Maggie's Farm

I own a couple of small Grillos, and had a nice chat with the fine old gent and his wife last summer on the Cape. I will buy one of his large oils when my piggy bank is full. He has moved through a number of styles, but mostly in the general abstract expressionism direction. The gal is his wife, if I am not mistaken, perhaps in her younger years:

TNR has always had more influence than its small (and shrinking) subscription base would suggest.

As I was reading Roger Simon's bit on the subject of TNR's most recent suicidal hijinks with Beauchamp, the answer came to me to the question "Why does anyone care at all about TNR?" After all, TNR has fewer  subscribers than Maggie's Farm has visitors in one month - and we are tiny.

We care not only because TNR was once a serious, thoughful magazine which many respected even if disagreeing (up through Andrew Sullivan's excellent editorship), but the main reason we care is because many of us policy and politics junkies relied on TNR in our foolish and liberal youths. We eagerly awaited its arrival in the mail. We have a sentimental attachment to the old rag. She always made us think, and she was always literate - more so than any blog I know. Way beyond what Timesweek was.

However, even my considerable sentimentality has its limits. TNR has passed them at this point.

I feel the same way about the NYT which I cancelled in disgust two years ago: I like the Book Review; I like their Arts pages; I like their Food stuff; I like their Theater stuff and and Car stuff and the Science section, etc - but their corrupting political partisanship and their PC obsession spoils all of the good stuff for me. Dang - I guess I could say the same thing about The New Yorker too since Tina Brown destroyed it for me.

Sad, sad, and sad. Past loves, all undone by a grandiosity that made them want to change the world in their own image, instead of being satisfied with the highly worthy and noble goal of illuminating it.

Tips for teachers, from Right Wing Prof

John Leo interviews VDH on Why Study War, at Minding the Campus

A threatening school drawing? New Yet Melted. Man, they should see the bloody stuff we drew in grammar school. Especially shooting Japs and shooting down Jap planes.

Infantile America, re subprime loans: View from 1776

How come the press hasn't mentioned this cold August we have been having in the Northeast? I have a sweater on at this moment, and we have been using the heat all week. That was just a rhetorical question: this weather doesn't fit The Narrative, I know. If it were a heat wave instead of a cold snap, it would be front page news.

Physicists ask whether existence is a virtual reality. Neurophilosophy. Of course it is. I think, therefore I am a confused SOB.

But existence sure feels real when you have a sore hip, or when you are 21 and your girlfriend dumps you, or when you can't pay your bills. No need to drop a little acid before reading the links: reality is strange enough on its own. 

How much does happiness depend on money and opportunity? Or is happiness just a fortunate state of mind? I tend to think the latter.

Money provides choices, which are wonderful things, but choices do not make people happy. Indeed, I believe that many would be happier with fewer choices in our choice-intoxicated America.

Arthur Brooks in City Journal on What Really Buys Happiness? It's mostly about income. A quote:

Edwards is one of a group of liberal politicians, policymakers, and social activists who want to reduce economic inequality through greater taxation and redistribution of wealth. And their plan draws inspiration from a particular academic theory: that inequality is socially destructive because it makes people miserable. As a scholar working in the field of public policy, I have long witnessed hand-wringing about the alleged connection between inequality and unhappiness. What first made me doubt this prevailing view was not some new scholarly study but rather that when I questioned actual human beings about it, few expressed any shock and outrage at the enormous wealth of software moguls and CEOs. On the contrary, they tended to hope that their kids might become the next Bill Gates.

Read it all. It appears that liberals and the left tend to be unhappier people in general. Perhaps we conservatives just are genetically blessed with sunnier dispositions.

Dr. Roy Spencer on the growing numbers of AGW deniers, at TCS:

Little damage was done by the Gore-Newsweek assault, though, since the attack amounted to little more than a verbal "Well, your mama wears Army boots!" It didn't help matters that the magazine's own columnist, Robert Samuelson, published a follow-up article saying the allegation of bribes offered to scientists "was long ago discredited" and that "the story was a wonderful read, marred only by its being fundamentally misleading."

Next, I'm happy to report that we skeptics have been getting a steady stream of new recruits. In the last year or so, more and more scientists have been coming out of the closet and admitting they've had some doubts about this whole global warming thing.

In fact, chances are that your favorite TV weather person is a closet skeptic (unless it's Heidi Cullen). But please observe the "don't ask - don't tell" rule. Most broadcast meteorologists are not ready for the public embarrassment that would accompany their outing.

And lastly, I have been heartened by new scientific intelligence that we skeptics have been gathering. I can predict there are more surprises to come, with some pretty powerful tactical weapons yet to be deployed. Climate scientists are beginning to question long held assumptions - which is almost always the first step toward a major scientific discovery. So stay tuned.

Oh, and by the way, in the interests of a fair fight, the next time someone sees Al Gore, could you ask him to stop calling us "global warming deniers"? I don't know of anyone who denies that the Earth has warmed. I'm sure this has just been an honest misunderstanding on Mr. Gore's part, and he'll be more than happy to stop doing it.

Girding for a vigorous debate. That is good for science. Read the whole thing.

Re those Brit Christians who want to call God "Allah": I am not one of those who says "It's all the same god, so what does it matter what we call him/her/it?" They aren't "all the same," and I happen to be a happy monotheist.

I like this from Insty: "I SAY CALL HIM "HERMAN," OR I'LL START BLOWING SHIT UP."

Atheism is selling books. Joseph Bottum at First Things thinks it's about politics - and about selling books.

Brewton says, of Bottum's piece, that the Atheists are getting desperate and frustrated:

At the apogee of atheistic materialism, in the 1830s, Auguste Comte’s well-intentioned expectation was that all the world would quickly recognize the superiority of his Positivistic philosophy and its Religion of Humanity.  People from the rest of Europe, from America, and from Asia, he assumed, would all come to sit worshipfully at his feet to learn the proper new system of socialist government and its canon of materialistic ethics. 

Central to the process, of course, would be accepting the belief that there is no God other than human reason and that the proper object of worship is Man in the abstract, Humanity.

To the horror of liberal-Progressive-socialists, the world did give Comte and his followers a respectful and lengthy hearing, but didn’t like what ensued – the slaughter of tens of millions of human beings by 20th century atheists in the Soviet Union, National Socialist Germany, Red China, and elsewhere.

Today, with Christianity rebounding strongly in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and more than holding its own in the United States, the New York Times, Christopher Hitchins, Richard Dawkins, et al have become desperate to reassert the superiority of their own minds.

Socialism advances via invented crises to alarm the people, or to seduce the people, into foregoing the markets for goods and services.

It is a deceptive strategy designed to prey on the worst, most infantile instincts of Americans. Re the big lies about the uninsured, we posted the above YouTube already. Hillary goes Shrillary over socialized medicine: Gateway

I have no doubt that Hillary is a socialist, whether she admits it to herself or not. Anyone who wants the State to take over the medical businesses, which are 16% of our economy, and the oil industry, which is ? % of our economy, has a good start on taking over all of it.

Well, I know that isn't hot news. I think we may have already linked Dr. Dalrymple's speech on Cultural Confidence but, if not, we should. It confirms my long-held opinion that the Western "intelligensia" in general isn't very intelligent when it comes to the real world. A quote from a quote on the speech at Thompson:

If you believe that the history of your culture is nothing but a catalogue of horror, massacre and the oppression of others, then you will not be very assiduous in its defence once it comes under concerted attack. Among intellectuals, at any rate, the history of crimes and catastrophes is more popular than that of achievement; and this view eventually communicates itself to society at large, to the point when it is not even realized that there is any achievement to record. In any case, there is a natural tendency, at least in the modern world, to take progress for granted the moment it is made, but never to accept problems as being an inevitable part of human life… 

Two years ago the separate $20 million gifts to Harvard and Georgetown for Middle Eastern Studies programs by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal sparked a short-lived focus on what such academic programs are doing.

From a piece by John Miller at Students for Academic Freedom:

Because Middle Eastern studies aspired to immediate relevance, it became vulnerable to mixing scholarship and activism, with combustible results. Many professors believed they should become activists for positive change, such as modernization in the Arab world -- a helpful concept, but perhaps a job best left to diplomats and nonprofit groups.

"A lot of what they do is just glorified advocacy journalism," says Rubin of AEI. To complicate matters, Middle Eastern studies isn't rooted in a traditional academic discipline. Like African-American studies and women's studies, it's an interdisciplinary response to dramatic events and social movements. Because of this, the field has a tendency to attract teachers and students with passionate political beliefs that can get in the way of objective research. Although several sub-fields of Middle Eastern studies have flourished, especially in early history, art and architecture, and a few other areas, these subjects are far removed from the modern strategic concerns that Middle Eastern studies might be able to address.

Read the whole thing. h/t, Minding the Campus

Malanga at City Journal on "The New Privatization." Apparently infrastructure has market value, so it makes sense to wonder why governments should be running these things. A quote:

Daley seeks federal approval to auction the rights to operate Midway, Chicago’s second-largest airport, as part of a federal project to demonstrate the benefits of privatization. Midway would be the second airport, and the first major hub, to enter the program. (The first was Stewart International Airport in Newburgh, New York, which the Pataki administration privatized in 2000.) In Colorado, the independent state authority that operates the Northwest Parkway, a Denver-area toll road, is evaluating bids for a 50-year lease to run it; the transaction could raise $500 million. New Jersey governor Jon Corzine is thinking of selling the New Jersey Turnpike, which could yield some $20 billion, though he’s also considering floating municipal bonds, backed by the turnpike’s tolls, which would raise less money but allow the state to continue operating it. Many smaller-scale deals are in the works, too. The Macquarie director said last fall that he anticipated as many as 25 toll-road privatizations in the U.S. over the next two years, potentially pouring $80 billion into government coffers.

Selling existing assets may turn out to be only a small part of this promising story. With far more money to deploy than there are public assets to sell, investors are now vying to help governments build and operate new infrastructure, and budget-squeezed states are taking them up on their offers.

Read the whole thing. Yes, that is the Brooklyn Bridge.

h/t, Town Hall

Wake up before it's too late. And no, it's not about the Moslems this time. It's about Brussels. The Economist details the deliberate deceit. A quote:

A month ago Luxembourg's prime minister, Jean-Claude Juncker, observed that new treaties always involve hefty transfers of sovereignty, before asking if it was “intelligent” to draw attention to this in places like Britain. And last week, the other convention vice-chairman, Jean-Luc Dehaene, a former Belgian prime minister, offered a broader conclusion. In an interview with Le Soir, Mr Dehaene declared it “dangerous talk” to want too much “transparency and clarity” in the EU.

Aaron Hansom via Pajamas:

I developed a unique skill during my brief career as an elementary school teacher in inner city Los Angeles: Within moments of entering a new classroom, I was able to glean which students had two parents living at home.

It was really no great feat. The boys whose pants were falling down to their ankles and the girls wearing short skirts were almost always from single-parent homes. I could tell immediately after reprimanding them that they weren’t accustomed to hearing a male authoritarian voice. The girls would usually respond to me by rolling their eyes, while the boys would either kick the wall or march out of class.

Even when they remained in class, these students didn’t learn much. After all, they weren’t in school to learn.

Read the whole thing.

Professor Bainbridge quotes Russell Kirk's ten conservative principles (below) in a piece attempting to determine the political orientation of Andrew Sullivan's readers. (Exactly why the good Prof wants to do that is beyond me.)

1. The conservative believes that there exists an enduring moral order. That order is made for man, and man is made for it: human nature is a constant, and moral truths are permanent. ... A society in which men and women are governed by belief in an enduring moral order, by a strong sense of right and wrong, by personal convictions about justice and honor, will be a good society—whatever political machinery it may utilize; while a society in which men and women are morally adrift, ignorant of norms, and intent chiefly upon gratification of appetites, will be a bad society—no matter how many people vote and no matter how liberal its formal constitution may be. ...
2. The conservative adheres to custom, convention, and continuity. ... Conservatives are champions of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they don’t know. ...
3. Conservatives believe in what may be called the principle of prescription. Conservatives sense that modern people are dwarfs on the shoulders of giants, able to see farther than their ancestors only because of the great stature of those who have preceded us in time. Therefore conservatives very often emphasize the importance of prescription—that is, of things established by immemorial usage, so that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary. There exist rights of which the chief sanction is their antiquity—including rights to property, often. ... The individual is foolish, but the species is wise, Burke declared. In politics we do well to abide by precedent and precept and even prejudice, for the great mysterious incorporation of the human race has acquired a prescriptive wisdom far greater than any man’s petty private rationality.

Read the rest on continuation page below.

Kling on the "universal distraction" of "healthcare," at TCS. It begins:

"Nobody is talking about a free-market approach in health care. The spectrum today is between fascism and Communism."
--John Graham

The Pacific Research Institute's John Graham offered this glum assessment during a brief chat recently when he came to Washington, DC for a meeting. He points out that the focus of health care policy is on how to get to "universal coverage." In this context, the conservative approach involves mandatory health insurance. The liberal approach involves expanding government coverage. Hence, it is either fascism or Communism.

The main proponents of "universal coverage" want to throw more money at the current health care system, which strikes me as unwise. I believe that the "universal coverage" mantra is dysfunctional for the same reason that "more money for public schools" is a dysfunctional mantra for education. When your current approach is digging you into a hole, the sensible thing to do is not to dig faster. It is to stop digging.

Later in this essay, I will offer my thoughts about the uninsured. First, I want to present free-market approaches to reform our health care system. I mention the assumptions that I make in offering these proposals.

Read the whole thing.

John Stuart Mill's ideas of liberty are obsolete, says Mr. Hattersley in The Guardian.

He claims that times have changed, and people need more statism and less personal freedom.

He says people are more interdependent that they were in 1856. I see no reason at all to believe that but, if they are, it is because Western governments have made people more dependent, stifled their instincts for self-reliance, and crippled their spirits by training them to look to government for their wants and needs.

And does Mr. Hattersley include himself as one of those needing a liberty-depriving state? I doubt it. Rather, I suspect he sees himself as one of that superior sort who should be telling me how to run my life. Frankly, I find this variety of condescension  frightening, and the desire to control others contemptible.

Tim Worstall discusses. The reason I post this is because it sounds so much like the American Left - and as an excuse to link to Mill's essay.

We have avoided saying much about this pathetic story, and TNR's pathetic way of handling the con job they wanted so much to believe. Yes indeed, more "fake but accurate" from the Left.

Today, however, Democracy Project has posted a piece on the subject by the Rev. Paul W. McNellis, S.J. which is the essay I wished I could have written and which I think is the final word on the subject.

It is here.  It concludes:

Pvt. Beauchamp has two choices.

He can await his discharge and then return to testify before Congress as the victim veteran in the “proud of being ashamed” mode. He might even run for Congress himself. He wouldn’t be the first.

Or, he can use his remaining time in the military to earn an honorable discharge. He could try to leave the military as a better man than when he entered. There are hints from his blog that he was already moving in that direction.

I would urge Pvt. Beauchamp to look at those in his unit, some of whom he surely respects and admires. Imitate them, and in the process you will become a better soldier, a better friend, a better husband, one day a better father, and...in the end, a better writer.

That will also leave you with something far better than the anemic sense of shame you describe; it will leave you with a sense of honor. And though TNR may no longer be interested in what you write, you will surely have become a better man.

Postcards of the hanging. Iran increasing numbers of public hangings.

Jim Cramer is emotional about the need for a Fed rate cut. Core inflation is not a problem at present, home prices are falling fast in many regions - so why not?

A good question about the autonomy of localities in dealing with illegals, from Wizbang.

Lack of sunshine gives you breast cancer.

Look how the AP characterizes Sarkozy.

Did you read about Rep. Nancy Boyda? Reminds me of a kid plugging his ears and yelling "lalalalala" so as not to hear something he doesn't want to hear.

Maybe doctors will begin growing some real ones. The Lucidicus Project.

Militant Presbyterians charged with murder of Oakland reporter.

The new Tacoma Narrows Bridge photo update.

The 2007 Chap Olympics. Free Market Fairy Tales

Department of Useful Idiots. Chavez and Sean Penn. Mutual exploitation.

The Cap and Trade allowances market, at The Economist. Not exactly a thriving market yet, but the whole thing is pointless anyway, I believe.

When visiting Dubai, make sure you don't have even a microscopic amount of pot with you...or even in your bloodstream.

Should one bring one's faith to work? If so, how?