Thursday, November 6. 2008
An old Stanley Brothers song. Lyrics here. This sweet and soulful performance was at Irving Plaza, NYC, in 1997:
 From May of this year. h/t, Ed Driscoll:
I grew up in the 1950s, supposedly the heyday of conformity, but there was much more freedom of opinion back then. And as a result, you knew that your neighbors might hold different views from you on politics or religion. Today, the notion that men of good will can disagree has disappeared. Can you imagine! Today, if I disagree with you, you conclude there is something wrong with me. This is a childish, parochial view. And of course stupefyingly intolerant. It's truly anti-American. Much of it can be laid at the feet of the environmental movement, which has unfortunately frequently been led by ill-educated and intolerant spokespersons--often with no more than a high-school education, sometimes not even that. Or they are lawyers trained to win at any cost and to say anything about their opponents to win. But you find the same intolerant tone around considerations of defense, taxation, free markets, universal medical care, and so on. There's plenty of zealotry to go around. And it's hardly new in human history. The media might stand as a corrective, cool and a bit detached, showing by example how to approach information and controversy. Instead, the media has clearly caught the fever of our intolerant times. Formerly, news people would never openly state their allegiance; young reporters understood it was poor form, and a senior person would carry the caution born of the experience that at least some of what one believes in the course of one's life turns out to be wrong. But it's a new era. Now, media reporters are proud to pound the table and declare their advocacy. Since so few of them have any training in science, they don't really know what they are pounding about, when it comes to global warming. They couldn't tell you even in general terms how the global mean temperature is calculated, for example. But it doesn't matter anyway. They just want to declare they believe what "everyone" believes. Who values such a news source?
 What's new with brain-computer interfacing?
Psychologists study the minds and brains of psychopaths. The New Yorker. It's important to be able to identify psychopaths, so you can stay away from them. Very useful new office stamp. Every desk needs one of these. Tagging Bluefin Tuna. Very cool. I did not know that they were essentially a warm-blooded fish. Ran a mile with a rabid fox clamped to her arm. Sounds like something from Carl Hiassen. Red really is the color of love. h/t, Flares. Hmmm. I think most women look best in black. China's Space industry is taking off Dr. William Gray on The Over-Hyping of Green. We view "green" as simply a fashionable marketing tool, but we are big on land and marine conservation. Women have more germs than men. A nice post on Crichton at Reference Frame Oldest Hebrew text found Thinking about how T.S. Eliot found God. I sorta wish Gaghdad would resist the temptation to spill into politics. Crusading for the Everglades, behind the scenes. Good for her, and good for Paul Tudor Jones too. Rich folks have their purposes. "Poverty and disadvantage are a better preparation for success than wealth and capitalizing on advantage.” Malcolm Gladwell. Adversity helps. But what is "success"? Markets in everything: "gold-farming" in China "A successful market-timing Man will typically have a portfolio composed of 60% High-end Hookers, 30% High-end GFs and 10% value High-end Wives when the market is bottoming. As the cycle comes around..." read the rest.
Wednesday, November 5. 2008
Dead of cancer at 65. Obit here. An MD, a storyteller, a TV producer, and a scientist, he's been one of our favorite folks. I repost this well-known talk by Crichton on the complexity of nature from 2005 for the benefit of readers who might have missed it. Damn interesting, especially with respect to the effects of human intervention. (The text of his talk, with images, is here.)
 Election season has brought us a wealth of new readers, visitors, and commenters.
Pull up a tractor and stick around for a while. We aren't just about politics. Don't be a stranger.
 I am with Right Wing Prof on this
The NYT was spinning so fast that they can't stop now. Or maybe they will be spinning in their grave. What's "middle class," and why does the Liberal elite have contempt for it? I'm not dead yet! SDA. Sheesh. We need more laws against hate! Related: From Thomas Frank: Liberals shouldn't be overconfident. Whither affirmative action? Thompson. Unless you want to make the case that we stuck a black guy with the most thankless job on earth. Related, re Bush via Roger Simon: Our failure to stand by the one person who continued to stand by us has not gone unnoticed by our enemies. It has shown to the world how disloyal we can be when our president needed loyalty — a shameful display of arrogance and weakness that will haunt this nation long after Mr. Bush has left the White House.
Also related: Will everyone get a pony? We get a photo of Coyote. I think he's the one on the left. Just one more Princeton blogger. Still spinning despair at the LAT, but as Surber notes: Yes, yes, yes. I see. Unemployment is 6%. Gasoline prices are a whopping $2 a gallon. The Dow is 9,000. People are actually paying cash for things. Run for your lives. I read stuff like this online and I am reminded of reporter Ken Herman’s observation: “If there’s anything reporters know better than math, it’s fashion.”
Was this a "I want my Mommy" election? I don't think so, mostly. From Insty: RUNNING THE NUMBERS: "More generally, the picture is of a solid Democratic win, but not the tsunami some had expected. Obama won the popular vote by a solid, but not crushing, margin of slightly less than six percent (52.4-46.5). Bill Clinton beat Bob Dole by a significantly greater margin and even greater relative percentage (49.25-40.71), and George Bush by a slightly lower margin, but higher relative percentage (43.01-37.45). Bush, meanwhile, beat Dukakis by a larger margin, 53.4 to 45.6. The Democrats picked up about twenty House seats, on the low end of the expected range. And, as noted above, they seem likely to pick up five or six Senate seats,which would make the Senate races either 18-16 in favor of the Democrats, or tied at 17-17, again on the low end of the expected range."
VDH wonders how Obama will govern. I agree that he deliberately made himself a mystery man. One of VDH's comments: I don’t know what Obama feels about drilling, nuclear power, FISA, NAFTA, capital punishment, abortion, guns, Iran, the surge, Jerusalem, campaign financing, etc. But I do get the impression that he is more or less cognizant that most of his views around 2006 were at odds with the American people’s, and so he had to change or drop them (and most of his social circle) to get elected, or at least mention them only at small private gatherings in San Francisco. The mystery? Will he revert back to the constant Obama of the last 30 years who waged dirty 1996 and 2004 campaigns, and shared apparently ideologies with Ayers, Khalidi, Pfleger, and Wright and others in his Chicago extremist cadre? Or will he govern as a center-leftist, corralling a Frank, Pelosi, and Reed and the most fringe beyond them?
Which of the following items on the immediate Dem domestic agenda do you support?  Employee Free Choice Act - Fairness Doctrine
- Freedom of Choice Act
- Nationalization of health care
- Estate tax increases
- "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" (driver's licenses for illegals)
- Capital gains tax increases
- Defense cuts
- Liberal judicial appointments
- Racial and ethnic preferences
- Income tax increases
- Bans on oil drilling
- Global poverty tax/Kyoto
A quote from an essay on forgiveness in literature, Why Mephistopheles had to work overtime, by Michael Dirda: Perhaps the most striking musical expression of forgiveness occurs in Mozart’s opera The Marriage of Figaro. Caught pursuing a servant girl, Count Almaviva pleads for forgiveness for his duplicity and attempted infidelity. The countess, in a supreme moment of charity, grants him his tearful wish, even as she half-knows that he’s sure to betray her again. Mozart’s music at this point shifts its whole tonal character, and immediately achieves a kind of hushed holiness. It’s just breathtaking when heard. Similarly, Leonard Bernstein’s music to Candide concludes with a general forgiveness of sins and injuries. In a beautiful last chorus all the characters admit that they have been “neither pure, nor wise, nor good.” But from now, “We’ll do the best we know. We’ll build our house and chop our wood. And make our garden grow.”
Read the whole thing. I forgive because I constantly need forgiveness - even though holding grudges is much more fun. However, I never forget. Here's "Contessa, perdono:"
 Our friend Chris Shays (R-CT), the only Republican Congressman left in New England, was swept out of office on a wave of Obamamania emanating from his home town of sad old Bridgeport.
Conservatives loved to complain about his moderate positions, but he had no choice in his district. He was replaced by Dem Jim Himes, a young (retired) very wealthy (and rational, or so I am told) Wall Streeter (Goldman guy) from Greenwich. Go figure. Photo is Chris Shays.
Quote from an 85 year-old codger neighbor yesterday afternoon (WW2 gunner, devout Roman Catholic, Repub, widower, master tomato-grower): "I like John McCain, but I had to vote for a change. You turn on the nightly news and the whole country seems like it's just going to hell. We have to do something different." There you go.
 Wow. The people spoke. The silver lining I can find in this cloud is that we elected a black guy as President. That is remarkable and quite wonderful. I wish him wisdom. Still, I had hoped that the first black Pres would be from the party of Lincoln.
Another plus is that the Repubs will be forced to renew and refresh themselves, and come up with a farm team of younger, smarter, more exciting and more inspiring candidates, with messages to suit the times. And I do not mean Mitt Romney. I'll admit to feeling bummed, but not at all surprised, by the outcome. I think John McCain did darn well considering everything that was dragging him down: a relentlessly hostile press, a hugely unpopular Bush, union money and a huge campaign $ disparity, economic fears, age, the Obama Cult of Personality - and his awareness throughout that the tides were running against him. Not to mention the perennial problem that Conservatives have in elections: they rightly find it hard to make goody-bag promises because they put their faith in free people rather than in government. I doubt anyone could have done better than McCain did this year, and I doubt he would have done better with Giuliani instead of Palin. The press would have Palinized Rudy too. (Well, on further thought, maybe Rudy could have done a better job than McCain: he's brighter and quicker but, perhaps, less likeable.) I think the Dems face the danger of over-reading this election. It's a common error for both parties. I do not feel that this election was an endorsement of a left-wing agenda but more an expression of general unease, Bush-fatique, and disgruntlement - mixed with a strong dose of celebrity-excitement. It's still the same center-right nation that it was last year, and every move the Dems make now will annoy some group or other. This Congressional leadership is not only loony-left but full of vengeance - and pent-up spending ideas. Hold onto your wallets, because we could quickly become the highest-taxed country in the developed world (we're almost there already). But who is going to benefit immediately from this election? - Gun dealers. If there are a few guns you've always wanted, now's the time.
- Tax accountants, tax lawyers, financial planners and estate planners
- Off-shore bankers
- Off-shore realtors: watch more businesses move divisions to foreign HQs which are more hospitable to enterprise. And, finally, consider this condundrum, especially those readers who are my fellow conservatives: How does one win national elections when you have to concede NY, California, and the rust belt in advance? Not to mention my New England?
Tuesday, November 4. 2008
I planned to post something like this, but Tiger did it first, and better. Wake me up when it's over.
Dems will silence talk radio. They mean, mainly, Rush and Sean. No plans to silence Keith Olberman. No word yet about silencing Maggie's Farm. I'd like to see them try. Dem Leader announces- "Keeping Your Own Money a 'Simplistic Notion.' " I guess I lack the requisite nuance. Somebody told me today about quiet Dem plans for federal "asset taxes" in addition to income taxes. They already get half when I die. They want it before I die? Vote fraud update, as of last night. Am I a chump for only voting once? What's going on in my country? Voting guards in Philly. Sheesh. Like Jules, I thought the Black Panthers would be using walkers these days, but these are the New Black Panthers, fresh out of the woodwork:
Is "gracious" the word for that, now? I can think of other words for it.
in Philly. No doubt they promised to "deliver" PA and will do anything to keep the promise.
Every collectivist revolution rides in on a Trojan horse of ‘emergency’. Herbert Hoover, a fine, if highly unlucky, president
 Since we're voting mostly - but not entirely - Repub today, I'm thinking that it would be fun to have Wooly Mammoths around again (and just in time for global cooling). Some probably think we are such paleocons here that an extinct Wooly Mammoth should be our symbol. But maybe they can come back to life...
Richard Baehr's election predictions. Assuming that Obama wins, I wouldn't underestimate the power of the endorsements by people like Warren Buffet, Colin Powell, Bill Weld, and others who provided Establishment respectability cover for a guy whose kind of shady past would never have survived press scrutiny had he been a Repub. Fr. West's Blog: 100+ reasons not to vote for Obama Larry Auster is writing in Tom Tancredo. That's a de facto vote for Obama. Re this morning's video ad, one might say "All that is missing is a statement from Obama saying that this is not the Obama that he knew…" I think this fellow is in over his head. GRE scores ranked by field of graduate study. It helps explain why financial firms like to hire Physics PhDs: they are smart. The "home ATM" is shutting down. Why do some animals' eyes glow at night? An instant Gay Test (for guys) Americans in Israel: 74% for McCain. Duh. Re Sarah: Typical politics. Yep, smears and insinuations stick. That's why people use them. The "politics of personal destruction" is fine when Dems use it. But where does Sarah go to get her reputation back? Repubs have been losing the media battlefield since 1968. Indeed. We have noted that here many times. Many people seem to go into that field to save the world without doing anything themselves. Whither Conservatism? McArdle. I read such things with skepticism, because I think politics has a lot to do with timing and the right communicative talent and tone for the time. Often those seem more important than ideology. Bush was not elected on ideology. Obama, via Blue Crab: You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.
From Dr. Sanity: "WE MUST NOT LET THE DEMOCRATS AND THE LEFT GET AWAY WITH THE PREMISE THAT OBJECTIVE REALITY DOES NOT EXIST. WE MUST NOT LET THEM ARGUE THAT ALL TRUTH IS RELATIVE, BUT THEN CLAIM THAT THEY ALONE POSSESS IT EXCLUSIVELY."
Related: Shrinkwrapped also waxes Chestertonian, but it's not a religious argument.
No wonder people are confused by Obama's positions on things. Obama attacks himself on every issue of significance:
Monday, November 3. 2008
Jerry Nadler notes that Obama has no political courage. Let's hope that Obama is the pantywaist he seems to be. I am not so sure about Reid and Pelosi...
Your Editor here at Maggie's will vote tomorrow (even though there is no point in ever voting) out of duty and citizenship. We promise no blame or recriminations towards anybody (except the press) if our preferred candidates lose in these elections which entail much more than just presidential elections, and we promise not to go hysterical, infantile, and paranoid like the Left tends to do if we don't get our way. (Well, but we may all move into Habu's cabin in Montana.)Related to that, our guest poster Bruce Kesler has some thoughts in anticipation of vox populi: What McCain did right and conservatives wrong By Bruce Kesler Over the past four years, conservatives have debated whether the Republican Party is serving them and the country. This discussion was stirred by several proposals by the Bush administration -- particularly not vetoing some budget-busters, the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, and the immigration reforms that didn’t prioritize border controls – and the failure to fire back at the gross distortions and language by opponents. Bush earned respect for his stalwart stance in Iraq, but even there lost points for his failure to act earlier to change a troubled strategy and command. Seeming backpeddling and soft-shoeing on the threats from Iran and North Korea, though following closer to the liberals’ playbook, didn’t earn him support from liberals or conservatives. The debate among conservatives and libertarians after this election is likely to grow much more heated, whether McCain wins or loses. Although conservatives have stood most strongly behind McCain, conservatives do not expect much thanks or loyalty from McCain if he wins, and do expect McCain to continue his practice of alliance with many liberal proposals, as he has in the past. That alone will add heat the pot. On the other hand, conservatives will welcome his Trumanesque temper and bluntness replying to the likely continuation of intemperate Democrats in the Congress. If McCain loses, conservatives will likely place most of the blame on him and his campaign for failing to take more advantage of Obama’s coterie of radical mentors, to alert more voters of their dangers. At the same time, in defense of McCain’s campaign approach, those most likely to hold these associations as important are aware of them. Meanwhile, in a campaign during which the overwhelming portion of the major media have utterly failed to research or expose Obama’s lack of record and record of shady allies, McCain would likely not have gotten much further in educating the wider public. So, McCain has concentrated on trying to woo marginal voters. Those non-partisans react more to appearances and mood. McCain earned none of the points he should have for trying to tackle the credit-economic meltdown, even by comparison to Obama’s passivity. Neither did McCain draw attention to the Congress’ tainted hands in creating it, but there are many Republican members who sat by and prospered from the false sense of well-being that preceded the deluge. McCain did not throw the Congressional Republicans under the bus, as Obama repeatedly did every time a mentor was exposed. And, McCain did exhibit a bully optimism in reacting to the meltdown and focused on quick actions. It is that indefatigable optimism and sense of fair play that has been highlighted and redounded to his credit. This is in line with his military and political record of bravely meeting challenges. Despite every odd, McCain has fought the election to a near thing. Conservatives must recognize that, for any of McCain or his campaign’s failings, it is among conservatives that reform must come. Much of our NY-DC commentariat are corrupted by overlong proximity to comfortable power and cocktail circuits, exhibiting callowness, lethargy or outright capitulation. Their lack of principle and intestinal fortitude must be replaced. Much of our bloggers have been consumed by editorializing and not organizing. The think-tanks we built and many major donors have been cringing or avoiding confrontation. Rank and file conservatives mostly looked to this inadequate leadership instead of to ourselves to step forward and fight. It will take a major overhaul to revive the conservative movement. As in 1964, it will not come from the establishment, but must depend on openness to new participants and leaders. Of course, that does not mean fringe elements or ideas. The crucial role that National Review played post-1964 in guarding against that will require a new central forum of conservative sanity and principle. No one can predict where they will come from. But they must be encouraged, welcomed and supported when they appear. Indeed, each of us must see in ourselves the willingness and determination to be those participants and leaders.
George Orwell wrote his most famous short essay, Politics and the English Language, in 1946. I would encourage all of our readers to read, or re-read it, when you have a few minutes. One excerpt:  Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, ‘I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so’. Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:
‘While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.’
The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find — this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify — that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship. But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought...
Here's the whole thing.
|
