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.
I see psychoanalysis, art and biology ultimately coming together, just like cognitive psychology and neuroscience have merged recently. You have specifically selected examples, which I use not to illustrate how science can enhance insight into art. Rather I use them to show how artists had insights into the mind that Freud did not have and that enriched and corrected what Freud taught us. This is what concerns me in the first third of the book. It is in the second and third parts of the book that I outline a biological approach to how we respond to a work of art...
Amtrak has around 20,000 employees with an average income of $90,000. I thought that the government takeover of passenger rail had been meant to be a temporary rescue measure, but I guess I was wrong.
Now I am not sure why passenger rail should be viewed any differently from the also-government-supported interstate highway system, or government-supported airports, but Clark Whelton claims Amtrak is a jobs program on wheels.
Where should one draw the line on taxpayer support of life amenities? I must confess that the high-speed Boston-Providence-NYC-Philly-Baltimore-DC Acela service is a very fine and heavily-used amenity for those in the Northeast corridor, as are the New York area commuter trains.
I'm on the road and using my laptop (barf) so this'll be short. Just a reminder that the third and final (praise be) presidential debate is on tonight. Showtime for the event in 9 pm Eastern. More info & a streamcast here.
By the way, in case you were out of the country planet last week and were wondering who won the debate, you'll be interested to know that both sides won. Democracy in action! Obama won the 'Overall Likeability' contest (which counts for half, as I understand it) but in every issue-oriented question ("Who do you think will best improve the economy?" e.g.), Romney won it walking away.
I think we'll see a general repeat of last week tonight. Three things will happen; both candidates will be at their best, the moderator will make damn sure Obama is protected from the slings and arrows of outrageous truth, and the MSM will pick one single Romney quote ("binders") to go nuts over. The usual stuff, in other words.
Re Mitt Romney’s toughest debate, he probably can't "win" on details of foreign policy. However, the election is not about details of foreign policy. There are no votes in the Benghazi mess up and coverup, and nobody cares too much about the entire crack-up in the ME, or whether Obama hearts Putin.
I think Romney can make his mark on two themes. First, the importance that America remain the leader of the free world, and the most generous and helpful nation on the planet. Second, that America's beneficial influence is founded on two things: our ideas of freedom and the wealth born of (relatively) free markets. The Reagan approach, minus the Cold War. That leads back to talking about prosperity at home.
(If he has the nerve to talk about respect, and bowing to foreign leaders, that would be fun but would not win any votes. This is fun too: Chavez, Castro, Putin endorse Obama... )
Obama’s last stand is also the Democratic Party’s last stand. A hundred years of foreign policy and economic failures at the hands of a corrupt mafia is about to come home to roost. The Democratic Party has marginalized itself, abandoning mainstream Americans while openly embracing a trillion dollar welfare state.
Iconography elevated Obama as it did FDR and JFK, but it cannot see him through a constellation of crises. And if he falls, then his party falls with him.
Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post offers three varying explanations for the muddle of Obama administration reactions and statements to the attack on our consulate in Benghazi: Ideological Denial, Willful Deception, and Simple Incompetence. Rubin neatly sums up each. Notice, Rubin does not say "competing" but "variations" of explanations. IMHO, all three apply. Her column is worth reading before tomorrow night's presidential debate over foreign policy, to help cut through the chaff that will surely be tossed out by Obama.
"Is there a doctor in the house?" is likely to be increasingly heard in coming years, according to one of the largest surveys ever of doctors. The Physicians Foundation contacted most of the doctors in the US and had the replies checked for statistical representativeness. Among the results:
A whopping 61 percent of doctors said they would retire today if they had the ability to do so. That's up from 45 percent in 2008.
More than 68 percent of doctors have a negative view of the current state of the medical profession. Just 3.9 percent have a "very positive" view.
Nearly three-quarters of all doctors have a pessimistic view of the future of the medical profession. Just 3.1 percent have a "very optimistic" view.
More than 59 percent of doctors have a more negative view of the medical profession as a result of ObamaCare. Just 18.5 percent of doctors have a more positive view as a result of ObamaCare.
Nearly 56 percent of doctors believe that more widespread use of health savings accounts will improve quality and reduce costs.
Nearly 73 percent of doctors believe that less government regulation will improve quality and reduce costs.
More than 35 percent of doctors have closed their practice to Medicare and/or Medicaid patients. That's up from 24 percent in 2008.
I tend to think of the Caribbean as a place for sailing. Nothing else to do there unless you like to sit in a chair and order umbrella drinks like Milton Waddams. Get to Tortola, grab some snorkeling gear, lease a bareboat and island-hop around the BVI while imbibing rum is a good plan.
But Guana Island is another thing: a nature preserve, a privately-owned 800-acre island, and takes only 30 guests at a time. I'll call it Jurassic Park because they are dedicated to restoring native species. No Limbo Rock, guaranteed.
(The "Enter" button doesn't work. Stop pushing it. Use my link.)
#8) Only in America would we make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just become American citizens
Conservatives in particular need to accept that Cuba is now just another loser Third World dictatorship, ruled by parasite-gangsters who ought to be hanging from lampposts, but who do not pose a strategic threat to the security of our republic.
No Humanitarian Aid on Estelle Ship, Says IDF - The IDF has confirmed that there was no humanitarian aid on the Estelle, the boat which sought to break Israel’s naval blockade on Gaza
10:35 James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came forward to him and said to him, "Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you."
10:36 And he said to them, "What is it you want me to do for you?"
10:37 And they said to him, "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory."
10:38 But Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?"
10:39 They replied, "We are able." Then Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized;
10:40 but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared."
10:41 When the ten heard this, they began to be angry with James and John.
10:42 So Jesus called them and said to them, "You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them.
10:43 But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant,
10:44 and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all.
10:45 For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many."
Two of my pics from an Adirondacks hunting trip a couple of years ago. Drive from covert to covert. Each one 2-3 hrs. of rough, off-trail brush-busting. Good fun, great work-out for man and dogs.
Current affairs afficionados like me - and like many of our readers - are probably on the thin end of the bell curve of voter information. Since we usually talk to roughly equally informed and interested people, we need to remember that many people are minimally-informed or not very interested in public affairs or policy.
Fox news interviewed some "WalMart Moms" this morning, and the Moms agreed with this statement: "We don't really know enough about the candidates yet."
I suppose this is why image, identity, and emotion are so important, especially in national elections. I suspect that this was true even before TV. I wonder what percentage of voters occupy the "low information" category.
The Pirate found these great examples of low-information voters, not at WalMart but at university:
Obama is 1/2 black (half-cool), of seemingly ambiguous sexual orientation (cool), wants to be friends with Jihadists (double-cool), and wants to make the grown-ups give us youths free stuff (triple-cool). It is literally a "no brainer."
I was that unwise in my callow youth, but I knew more than these morons who probably could not locate Libya on a map. How did these bozos get into college?
I’m not a fan of remote psychoanalyzing individuals or groups. Without sufficient personal time with the individual, it is guesswork about their motivations. Without sufficient such information about the members of the group, and taking account of differences in behavior within the group compared to individually, it can compound the errors. I think one can get enough information from an individual or group's behavior.
(NOTE: Steve just emailed me this, and I agree: " I, like you am not a fan of psychoanalyzing individuals I don't know, however applying some psychological perspective to a movement and ideology and its symbols is fair I think.")
Nonetheless, my friend Steve Rittenhouse M.D. is a noted psychoanalyst of many decades experience. In a piece at American Thinkerhe tries to make sense of the liberal attachment to defending Big Bird after the first presidential debate. Big Bird earns tens of millions of dollars and does not need taxpayer subsidy. This attachment is simply pathetic. Personally, I think the Obama partisans are just desperately grasping at straws, or feathers, to have anything to chant while avoiding Obama’s myriad failures.
Here’s the gist of Steve Rittenhouse’s thoughts:
Fifty years of clinical observation have taught me the unwillingness of many to relinquish childhood dreams of perfect bliss….
Gov. Romney in one witty comment suggested that it is time to grow up, to relinquish the utopian fantasy of a blissful androgynous childhood free of conflict.In one comment, he leveled a blast at the feminized metrosexual culture of contemporary liberalism.He went on to link his opponent to childhood, by likening him to his own boys when they were young, a time when wishes often prevail over reality.
No wonder liberals reacted with rage.No wonder the president mentioned his defense of Big Bird thirteen times in the week following the debate.Liberals long for what Big Bird represents: that utopian childish dream world where differences of gender, talent, fortune, looks, race, color, intelligence, etc. do not exist….
In the coming election, America is choosing not just between different domestic and foreign policy alternatives.It is choosing at a deeper level the shared idea of America.There are two competing and conflicting versions.There is the shared liberal fantasy of an America that is an egalitarian utopia….
This liberal vision of America is now in a contest with another, older shared idea of America.This older idea asserts that our greatness lies in our uniqueness -- the uniqueness of our founding and of the generations that followed.It asserts that we are unique in our history and composed of individuals, each with different abilities and limitations….
Let us not underestimate the skill with which the president is able to represent his postmodern, androgynous, egalitarian vision.He goes on The View and schmoozes with Oprah, just like the gossipy woman next door.He prides himself on identifying with angry women and children.You would not be surprised to hear him share his deep feeling for what women go through physically when the patriarchy forces them to submit to men.Maybe a government program can correct this unfairness.His opponent, on the other hand, represents an older American ideal -- a proud, unapologetic ideal that doesn't blur the differences between the sexes, but celebrates them.He is combating an elite media, educational, and journalistic culture that has been promoting the utopian views of aggrieved, entitled liberalism for years.How far has America gone down that cultural road?This coming election will tell us a great deal about where we are and what we have become.
Read the whole thing. Share it with a liberal friend. Tell them it's less costly than $100 or $200 an hour on the psychoanalyst's couch.
A sweet disorder in the dress Kindles in clothes a wantonness; A lawn about the shoulders thrown Into a fine distraction; An erring lace, which here and there Enthrals the crimson stomacher; A cuff neglectful, and thereby Ribands to flow confusedly; A winning wave, deserving note, In the tempestuous petticoat; A careless shoe-string, in whose tie I see a wild civility: Do more bewitch me, than when art Is too precise in every part.
Mrs. BD and I stopped by the Villa Zuccari last summer, in the wine country of the Valnerina (the valley of the Nera River) outside Montefalco. It's only an approx. 3-hour drive from the Rome airport. The Appennines in the distance. It's an easy rural drive to Spoleto, Spello, Assisi, and, of course, our favorite village of Norcia which means GOOD FOOD. We checked out the Villa's menu, in which nobody could be disappointed.
We felt it would be a perfect spot for a destination wedding. Here are a couple of my pics:
I'm not going to even try to delve into the actual history within which this film takes place nor the religious context. That's flavor, but the meat is simply one of the most powerful films I've seen about how men think, wrestle, reach decision, come together in the face of life and death and moreso in the face of their meaning on earth.
I'd missed this movie last year so I went to see a showing at the local community college. For two hours, the audience was entirely silent, barely a stirring, and left the theater quietly and deep in individual thoughts.
I doubt this movie could have been made in Hollywood. Hollywood's films exalt the rebel against the establishment, standing against the group, and with little respect for traditional values. This French film exhibits the importance of community, of spirit, and how very individual men bravely reach common agreement about their mission.
The film takes place in the Algerian mountains in the mid-1990s. It just as well takes place within all our communities. The choices we make may not be as immediately fearful but are just as dire for our standing before Gods and Men.
At least, that's my take. If you've seen this movie, I'd be interested in your Comments.
NOTE Update: A friend who is very knowledgeable Catholic priest tells me that this order portrayed in the film are not as pacifist as the script, so the screenwriter likely imposed some of his own characterization of how he thinks Catholic monks think and behave. The actors chosen to portray the characters, he feels, do an excellent job.
Home schooling has been around forever. Whether it was the wealthy with education via Moms and tutors, or poor immigrants working all day and then educating themselves in the New York Public Library, or pioneer kids like Abe Lincoln, it was all home schooling.
As one example, Teddy Roosevelt - who wrote more books and articles than any President ever - never attended any school until he went to Harvard College. (As I recall, though, he did have to cram his Ancient Greek and Chemistry a bit for the Harvard entrance exams. At home, of course.)
Here's a good update on the topic, explaining why the Education Establishment is hostile to home schooling.
Related to the topic is the latest educational egalitarian wackiness coming out of France. Schneiderman does a good semi-rant on the topic: Dumbing Down Education in France. Many are not aware that there are similar Harrison Bergeron movements afoot in the US.
I'm on the road and using my laptop (barf) so this'll be short. Just a reminder that the third and final (praise be) presidential debate is on tonight. Showtime for the event in 9 pm Eastern. More info & a streamcast 
5 Life Advantages You Acquire from Experiencing Poverty
. That's flavor, but the meat is simply one of the most powerful films I've seen about how men think, wrestle, reach decision, come together in the face of life and death and moreso in the face of their meaning on earth.