What's the issue?', you might ask.
Socialism. It's socialism that means you can't ride motorcycles.
But no: they will answer that they have a moral duty to care for me if I'm hurt, so they therefore have a corresponding moral duty to prevent me from doing things that might get me hurt. Freedom? That's just another word for not accepting my duty to the state and society.
It's worth watching this old Hells Angels documentary from the early 1980s all the way through. Read it with the post below about how the establishment has moved gangsters from anti-heroes to heroes. That's not completely true, but it's not completely wrong either. At one point their lawyers suggest that they're basically Goldwater Republicans, philosophically. At another, they themselves declare that they're quintessentially American, because America is the only place that would take them. Of course there's plenty of rough edges, which to their credit they don't try to hide.
At some point it's going to be us against the bureaucrats and technocrats who want to govern every inch of our lives. I know which side I'm on.
So motorcycles are small, easy to park even in urban conditions, and quite fuel-efficient which is supposedly a virtue in these carbon-sensitive times. 'What's the issue?', you might ask.
Socialism. It's socialism that means you can't ride motorcycles.
Since every European Union country has socialized medicine, it’s clear that the cost of traffic accidents is borne by society, not by individual drivers or riders. In absolute terms, cars are responsible for 10 times the accident costs of motorcycles, €210 billion for cars versus €21 billion for bikes. But, on a passenger-kilometer basis, bikes incur triple the accident costs of cars (€0.127 for motorcycles versus €0.045 for cars).Seems easy enough to fix: don't pay out if I get hurt riding my bike, leave me to sort that via private insurance. That's what we do here in the good old USA, right?
But no: they will answer that they have a moral duty to care for me if I'm hurt, so they therefore have a corresponding moral duty to prevent me from doing things that might get me hurt. Freedom? That's just another word for not accepting my duty to the state and society.
It's worth watching this old Hells Angels documentary from the early 1980s all the way through. Read it with the post below about how the establishment has moved gangsters from anti-heroes to heroes. That's not completely true, but it's not completely wrong either. At one point their lawyers suggest that they're basically Goldwater Republicans, philosophically. At another, they themselves declare that they're quintessentially American, because America is the only place that would take them. Of course there's plenty of rough edges, which to their credit they don't try to hide.
At some point it's going to be us against the bureaucrats and technocrats who want to govern every inch of our lives. I know which side I'm on.
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
I went to see the thing today. If any of you saw it too, and want to discuss it, the comments will be a good place for that.
If you didn't see it, avoid the comments. Definitely go see it, especially if Tarantino's approach has worked for you before.
If you didn't see it, avoid the comments. Definitely go see it, especially if Tarantino's approach has worked for you before.
Gangster Films
I referenced Robert Warshow's essay, "The Gangster as Tragic Hero," a few times in the long life of this blog. Until today, though, I couldn't remember the author or the title.
One of the comments on cinema from 2013 stands out to me now:
There's been an attempt to fit other, less plausible figures into the role too. But in a way I think it explains something about the President's ongoing invulnerability to charges of illegal behavior, racist behavior, hateful behavior, awful behavior. The gangster is against the system, and for a while now we've been rooting for that.
We've been rooting for it in the land of imagination because in the real world we can see that the system is fantastically corrupt, impossible to hold to account, and that all of its pious words are false. They don't believe in the rule of law -- witness sanctuary cities. They don't believe that there's one law for all, powerful and poor: witness the difference between the Comey investigation into Clinton's violation of classification laws, and the Mueller investigation of everyone Donald Trump ever knew. These dramatic moments fit within a context of our everyday lives, when we try to make things work with city hall or the state government.
This weekend the gangster President is feuding with two giants of the Congress, the Speaker of the House and Elijah Cummings, about the run-down conditions their American cities have assumed under the leadership of their party. No one is going to fix Baltimore, and San Francisco is covered over with feces and needles. No one is accountable, and if you try to make someone accountable, they are protected by overlapping fields of power and privilege. It is racist to criticize him, they say. It is sexist to criticize her. In terms of power they hold senior positions in high office. They are deeply rich from their long lives of public service, with all the power wealth brings. Also, the city governments would do anything they ask, because those cities are run fellow Democrats who are getting rich off public service too.
There is going to be a cost, of course, to celebrating gangsters instead of genuinely virtuous men. It's worth remembering, though, that many of the noblest names in history were all but gangsters: William the Conqueror and all his line of kings, for example. Alexander the Great once arrested a pirate and asked him how he dared to molest ships at sea. The pirate is alleged to have demanded, in return, "How dare you molest the whole world?"
Alexander was taught virtue by Aristotle himself, but the pirate hit him fairly and he knew it.
One of the comments on cinema from 2013 stands out to me now:
It may be the reason gangster 'films' are so pervasive on the new television are the two old reasons: that it as a genre permits a genuine tragedy, and that it permits a clear-eyed critique of the American system. But it may also be that the American system isn't as healthy as it used to be, and the critique is therefore more persuasive. At some point, the tragedy will fall away, and people will simply accept these gangsters as heroes, full stop.Someone will write a follow-up essay to that soon, I suspect: "Trump as Gangster Hero." But it's already life on YouTube.
There's been an attempt to fit other, less plausible figures into the role too. But in a way I think it explains something about the President's ongoing invulnerability to charges of illegal behavior, racist behavior, hateful behavior, awful behavior. The gangster is against the system, and for a while now we've been rooting for that.
We've been rooting for it in the land of imagination because in the real world we can see that the system is fantastically corrupt, impossible to hold to account, and that all of its pious words are false. They don't believe in the rule of law -- witness sanctuary cities. They don't believe that there's one law for all, powerful and poor: witness the difference between the Comey investigation into Clinton's violation of classification laws, and the Mueller investigation of everyone Donald Trump ever knew. These dramatic moments fit within a context of our everyday lives, when we try to make things work with city hall or the state government.
This weekend the gangster President is feuding with two giants of the Congress, the Speaker of the House and Elijah Cummings, about the run-down conditions their American cities have assumed under the leadership of their party. No one is going to fix Baltimore, and San Francisco is covered over with feces and needles. No one is accountable, and if you try to make someone accountable, they are protected by overlapping fields of power and privilege. It is racist to criticize him, they say. It is sexist to criticize her. In terms of power they hold senior positions in high office. They are deeply rich from their long lives of public service, with all the power wealth brings. Also, the city governments would do anything they ask, because those cities are run fellow Democrats who are getting rich off public service too.
There is going to be a cost, of course, to celebrating gangsters instead of genuinely virtuous men. It's worth remembering, though, that many of the noblest names in history were all but gangsters: William the Conqueror and all his line of kings, for example. Alexander the Great once arrested a pirate and asked him how he dared to molest ships at sea. The pirate is alleged to have demanded, in return, "How dare you molest the whole world?"
Alexander was taught virtue by Aristotle himself, but the pirate hit him fairly and he knew it.
Seams of malice
Peggy Noonan muses on the Terror, then and now.
Wouldn't you have to need a job pretty badly to continue working at a professional institution that boasted something called an "Inclusive Communications Task Force," whether or not it was backed up by the guillotine?
Schroedinger's Bob
From the political machine that brought us "It depends on what the meaning of is, is," language that makes me wonder if journalists and deep state operatives all really aspire to be the more mushy-headed, prevaricating variety of stereotypical corporate lawyer:
But the larger problem with Mueller’s case was neatly summed up in his exchange with Republican Representative Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania. “You made a decision not to prosecute?” Reschenthaler asked.
“No,” Mueller replied, “we made a decision not to decide whether to prosecute or not.”
That one fundamental decision—the decision not to decide, because he believed doing so would be inherently unfair, given Justice Department guidelines barring indictment of a sitting president and Trump’s corresponding inability to have his day in court—ensured that Mueller’s testimony, like his investigation itself, wouldn’t resolve anything. And that’s far more than a matter of mere optics. It’s a built-in flaw in the basic script, one that Charlton Heston as Moses himself couldn’t counter—and one that Mueller would strenuously argue was neither his preference nor of his own making, but one that he, and the rest of us, must to learn to live with. To act on, or not.See, given his own preferences in a world of his own making, Mueller wouldn't have had to live with a decision not to decide, against the wishes and direction of his superior, AG Barr. But he courageously decided not to decide and then to live with the consequences or non-consequences, or not. And then to sort of testify about it, but not.
Today in Media Gaslighting
The United States, but not Iran, is one of the ten most dangerous countries for women -- as proven by a successful campaign to redress violence against women.
Meanwhile, the United Nations votes to condemn Israel as the world's only violator of women's rights. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen all joined in the condemnation.
Strangely, Israel didn't turn up on the top ten list from the first article, and the United States wasn't condemned by the UN in spite of its inclusion on that list. Must be some sort of wonkiness in the methodology.
Meanwhile, the United Nations votes to condemn Israel as the world's only violator of women's rights. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen all joined in the condemnation.
Strangely, Israel didn't turn up on the top ten list from the first article, and the United States wasn't condemned by the UN in spite of its inclusion on that list. Must be some sort of wonkiness in the methodology.
While The Circus Was In Town
Apparently there was some sort of hearing in Congress today, got a lot of attention. I was busy splitting firewood for the coming winter, so I missed out on all that.
But Congress did manage to confirm a new Secretary of Defense. I guess it was lucky that the circus was in town in the other chamber, so that actual work could get done in the Senate for a change.
UPDATE: Apparently the circus being in town allowed the Senate to confirm Brian Buescher, without needing to go through the whole screaming jag about him being a member of the Knights of Columbus.
But Congress did manage to confirm a new Secretary of Defense. I guess it was lucky that the circus was in town in the other chamber, so that actual work could get done in the Senate for a change.
UPDATE: Apparently the circus being in town allowed the Senate to confirm Brian Buescher, without needing to go through the whole screaming jag about him being a member of the Knights of Columbus.
Demographics
So why is this true?
AVI raises a variation of the point he's often raised that is relevant on this topic. It's an unexplored area in our public discourse, but it does seem to hold true internationally as well as nationally.
Those in the third group are Democratic primary voters who describe themselves as moderate to conservative. This group has the largest number of minorities; it is 26 percent black, 19 percent Hispanic, 7 percent other nonwhites, and it has the smallest percentage of whites, at 48 percent.The more progressive parts of the party are also the most white. Why is that true?
AVI raises a variation of the point he's often raised that is relevant on this topic. It's an unexplored area in our public discourse, but it does seem to hold true internationally as well as nationally.
To be an "Artist, Warrior, Philosopher"- A Good Goal
Somehow in my bouncing around the internet, I came across a rather interesting person- Jason Everman. He was for a brief time a touring member of Nirvana, and a member of Soundgarden, but in addition to that-
Seems like an interesting fellow. I'm thinking he'd be more than welcome here.
In September 1994, influenced by Renaissance icon Benvenuto Cellini (who stated that a well-rounded man is an artist, warrior and philosopher), he left Mind Funk to join the United States Army, subsequently serving with the Army's 2nd Ranger Battalion and later with the Special Forces, serving tours in Afghanistan and Iraq.[4] After completing his service, he took a break from the military and lived in New York City where he briefly worked as a bike messenger. He then traveled to Tibet and worked and studied in a Buddhist monastery before returning to the U.S. He reentered the Army when offered the chance to join Special Forces.Then went on to get a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy from Columbia, and is currently pursuing a Masters in Military History from Norwich.
Seems like an interesting fellow. I'm thinking he'd be more than welcome here.
Borderline thinking
Democratic operatives are unhappy to detect a growing view that their border policy amounts to lawlessness. The President's common-sense view is “We’ve got to straighten out our immigration laws.” Pressed to rebut this approach, the Center for American Progress has released a report arguing that Trump
Nope, still don't get it. Let's try again: how do we know he's undermining the rule of law? Well, because the immigration system is broken. It's the nature of broken systems to have cracks. Trump is exploiting the cracks by issuing executive orders and rule changes, which his opponents are challenging in federal court. See?
In the meantime, Trump's opponents don't have any public message on how they'd amend the immigration laws, other than to abolish them. Given a choice between abolishing the border and straightening out (i.e., reforming) our immigration laws, voters do seem likely to go with Trump. Whatever the opposition view is, it doesn't look like reform. It looks like lawlessness.
has relied on the administrative discretion built into the immigration system to bypass real reform. That failure to substantially reform the immigration system, the report argues, actually undermines the rule of law—broken systems have cracks, after all, and with numerous immigration-related executive orders and proposed rule changes facing legal challenges in federal court, the president has shown himself willing to exploit them.I find that passage difficult to parse. There's the opening question of what "real reform" is. Whatever it is, we're asked to believe that Trump is "bypassing" it by relying on "administrative discretion." Then, by bypassing "real reform," Trump is "undermining the rule of law."
Nope, still don't get it. Let's try again: how do we know he's undermining the rule of law? Well, because the immigration system is broken. It's the nature of broken systems to have cracks. Trump is exploiting the cracks by issuing executive orders and rule changes, which his opponents are challenging in federal court. See?
In the meantime, Trump's opponents don't have any public message on how they'd amend the immigration laws, other than to abolish them. Given a choice between abolishing the border and straightening out (i.e., reforming) our immigration laws, voters do seem likely to go with Trump. Whatever the opposition view is, it doesn't look like reform. It looks like lawlessness.
Mighty Thora
I realize that all heroes have to be women now -- and not 'heroines,' either, that word has to be erased from the language. So James Bond and the God of Thunder must, of course, also become women.
Natalie Portman, though? You couldn't find a female Strongman competitor who could act?
Anyway, people still aren't happy.
Natalie Portman, though? You couldn't find a female Strongman competitor who could act?
Anyway, people still aren't happy.
A number of feminist commenters complained that people were calling Portman’s character “female Thor,” saying she should be addressed simply as “Thor.”Wait a second now. Are you sure about 'her' pronouns?
And yet they still don't see what the underlying problem is
When your currency holds less value than one which is only usable within a game, do you even actually have a real economy anymore?
And yet, CNN will defend the current crop of Socialists in the House and running for President without batting an eye.
P.S. From experience, I will tell you a shrewd negotiator can even make World of Warcraft gold even MORE valuable. All it takes is telling a friend, "Hey, if you buy me lunch, I'll give you 100 gold in game."
And yet, CNN will defend the current crop of Socialists in the House and running for President without batting an eye.
P.S. From experience, I will tell you a shrewd negotiator can even make World of Warcraft gold even MORE valuable. All it takes is telling a friend, "Hey, if you buy me lunch, I'll give you 100 gold in game."
Why the negative vibes, man?
On Wednesday Mueller is set to testify before television, I mean Congress. "Not everybody is reading the book, but people will watch the movie." If only the movie had trailers, they might include shots of Trump surrogates adopting Oman-like defenses of "these questions are demeaning" and "I refuse to be distracted by the negative energy."
What happens if you can't get the president:
What happens if you can't get the president:
Standards
Glenn Reynolds:
THAT’S DIFFERENT BECAUSE SHUT UP: And what about Ilhan Omar’s bigotry? The left seems to think racist prejudice is okay if it comes from a cool Muslim. “Yes, if you try to draw attention to Omar’s promotion of anti-Semitic tropes and her feverish, disproportionate obsession with Zionists, you will be denounced as the racist. Taking Orwellian contortionism to new levels, we’re now told it is racist to speak of Omar’s racism.”
Remember, the left doesn’t have standards, only slogans.
Where's Cassandra When You Need Her?
That woman should not have given up blogging. She'd be having a field day with this.
The life of Armstrong stands in such fascinating tension with the way people have imagined the moon in the past. The moon was feminine, overwhelmingly powerful, and a vast imaginary expanse where anything might be possible—he trod on it.We lost a lot when she decided to pursue a more private life.
"National Conservatism"
A recent conference has a YouTube channel featuring its lectures. A piece in the WSJ lays out why it seems plausible to so many right now:
In America, the nationalist claim is that the federal government has abdicated basic responsibilities and broken trust with large numbers of citizens:That all sounds basically correct to me.
• It has failed to secure the national borders and provide regular procedures for immigration and assimilation.
• It has delegated lawmaking to foreign and international bodies, and domestic bureaucracies, that have scant regard for the interests and values of many of our fellow citizens.
• It has acquiesced in, or actively promoted, the splintering of the nation into contending racial, religious and other groups and has favored some at the expense of others.
• It has neglected core American principles and traditions—separation of powers, due process, the presumption of innocence, local prerogative, freedom of association—allowing them to atrophy or be subjected to political conditions.
...
The illusion of unlimited optionality has been especially damaging in government and politics. A dramatic recent instance came in the Democrats’ presidential primary debates, where many candidates favored both open borders and free health care for everyone who shows up. This would plainly amount to the abolition of the United States. Still, the proponents would say in all earnestness that they have ingenious plans to make it work.
That is an extreme instance of the phenomenon that every social problem or inconvenience summons forth costly new spending or regulatory solutions, with hardly a care to where the resources will come from or what other problems will be slighted. It is a bipartisan phenomenon, and it has left us with a massively indebted government that spends trillions of borrowed dollars on our immediate needs, with the bills kited to future generations.
The American nation-state is rich, powerful and less constrained than any other, yet it is much more constrained than we have led ourselves to believe. Thinking of ourselves as a nation-state is, as Peter Thiel has observed, a means of unromantic self-knowledge.
A Small Roundup
The President does tend to the insult as a form of rhetoric, doesn't he? Once in a while I really wish he wouldn't; but a lot of the time, I think that justice is served by the insulting of many of his targets. Most of these folks are politicians from a particularly bad crop. We could do with fewer of them, and instead they're showered with honors and treated as if they merit high dignity.
A Protestant Heresy
Joshua Mitchell argues that identity politics is a species of heresy:
The categories of transgression and innocence, purity and stain, have now effectively migrated from the mainline churches into the universities and from thence into the Democratic Party, which is now the political wing of the universities. To say the same thing in a different manner, the universities are now the theological wing of the Democratic Party. Together, they disseminate the political theology of identity politics....He has some theological recommendations. Perhaps it is right to say that only God can forgive such sins, and thus that eliminating a God who can forgive also eliminates the possibility of forgiveness. Then what? Romans 12:19 (like Deut. 32) assigned vengeance to the Lord God alone. Without the God to own it, vengeance flies free; and without the God to forgive and to instruct us to forgive each other, vengeance is all that's left.
Christian realism, however, is not enough. Identity politics understands the original sin of the white heterosexual male to implicate all that he has touched, not least of which is the nation, which is taken to be a construction of his that is responsible for the great wars of the twentieth century; colonialism in Africa, the Middle East, South America, and South Asia; and slavery in America....
Identity politics recognizes irredeemable sin, but seeks an immanent resolution to the problem, namely, purging all that the white heterosexual male has constructed—including the nation. Not by the sacrifice of Jesus do we achieve redemption, but rather through the renunciation of the nation and its irredeemable stain. That is why citizens in Europe and in America are clamoring for the EU or for global governance. In the world identity politics constructs, there is no other way for their stain to be removed.
Christian realism has nothing to say about this now ascendant frame of mind.... God’s salvific plan of the world of nations is his to disclose, in a providential history that man cannot grasp in advance. Identity politics finds this to be a filthy delusion. The Christian God, the nations he authorizes, and his so-called providential history are the invention of the white heterosexual male who himself and all that he has invented must be purged so that the world may be made pure.
Pesky strings on that money
The University of Missouri faces a moral dilemma.
Unfortunately, the university was dumb enough to generate internal memoranda admitting that it was trying to circumvent the donor's intent, explaining that “the Austrian School of Economics is quite controversial ... [w]e didn’t want to wade into that controversy, so we focused on some Austrian tenets that are compatible with what we do in our business school.” That's pretty close to “a dedicated and articulate disciple of the Ludwig von Mises (Austrian) School of Economics,” right? Presumably they scrounged up a few guys who at least agreed with the Austrians on one or two basic economic principles on a good day when no pressing social justice issues intervened.
Somehow, this didn't satisfy Hillsdale College, which recently lost patience and filed a lawsuit arguing that no “disciple” of Austrian economics was ever hired, let alone a dedicated or articulate one. No doubt the university will give up now and hand the donation over to Hillsdale. Again, just kidding.
In 2002, the university received a $5 million bequest . . . to fund six professorships at the Trulaske College of Business to be filled by devotees of free market economics.
[The will included] a unique enforcement provision. Mizzou would be required to certify every four years to the satisfaction of Hillsdale College that each professorship had been filled by “a dedicated and articulate disciple of the Ludwig von Mises (Austrian) School of Economics.” The remaining funds would revert to Hillsdale in the event that this requirement was not met.But the university obviously doesn't approve of Austrian economics. You might suppose, therefore, that its moral dilemma was whether it was justified in taking the money. Just kidding. Of course they took the money. The moral dilemma was their concern that "acceding to [the donor's] request would consign the school to being 'held hostage by a particular ideology.'" Ideology is wrong, at least when it's the wrong ideology. The university stands foursquare against it.
Unfortunately, the university was dumb enough to generate internal memoranda admitting that it was trying to circumvent the donor's intent, explaining that “the Austrian School of Economics is quite controversial ... [w]e didn’t want to wade into that controversy, so we focused on some Austrian tenets that are compatible with what we do in our business school.” That's pretty close to “a dedicated and articulate disciple of the Ludwig von Mises (Austrian) School of Economics,” right? Presumably they scrounged up a few guys who at least agreed with the Austrians on one or two basic economic principles on a good day when no pressing social justice issues intervened.
Somehow, this didn't satisfy Hillsdale College, which recently lost patience and filed a lawsuit arguing that no “disciple” of Austrian economics was ever hired, let alone a dedicated or articulate one. No doubt the university will give up now and hand the donation over to Hillsdale. Again, just kidding.
Racism problem worse than I dreamed
Until today I had no idea front-door cams were racist:
I notice the linked AP article didn't even try to explain the race-barrier angle, because frankly that line of reasoning won't bear close scrutiny.
Critics complain that the systems turn neighborhoods into places of constant surveillance and create suspicion that falls heavier on minorities. . . . Critics also say Ring, a subsidiary of Amazon, appears to be marketing its cameras by stirring up fear of crime at a time when it’s decreasing. . . . “Amazon is profiting off of fear,” said Chris Gilliard, an English professor at Michigan’s Macomb Community College and a prominent critic of Ring and other technology that he says can reinforce race barriers. Part of the strategy seems to be selling the cameras “where the fear of crime is more real than the actual existence of crime.”Thanks, Prof. Gillard, but I think I'll make up my own mind how secure my front door is. Do front-door lock manufacturers profit off fear? If so, bully for them. Ditto vaccine and airbag manufacturers.
I notice the linked AP article didn't even try to explain the race-barrier angle, because frankly that line of reasoning won't bear close scrutiny.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)