We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The economy, bad decisions, and the endless pursuit of stuff, quoted from Free Republic:
Lenders across the country are pulling the plug on equity lines and tightening credit after a lending spree to people for whom the housing market was their pot of gold.
Much of this economic "pain" is self-inflicted. Rather than purchasing homes they could not afford - or putting too much down, making them cash poor - they might have invested their equity in balanced mutual funds (the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 11.59 percent over a 10-year period). Such a path could have avoided the tight spot in which many now find themselves.
Some of the lust for bigger and better is human nature, but a lot is the result of consumerism. The Timex watch is no longer enough. We now must have a Rolex, though both accurately tell time. The adequate low-end automobile is insufficient. We must trade up to a luxury car with numbers and letters on the rear that mean nothing, but convey "status." And the house we are living in, which would have been more than adequate for our parents and certainly our grandparents, must be upgraded to larger digs in order to impress, if not growing families, than enlarged egos.
Hmm, if this were health care, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would be decrying those “greedy” teachers and bureaucrats and would be calling to slash spending and use more technology.
“There is an inverse relationship between reliance on the state and self-reliance.” - William F. Buckley Jr.
I have read a number of comments and reviews of Dr. Lyle Rossiter's book The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. I suppose I should read it, but I wish I had taken the time to write it myself, because the themes of the book seem close to much of what I have posted here about liberty.
"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."
Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."
I know exactly what is meant here, but I have reservations about terming it "neurotic," which implies internal unconscious conflict. I think Dr. R. means "irrational."
When we talk about the beliefs of others, everybody tends to views those who disagree as irrational or uninformed. The fact is that peoples' convictions and attitudes can be based on any mix of emotion, experience, emotional tendencies, fantasy, personality type, logic, self-interest, intelligence and amount of information they have, emotional maturity, and so forth. There are many recipes that end up with a bowl of Chili.
For example, I know some Liberal types who are as benevolent, independent, intelligent, and high-functioning as can be, and who want nothing from the government. And I have met (and often read) Conservatives (and Liberals too) who seem driven, in part, by a paranoid undercurrent and sense of grievance.
Thus I think that the psychology of beliefs is complicated. As readers know, I prefer to use individual liberty as my starting point in political discussion, rather than psychology. Individual liberty is what my ancestors fought, died, and lived for and the realization of it, and the reverence for the idea, is what differentiates the US from the rest of the civilized world. I believe that life in a world of individual liberty is risky, often difficult, often daunting, filled with failure, but offers endless opportunity to pursue the realization of dreams. Still, liberty is obviously not for everybody, as voting patterns indicate. Not even a majority of Americans supported the Revolution.
The failure of modern "Liberalism" to maintain the ideals of personal liberty associated with classical liberalism is discouraging for me. Modern Liberals seem to celebrate leftist dictators, and, as I have posted, How Come Liberals never talk about Liberty? Clearly it is because they do not revere the founding ideas of America. I do revere them as the highest and most noble expression of the human spirit.
Image: Trumbull's painting of Cornwallis' surrender.
For at least 100 years, there has been a slow, steady flow of power from the individual to the state in the US. Despite American history, American ideals, and some parts of the Constitution which have grown weak with disuse, these flows of power have been approved by voters. Both liberals and Republicans have played roles in this trend, and even Reagan was (unwillingly) in the grip of this populist, quasi-socialistic trend which, in my view, amounts in the end in little more than a series of power grabs from people to government, with little to show for what was bought with that bowl of lentils other than more financial security for the poor and the removal of government-supported racial discrimination.
“A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling "Stop!"” - William F. Buckley Jr.
This trend has been driven by Leftist populism, and opposed, especially in the past 30 years, by Conservative populism. (Both populisms are interestingly discussed here in the WSJ.) Populisms sell dreams, usually with an "us vs. them" theme as an emotional hook. Paul at Powerline takes a gander at Obama's populist dream-marketing (my highlighting).
It goes without saying that Barack Obama will end the hardship and "struggle" in our daily lives. Under the Yes We Can Man, folks (other than conservative bloggers) will be able to quit their second jobs, the price of gasoline will plummet, and Ivy League grads will never again have to work for hedge funds to pay off their college loans.
Nor does Obama's magic end at our borders. Last night, he said he would solve our immigration problem in part by improving the economy of Mexico to the point that illegal immigrants will have no need or desire to enter the paradise Obama will create here.
Most magically of all, Obama will fix Mexico's economy even while refusing to trade with Mexico unless it complies with U.S. labor and environmental standards.
I know the competition is fierce, but Obama may turn out to be the most intellectually dishonest Democratic presidential nominee of my lifetime.
As the nurse-anesthetist said to me before they put me out for my last colonoscopy, "Pick a dream." My dream for America is to reclaim the best of our pre-60s, pre-1930s historical character and ideals. But, OK, I am rambling, and posting truisms. I'll stop for now, and close with this:
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth.” - William F. Buckley Jr.
The roller coasters and ferris wheels are remarkable, but the main thing with k'nex is putting them together. It's a challenge, a 3-D puzzle, and that's the fun of it. Like Legos.
Quoted in a thoughtful discussion at David Thompson about the Left's internal conflict between internationalism and nationalism:
The justification for giving priority to the interests of fellow citizens boils down to a pragmatic claim about the value of the nation-state. Without fellow-citizen favouritism, the nation-state ceases to have much meaning. And most of the things that liberals desire - democracy, redistribution, welfare states, human rights - only work when one can assume the shared norms and solidarities of national communities.
It turns out that Aristotle, not Jean Buridan, first came up with the logical paradox of the hungry, thirsty ass who dies, paralyzed by indecision between a bucket of water and a pile of hay.
It's the political equivalent of Buridan's ass: with no defining issue to differentiate the candidates, Americans gravitated towards the one you'd like to have a beer with and watch a little football.
Our editor mentions another one: A MA Yankee torn between his attachment to the Berkshire Hills and Cape Cod. (God forbid that leaves you stuck inside of Worcester, MA with the Memphis blues.)
“Liberals, it has been said, are generous with other peoples' money, except when it comes to questions of national survival when they prefer to be generous with other people's freedom and security.”
Riehl:Women seem to want politicians who sympathize with how hard they work. Pathetic, but it might be the reality. Pathetic because it's their husbands and kids who should appreciate their efforts - not politicians.
If he really cares about me, he should shut up about no taxes for the greedy geezers (Why just them? Why not me, too?), and free health care, and all that nonsense. He should just do something truly useful: pay our dang Costco food bills.
Food prices are shockingly unprogressive for this enlightened, progressive era. America can do better, and there is no justice in the filthy rich paying the same price that I pay for a nice butterflied New Zealand leg o' lamb.
I paid $477.89 this afternoon to fill one lousy cart (admittedly the giant-sized Costco cart, full of lots of meat like lamb, salmon, pork loin, burger, and filets - and cheeses and fruit to supply us for a couple of weeks, plus ten years' worth of those skinny French string beans, plus the usual cleaning supplies and the random impulse buys that Costco thrives on), not to mention the gas to get there (20 miles). Food is more important and essential than anything else. Come on, Barry! "Universal Food Care" : promise me Costco food will be free in the beautiful future we all dream of.
Consider the same for Home Depot stuff, too, Barry. We cannot live without tools and lumber and cement and windows and screws and toilet parts and stuff like that. Simple justice requires that these things should be free, same as food.
Run, Ralph, run. He will. For those of you who do not live in Massachusetts, let me inform you that Nader fits right in.
Campus rape. It's everywhere, in theory. But rare as hen's teeth, in reality. What gives? Oh, now I get it. It's about feminist victim politics. Facts urgently needed to support theory. (Of course, one can always change definitions, too, when theory-support is required. I suspect that some of the lesbian feministas wish to view all heterosexual romance and fun as rape.)
Is there any relationship between global climate and hurricanes? No, but it surely causes earthquakes. Everybody knows that.
How free trade and open markets can save the world, materially speaking, with wealth, health, and easier lives. We linked this fascinating 20 minute Hans Rosling piece once before, but it deserves a repeat.
"What office do I go to to get my reputation back?" The oxycontin story. Scary story, and I have yet to hear an apology from the NYT for the job they did on Purdue Pharma. (h/t, Town Hall)
The arrogant impotence of the EU. No Pasaran, who quotes a Kissinger interview:
Kissinger: The major events in European history were conducted by nation-states which developed over several hundred years. There was never a question in the mind of European populations that the state was authorized to ask for sacrifices and that the citizens had a duty to carry it out. Now the structure of the nation-state has been given up to some considerable extent in Europe. And the capacity of governments to ask for sacrifices has diminished correspondingly.
SPIEGEL: Thirty years ago, you asked for one phone number that could be used to call Europe.
Kissinger: ... and it happened. The problem now is: Nation-states have not just given up part of their sovereignty to the European Union but also part of their vision for their own future. Their future is now tied to the European Union, and the EU has not yet achieved a vision and loyalty comparable to the nation-state. So, there is a vacuum between Europe's past and Europe's future.
(with thanks to The Anchoress for the reminder of this hopeful Psalm of David who was, indeed, a big-time sinner)
Have mercy on me, God, in your kindness. In your compassion blot out my offense. O wash me more and more from my guilt and cleanse me from my sin.
My offenses truly I know them; my sin is always before me Against you, you alone, have I sinned; what is evil in your sight I have done.
That you may be justified when you give sentence and be without reproach when you judge, see, in guilt I was born, a sinner was I conceived.
Indeed you love truth in the heart; then in the secret of my heart teach me wisdom. O purify me, then I shall be clean; O wash me, I shall be whiter than snow.
Make me hear rejoicing and gladness, that the bones you have crushed may thrill. From my sins turn away your face and blot out all my guilt.
A pure heart create for me, O God, put a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from your presence, nor deprive me of your holy spirit.
Give me again the joy of your help; with a spirit of fervor sustain me, that I may teach transgressors your ways and sinners may return to you.
O rescue me, God, my helper, and my tongue shall ring out your goodness. O Lord, open my lips and my mouth shall declare your praise.
For in sacrifice you take no delight, burnt offering from me you would refuse, my sacrifice, a contrite spirit, a humbled, contrite heart you will not spurn.
In your goodness, show favor to Zion: rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. Then you will be pleased with lawful sacrifice, (burnt offerings wholly consumed), then you will be offered young bulls on your altar.
You probably won't post this on your centrist PC blog, but let me make a case for affirmative action in so-called "selective" institutions of so-called "higher education."
As an undergraduate at an Ivy university, I have given up on any hopes of diversity of political opinion. The politics here are fashionably Maoist and this place is packed with tenured radicals left over from the 60s who still think their thinking is "advanced." It's a joke, really, and most of us see it for what it is.
However, I would like to see some "affimative action" in the admission policy for female undergrads.
Specifically, they need to make a serious effort to recruit and admit more cute females who are comfortable with their femininity. There are not enough of them to go around for us wholesome, regular heterosexual fellows, so we are forced to go elsewhere to find them; forced to forage widely and inconveniently to the environs of BC and, if desperate and half in the bag, BU.
Never to MIT, believe me.
What makes it worse is that some of the gal students here, who could look great, do not. As a socio-political fashion statement, they do not try to look good. They try to look dowdy, or 60s, or scholarly, or to create the illusion of indifference to their appearance, or to look like dikes. It's just not appealing to a guy for a female to look unfeminine.
I know that you will tell me that they will fix this appearance thing when they go for their job interviews at Goldman Sachs and McKinsey, but what about now? Would gals be drawn to me if I wore a skirt instead of khakis and a Brooks Brothers shirt? If it would work, I'd give it a try...
I think my idea is reasonable, since affirmative action is all about appearances anyway. So, as a consequence of my experience, I have decided to support the idea of affirmative action solutions to the statistically disproportionate lack of cute, charming, appealingly-dressed females on Ivy campuses - regardless of skin color, religion or lack thereof, ethnicity, dietary preference, or political orientation.
Your devoted nephew,
T.
PS: I dare you to post this on Maggie's. PPS: I have attached a photo of the sort of person I mean: cheerful, chipper, outdoorsy cuties who like sports is all I ask for. Smart, but they do not need to be rocket scientists. I almost went to Theo's place for a bethonged example, but thought it might detract - or distract - from the sincerity of my earnest plea for fairness.
This is a reposting from2006, prompted by a post by Surber about the dramatic resurgence of the wolf populations in the northern Rockies. Also related to the Crichton video posted today.
The ways that ecological interactions take place is always fascinating to me, and unpredictable. The return of wolves to Yellowstone Park is a case study.
Wolves kill more elk, balancing the elk population and driving the elk to safe zones, thus permitting the return of normal willow growth along river edges, thus cooling and stabilizing rivers resulting in bigger trout, and happy songbirds, and generally more biodiversity. And the wolves kill coyotes, thus there are more fox and mice and little critters, and more and happier hawks. Sadly, a parvovirus from domestic dogs threatens the 170 Yellowstone wolves. I guess no-one brought them in for their shots.
"Apex predators" are a key piece of any ecological puzzle. I'd like to see our native Timber Wolf returned to New England, along with the Elk who used to live in the Northeast. It would solve the deer infestation and the coyote infestation, and might reduce the number of cats and dopey little ankle-biter dogs in suburbia, too. Politically, it might be tough - can you imagine running for state office with a campaign promise to return wolves to Pittsfield, MA? But maybe they will come under their own steam, the way the coyotes did - which were never native to the Northeast and which cannot take on a whitetail deer.
Skiing again in the morning.Okemo this time, and I am about to head up there for the weekend. Not a particularly challenging mountain (a "family mountain" for sure), but closer, and with the loan of a friend's condo and today's snow, some good fun without expense. Sometimes I wish that fall, with hunting, and winter with skiing, could simply rotate all year. One more reason to welcome the coming global cooling.
PressThink takes a thoughtful look at the NYT and the McCain content-less story. Makes ya wonder. Yes, The NYT is looking bad,again. I'd be embarassed to bring that "story" to my City Editor. My instinct tells me that the story was "ordered" from the top, and did not come from the guys on the ground. However, here's a real story that the NYT has not followed.
More truth about Obama: His stance on gun rights. These lefties have absolutely no concept of the limits of government power which means, to me, no respect for the population. And what about this? Bernadette Dohrn?
Did we mention this? The AP instructs on how to play the Fidel retirement story. OK, we all know that it's a happy country full of happy slaves, enjoying their "health care" while singing and dancing all day long, and never worrying their heads about politics at all. It probably is a paradise for the rulers, as long as they are sociopaths.
Feeling bad can be good for you. The miracle of melancholia. I guess I believe that the right amount of pain and heartache is good for us, but when do we get to say that we have had enough?
What happens when a Lefty wonders about global warming. Sheesh. Talk about Stalin.
Since when is being labelled a 
These folks make 
It turns out that 
I'm hungry. 
If he really cares about me, he should shut up about no taxes for the greedy geezers (Why just them? Why not me, too?), and free health care, and all that nonsense. He should just do something truly useful: pay our dang Costco food bills. 
"What office do I go to to get my reputation back?" 
A recent email from a nephew:
The ways that ecological interactions take place is always fascinating to me, and unpredictable. The return of wolves to Yellowstone Park is a case study. 
Skiing again in the morning. 
A friend laid a box of the