Grenma

The Bigger Lie: Andrew Sullivan's projections

2011-10-27T09:48:00.000-07:00

It is gratifying and sad at the same time ("sorrow and joy are one" to borrow Auden's phrase) to see the intellectual dry rot at the core of American liberalism finally exposed in the public square. Andrew Sullivan has long been an example of this inexorable decline and he has shown himself once again to be a product of his time with his piece "The Big Lie" The irony of writing a column describing "the Right"'s construction of a deliberately false narrative to destroy our president and then hyperactively naming it after Nazi Germany's most infamous program of racial propaganda seems lost on him. In Sullivan's pretzel logic President Obama is stymied not by his actions or political views but by " a deliberate, simple and systemic campaign to kill Obama's presidency in its crib" that stems from... well, what?Andrew Sullivan does his best to prop up Obama's Even as the "Occupy" protests have devolved into uneasy coalitions of trust fund kids, shadily-funded community organizers and homeless opportunists.

It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail

2011-09-11T23:40:00.000-07:00

Thus it is tempting if you were raised to be an entitled pseudointellectual in a Godless world filled with hypocrisy and dystopian fantasy to see everything like this:

The Children of Aftermath

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/38363/the-children-of-aftermath

Bush's Tragic Legacy

How 9/11 Triggered America's Decline

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,785405,00.html

That is just too depressing for me

Anyone who doubts the veracity of Christianity...

2011-08-18T22:40:00.000-07:00

... has only to read the Pentateuch and appreciate its deep understanding of human nature (our constant failing in the face of the divine) 3000 years before Freud was in diapers.

Word Coinage of the day

2011-08-18T22:38:00.000-07:00

Conflatulence - upon reading the word "confluence" after Scotch and wine

On the 6th Circuit Upholding ObamaCare and the State of our Judiciary

2011-06-29T10:43:00.000-07:00

from (link above):

6th Circuit on losing streak in Supreme Court cases

"It's a bit surprising to see 15 reversals in a row," said Michael Solimine, a University of Cincinnati law professor who studies the federal courts.

Some 6th Circuit judges are surprised, too. But they say they're doing their best and are trying to take the rejection in stride.

"Getting reversed by the Supreme Court, some people these days think, is a badge of honor," said Gilbert Merritt, a semi-retired senior judge and one of the 6th Circuit's most liberal members. "It depends on your point of view."

Hello, I Think you Must Be Going!

2011-05-18T10:47:00.000-07:00

Mr. Gingrich had the good sense to stay out of the 2008 presidential race, but time has weakened the checks on his oversized ego. Fortunately he can't stop being Newt and has showed his true colors, extemporizing and breaking Reagan's eleventh commandment. Hopefully Newt will retain (or regain) enough self-awareness to exit the race at the earliest opportunity.

Maybe he can still get his deposit back from the government.

Michael Steele Needs to Move On

2010-04-05T11:27:00.000-07:00

Like many others I first took notice of Michael Steele during his unsuccessful 2006 Senate run in Maryland. He was confident and well-spoken and his attitude during his David-vs-Goliath campaign was truly inspiring. Buoyed by his newfound national identity he managed to stay in the limelight enough to be considered (again as a long shot) for the RNC chairmanship. So I was truly happy to see him get elected to that position, expecting him to be a fresh and articulate alternative to the Republican Party's rather lackluster public face. Well since then he seems to have done little but continually put his foot in his mouth, undermine the RNC's message, and act in a generally self-serving manner. This latest strip club scandal is just that - the latest in what is becoming a very long list. But now we hear his defense is to play the race card? This is the last thing the RNC needs after having squandered so many advantages and being so out of touch as to launch and entire political movement.

Steele needs to find a well-paid consultancy position somewhere and stop helping the Republican Party commit suicide.

The Obama Theme Song

2010-02-10T09:07:00.000-08:00

Heard this driving in to work today and was struck by the similarity of its sentiments to those of our current administration. The theme of "we're outsiders and its not our fault"- it couldn't be more perfect:

me and all my friends
we're all misunderstood
they say we stand for nothing and
there's no way we ever could
now we see everything that's going wrong
with the world and those who lead it
we just feel like we don't have the means
to rise above and beat it

so we keep waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

it's hard to beat the system
when we're standing at a distance
so we keep waiting
waiting on the world to change
now if we had the power
to bring our neighbors home from war
they would have never missed a Christmas
no more ribbons on their door
and when you trust your television
what you get is what you got
cause when they own the information, oh
they can bend it all they want

that's why we're waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

it's not that we don't care,
we just know that the fight ain't fair
so we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

and we're still waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting waiting on the world to change
one day our generation
is gonna rule the population
so we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

Now This Makes Sense

2010-01-28T10:26:00.000-08:00

Given Obama's abysmal performance so far:

The chatter has increased in recent days about Clinton leaving the cabinet sometime in the first term, likely over some matter of principle, so that she can position herself to challenge Obama in 2012"

That so makes sense.

Too Smart to Be An American

2010-01-25T10:35:00.000-08:00

It has been widely reported that the administration has decided to "double down" and plow forward on its health care and banking reform agenda and either spin or ignore the voter discontent whose clearest and most recent sign is the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. It's as though Team Obama attended telemarketing training, where the main rules are "ignore the customer's first two objections" and "above all, stick to the script". While for the first time a few tiny cracks are appearing in the media's united pro-Obama front, many in the self-described (and pseudo-intellectual) press elite are still carrying water for a man that they perceive as "one of their own", somebody who really "gets" the liberal message (and the need to further it through Alinskyesque subterfuge). In that spirit Joe Klein of the once-respected Time has placed his own offering at the feet of his president by attempt to clear up confusion and explain away all that nasty controversy. And what is his thesis to explain Obama's current difficulties?

Most Americans are simply too stupid to appreciate Obama's vision.

In his brief article he supports his thesis in a variety of ways: ridiculing "average" voters ("nearly three out of four Americans think the money has been wasted...they may be right: it's been wasted on them...It is very difficult to thrive in an increasingly competitive world if you're a nation of dodos"), echoing the complaints of earlier Bush apologists ("The Obama Administration has done a terrible job explaining the stimulus package") and even slandering his own competition ("Americans are flagrantly ill-informed...and, for those watching Fox News, misinformed"). Perhaps Mr. Klein is breaking some unnamed journalistic code by stating it so frankly, but this post is a great thumbnail view of the current state of Progressive thought and its contempt for the average American.

I can only imagine that as the out-of-touch and sneeringly elitist Mr. Klein watched the comments roll in he must have realized his error in stating his views so plainly. Like a benevolent dictator sensing that he'd gone too far, he moderated his elitism, tried to spin his earlier post and resumed the facade in "Dumb or Just Badly Educated...or Maybe Just Lazy?".

Man - someone remind me how Time stays in business.

See here as well (Valley of the Shadow)

Careful Obama - the disembodied spirit of Harry Reid is watching

2010-01-25T10:17:00.000-08:00

Even though it appears he's trapped in the windowpane, he can still probably do some damage (from the Financial Times)

The Theology of Warmism, or Why Bad Data Happens to Good People

2009-12-09T11:56:00.000-08:00

The faith-based "Warmism" movement has begun to look more and more like a religion these days. Climategate has been sent to them test their faith, but the truly converted will not falter. But how to respond to the negative publicity? Al Gore is already on record stating that in such circumstances it is totally justified to embroider the truth:

"In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis."

This explains his "move along, nothing to see here" tactic in addressing the Climategate emails. He even goes so far as to flat-out lie, saying the latest emails are 10 years old (the latest were from November 12 of this year, and many of the controversial ones are from this year).

So Warmism is now becoming more like a religion. It seems clear that its fiercest adherents, like rebellious teens seeking after truth have modeled their religion not on the oppressive Judeo-Christian dogma of their parents but on the newer kid on the block, the ultra-hip religion of Islam. For nothing else explains the prevarication, obfuscation and slander on display better than the Muslim ideal of Taqiyya:

'The word "Taqiyya" literally means: "Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one's beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralising any criticism of Islam or Muslims.'

ALMNAKH HU AKBAR!

Learning From Carter

2009-10-23T12:23:00.001-07:00

Jimmy Carter's failure as a president was evident pretty early on, and like many a politician Carter's response was to look for a scapegoat. Unwisely he decided to make it the American people: his cries of "malaise" only heightened his ineffectiveness and earned him the enmity of the average citizen. Obama and his Machiavellian handlers have perhaps learned from this; the new scapegoat is more Emmanuel Goldstein than you and your neighbor, because no one likes to be told something is their fault. Now we have Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, Fox News and their unwitting accomplices: The Neanderthal Republican Congressman, the Flyover State Yokel and (shudder) The Teabagger.

Decisions, decisions...

2009-09-25T11:10:00.001-07:00

Andrew Sullivan II

2009-09-21T12:01:00.000-07:00

I get no joy from this - the conservative movement needs smart dedicated folks, but LGF continues its slide:

here

here

here, and

here.

Our Glorious Comrades at Reuters

2009-09-21T11:54:00.001-07:00

...have announced that the rightful president of Honduras has returned after being ousted by the military junta there. At least that what you get from this:

"Soldiers toppled Zelaya and sent him into exile after he upset conservative opponents, who accused him of wanting to change the constitution to allow presidents to seek re-election."

The omissions here are deafening, especially given how long this has been in the news and how Zelaya's attempts to set up a Chavez-style dictatorship have been so thoroughly documented. It's as if Reuters feels the US populace is stupid or forgetful enough that it can engage in an Orwellian rewrites of history anytime it likes.

Plus ca change...

Expelled

2009-07-26T15:12:00.000-07:00

Finally got to see "Expelled" by Ben Stein (thanks, Netflix streaming service!). The production values and tone are smart and modern and therefore it stands out among most conservative or evangelical documentaries. Here is a truly engaging and witty man who sets out to ask some difficult questions and knows how to drive home a point (his interview with Dawkins and trip to Hadamar are particularly devastating). The response from mainstream media and internet is universally and comically derogatory (just check the supposedly neutral Wikipedia) and I can see why: like the conservative response to Michael Moore, most materialists (even if they don't or can't articulate it) see the threat of such a well-crafted movie to their worldview.

2009-04-27T15:11:00.001-07:00

The assumption of truth (and its advocacy at all costs) of many of the liberal tenets implied in the election of our new president is unique in my lifetime.

2009-04-27T14:17:00.001-07:00

Well no more little green concerns.

The LGF way gets its 15 minutes

2009-04-22T19:24:00.000-07:00

Now that Charles and Glenn Beck have butted heads, the resulting exposure will probably serve shed some light on the increasingly arrogant tone over at LGF. I suspect it will only further marginalize the site, which is already (unfairly) labeled as right-wing and extremist.

p.s. meh

My First (and Last) Discussion on LGF

2009-02-05T11:37:00.000-08:00

Well, I finally manged to get a coveted membership spot at Litttle Green Footballs last week. I wanted to be able to wade into some of the numerous Intelligent Design discussions that come up there. There are usually one or two a day, so it didn't take long for a story to appear that I thought I could speak to - in this case, the current kerfuffle over Ben's Stein's withdrawal from a commencement address, or, as stated in the purple prose Charles reserves for Jihadi or ID topics:

Creationist Ben Stein has withdrawn as the commencement speaker at the University of Vermont, after a huge outcry erupted over his support for the pseudo-science promoted by the Discovery Institute, and his ludicrous, highly dishonest anti-evolution film "Expelled."

Well, I waded in to say basically that Ben Stein is a fine man, that the schadenfreude on display at LGF did them a disservice and that the tone and vituperation directed selectively at ID targets was arrogant and overblown. My comments were roundly and universally criticized and even caused Charles himself to jump in. He was just as caustic in discussion as in his posts. I pointed out the (to me) obvious irony of his misrepresentation of the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Document" and how he used it in a way that was similar to the way Anti-Semites used the bogus Protocols of the Elders of Zion - to fabricate "proof" of a group's evil plan of world domination. I thought that drawing a comparison to a group he held in such contempt would give him some insight into the path he had chosen. But anyone who defends ID or its proponents is immediately and irrevocably the enemy in LGF Land and can be safely ignored. Reflectively calling me arrogant, a name caller and, even worse, a "Creationist!", he alternated insults with variants on "I've seen your kind before". As the negative feedback piled up on each of my posts (and the positive feedback multiplied on any post responding to me) Charles repeated a meme I had often heard on the site about being infiltrated by the enemy and promptly closed my account. After my absence the tone returned to its usual navel-gazing and self-congratulation.

LGF is not my site, nor is it really a public forum. Banning me certainly was Charles' right and probably the right thing to do given the kind of site he wants to maintain. I was wrong to try and bring a contrary opinion to such a place as Little Green Footballs - it will not happen again.

In Praise of Hypocrisy

2008-09-23T11:00:00.000-07:00

First, a disclaimer: I fully realize hypocrisy is a human failing and is, like narcissism or addiction, not a state to aspire to. But in our modern world concepts like shame and morality are considered optional or unessential to daily life. In the political or business arena for example, having a moral compass can even be seen as a liability, limiting one's options. So hurray for the fact that hypocrisy at least presupposes a moral context. Of course, progressive pundits - the classic example is Jon Stewart - get to have it both ways, using charges of hypocrisy against supposedly "moral" public figures as a way to shut them down while insulating themselves from such charges with the defense that they don't adhere to the values in question to begin with.

Out of Step With the Lizardroid Army

2008-09-21T00:46:00.000-07:00

As a consumer of conservative blogs, I would be remiss not to be well aware of Little Green Footballs. Charles Johnson's regular exposes of "fauxtography" and other MSM lies and half-truths serve as an invaluable fact-checking resource and epitomizes much of what is good about the blogosphere. But, like anyone who believes his good press and then becomes galvanized against his opponents, the site is also prone to a bit of smugness and a sneering tone towards people he despises (mostly the Kos Kids) and issues he finds especially pertinent. The principal "issue of the heart" on which LGF waxes strident is the defense of Israel and Zionism, a characteristic unfortunately shared by my personal hero James Taranto. Don't get me wrong: I am no defender of Palestinian thuggery and see Israel as a bulwark of (relative) freedom and democracy in a region short on both. But Johnson's arguments are almost comically one-sided. His favorite "issue of the head" which he enjoys pillorying is Intelligent Design. His arguments against ID are shrill and supercilious and show a mind completetly given over to materialism. Like an inversion of his coverage of Israel, Johnson never attributes a single cogent thought to the proponents of ID. Given his background as a Computer Scientist I guess I shouldn't be surprised. But the enjoyment he seems to derive from ridiculing an idea that he constantly demonstrates he knows nothing about is a bit unsettling.

Life and Elections Aren't Fair

2008-09-17T22:43:00.000-07:00

It's pretty frustrating to see the mainstream media abandoning any sense of balance or fairness. Any news outlet outside of Fox News, the right-wing blogosphere or conservative talk radio (and that includes almost all traditional news sources) have, in their panic over the recent surge in McCain's popularity gone on a crusade to assure the election of Barack Obama. Whether selectively fact-checking McCain ads, or scurrying to sully Sarah Palin's image, the effect is almost comical. The left wing opinion writers are almost completely untethered. The lack of a moral center that charatcerizes much of the social Progressive movement means that many liberal commentators' worst instincts are going unchecked and the level of meanness is just appalling. The child in me sees the unfairness of the situation and wants to let everyone know, but fortuantely the country doesn't need me to save it. For even though the media and academia have undermined (and in some ways mortally wounded) many of the the core values that served as the foundations of American Democracy and Western Civilization, many Americans sense the bad faith and slander inherent in the left's message.

Addendum: I see Bill Whittle has just addressed the issue much more colorfully and thoroughly than I ever could here

The Richard Rich Army

2008-09-17T21:26:00.000-07:00

I was opening the mail a few days ago when a piece of mail caught my eye. It was from NewYork and had no return address. A thick plain white envelope, it appeared to contain newspaper clippings. Upon opening it I found it was an entire page of newsprint advertising a government grant seminar. Affixed to it was a Post-It note with a simple scrawled note: "Ya gotta see this!" The signature was illegible. Most folks would have felt compelled to read the article; I went and Googled the web address provided and saw it featured prominently on RipoffReport and other scam notification sites. I resented having spent my time on it, but I also wondered about the folks who sent this out. I imagined a room full of poor souls scribbling notes and stuffing envelopes for minimum wage (or even worse, for less than minimum wage and a negligible commission based on the number of successful contacts). In what kind of armor, I wondered, does one have to encase one's soul to be able to perform that kind of work (or order others to perform that kind of work and reap most of the profits) day in and day out? Talk radio and late night TV are filled ads for these kinds of schemes. Like pornography, it is one of the uglier sides of an open society.

It made me think of John Hurt's portrayal of Richard Rich in A Man for All Seasons. When shame is banished, man is capable of truly horrible things.

Acura Wants You to Make Someone Very Special Happy

2008-09-13T02:04:00.000-07:00

It's hardly a new phenomenon: advertisers co-opt a song to sell a product even though the song's lyrics or original meaning run counter to the product being sold. Heck, I got a chuckle last week when I was at Disney's California Adventure with the kids and heard Randy Newman's "I Love L.A." blaring over the speakers. On the surface it seems to be a snappy little tune extolling the virtues of California's largest city, but a closer listening reveals Newman's true intent as he rattles off a list of some of the ugliest places on planet Earth (that happen to be right here in the Southland).

But it is (to me at least) a sad thing to take a song with a lofty intent and warp it to fit a more "modern" view of existence. Jimmy Durante's 1965 cover of "Make Someone Happy" is a wonderful statement of the then universally understood Judeo-Christian sentiment that living for another is essential for a deeper understanding of life. By the time the agency responsible for creating a commercial for the Acura MDX acquired the tune, however, the song's meaning had been diluted by years of cultural self-absorption. It was then easy to invert its meaning, so that the person you really should do something special for is not some significant other but the more significant you.

Somedays You Just Feel Like

2008-08-20T21:55:00.000-07:00

A Tyrannosaurus Rex with a back itch.

Day-um!

2008-07-10T14:53:00.000-07:00

I would have thought that the ink would have exploded like a beaker of alien blood in John Carpenter's The Thing before the Telegraph printed something like this:

Holy Cows: George W Bush - buffoon or great leader?

Here is just one of many surprising quotes about the differences between European Leaders and Mr. Bush:

Usually we wait and wait until the enemy starts attacking, then we let them win a bit, then we fight until we are tired, then we just call the US to come over to clean our mess.
That is what happened in WWI, WWII, and the Balkans.

Bush is just showing us what a bunch of dangerous ditherers we are and we hate him for it. Naturally.

Wall-E: A Minority View

2008-07-06T00:25:00.000-07:00

(this was originally written as an email to Stephen Greydanus and his wonderful movie site decentfilms.com)

I'm not privy to advance screenings, so I only got a chance to see Pixar's latest film Wall-E today.

I have been a huge fan of Pixar over the years. To my mind, The Incredibles is perhaps one of the most perfect films made for any audience and on a par with Mary Poppins or It's a Wonderful Life (or even Apocalypse Now if you want to go there). Pixar's sheer output of good to excellent movies is staggering. But I have observed a kind of "Circle of Life" rule that operates in the movie business where any successful artistic enterprise eventually begins to believe its own hype, become more complacent or self-indulgent, and thus sow the seeds of its own demise. To my mind (and I was almost alone in my assessment), I saw sad confirmation of this in Finding Nemo, a film, admittedly gorgeous to look at - I mean we're still talking about Pixar - where comedy and high concepts were sacrificed for Berkeley-esque platitudes about "special needs" and inclusiveness. Ironically to me, Nemo was almost universally hailed as the studio's masterpiece and, I believe, is still its most profitable film. Even though Brad Bird has been a real shot in the arm, Pixar's track record has been spotty but above average ever since, and has I think reached a new low with WALL-E.

As a mere consumer of films I enjoy and judge a film for what it is saying up on the screen. Like Nemo, WALL-E is a beautiful film with nothing to say. Perhaps there were too many hands involved: it seems they were trying to make an environmental film but economic concerns forced them to hedge their bets (or perhaps "code their message" so that only the faithful would be in on it) until they were left with nothing but a Chaplinesque love story. Again, this film has been praised to the skies, though perhaps more praised than watched, and I can only wonder where the studio is headed. Redemption from the aforementioned rule and trend reversals are always possible (think of Disney's "The Little Mermaid" or even the Coen brother's "Fargo"), but I have seen no one even acknowledge this problem at Pixar.

How Will Postmodernism Die?

2008-07-05T00:41:00.000-07:00

Progressive postmodernist thought mortally wounded the culture of the "Silent Majority" forty years ago and, like some colossal John Stewart, shrugged its shoulders, muttered "it's not my responsibility" and walked away, failing to repair the damage or replace what it had destroyed with something better. The question now seems to be: can something so narcissistic be destroyed? The progressive movement is based on several truths (such as materialism and the primacy of feelings and desires) that can be repudiated only at great personal cost. The generation that brought all this on is dying but they cannily staked their claim to our universities and social institutions in the hopes of perpetuating their beliefs. The Boomers' influence will fade over time, but it will be hard to put the genie of narcissism back into the bottle.

Note to KRLA

2008-05-17T15:17:00.000-07:00

The Hewitt/Medved/Prager/Dennis Miller lineup is so good and classy that it makes Laura Ingraham and Kevin James (on either end of that grouping) look even worse than they really are (which is mildly annoying and awful, respectively).

Please use Kevin James' latest faux pas on Hardball as the excuse to set him free.

In Politics, There's no Freude Like Schadenfreude

2008-05-17T15:06:00.000-07:00

I think one of the least appealing aspects of modern politics is its unrelentingly negative starting point. Good news can only be simplistic or stupid; the only real good news is bad news about your enemy. The press takes the lead in this by avoiding almost all positive news, whether it be in Iraq, climate change, AIDS statistics or the economy. And any positive statement or acknowledgment of progress given by the governing party about the current state of things is immediately inverted by the opposing party. Unvarnished truths can never escape the gravitational pull of the press and political spin, and public apathy and skepticism is the result.

Prince Caspian

2008-05-17T12:29:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite sites to read about movies is Steven D. Greydanus' decentfilms
, though his posting of late has been very sporadic. I think he nails prince Caspian in his review. The second movie in Disney's Narnia series is a better movie (based on a much weaker book, at least filmically) than the first in every way. Every way, that is, except its spiritual and intellectual core. Like the film of Eco's Name of the Rose, the ideological underpinnings of the book have been jettisoned and the result is a fairly standard adventure film. Lewis is a great theologian who is also a storyteller; his dramatic choices are perhaps debatable, but the religious foundations are rock solid. In making an admittedly fine film, a creative team woefully inadequate to the task have sliced and diced the theological landscape, substituting carefully crafted points about the nature of God with bland New Age platitudes.

Here's hoping for a third film that fires on all cylinders.

The story thus far

2008-05-17T12:19:00.000-07:00

Obama marches toward what? Will Hillary be able to fight back her impulse to say "if I can't win, nobody can" and keep her finger off whatever Doomsday Bomb she has in her possession? Will American voters be able to untangle Obama's record (at once both ultra-liberal and scant) and their feelings about race and political idealism? Will McCain be able to conquer his own demons as a hothead and underwhelming speaker and rise to the occasion?

Tune in next month for another chilling installment.

The Smartest Man Still Wearing A Bowtie

2008-03-12T10:22:00.000-07:00

... has some very reasoned points to make about the Eliot Spitzer mess.

"Thank you for joining us from Vanity Fair"

2008-03-05T22:00:00.000-08:00

Hugh Hewitt is (apart for being really gaga about Mitt Romney) a very smart guy. So is Christopher Hitchens, though I would much rather be a dinner guest at Hugh's. Check out the scary exchange on Hugh's show today.

YOW.

You Can't Line A Birdcage With A Blog...

2008-02-26T13:18:00.000-08:00

...and that's too bad. Unlike newspapers, I can make pronouncements and opinions here that, should anyone have the remotest interest in reading them, will still be wasting electrons for years after they've been proved wrong. And while I've made my own predictions they won't matter in a few weeks time. The nominees for each party will be chosen in a matter of months and by this time next year we will have a new sitting president.

The wisdom of the moment says Hillary is finished, and she may well be. But the barrage of nonstop, absolutist media pronouncements have been especially strident (and amusing) this election cycle. Like the scientific and medical communities who, on issues like good/bad foods or child care offer "definitive" judgments that flip 180 degrees every 5 years, the media is now telling us that Obama is as much of a "sure thing" as they proclaimed Hillary to be 3 months ago.

The Wisdom of President Nader

2008-02-25T12:02:00.000-08:00

With his second term drawing to a close, president Nader held a press conference today to reflect on the achievements of the past eight years and reiterate his commitment to the principles that have shaped his presidency. "My administration is no lame duck. We have proactively dealt with the unenlightened and will continue to do so until our final day in office", Nader said. "We have boldly abandoned the failed policies of previous administrations and followed an uncompromising vision for a better, safer America - a vision that could only have been imagined under my leadership."

He then turned to what many consider the watershed moment of his tenure: his response the the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. "9-11 was, in every sense of the word, a wake-up call for America. It was a message sent not from Muslim extremists but from Nature herself, telling us that America had strayed from its core principles. And, unlike the career politicians who saw only a petty clash of cultures, I immediately grasped not only the severity of the problem but the stakes involved. From that day forward, I resolved that we would no longer live in a country where steel buildings caught fire and planes simply vaporized upon contact with fixed objects. My response, then as now, has been swift and certain and will soon bear fruit in the creation of the first flameproof skyscraper in history. The World Nader Center has passed most regulatory hurdles. Groundbreaking ceremonies for this testament to my unique vision, rising from the ashes of its deeply flawed predecessor will be held shortly before I leave office at the end of this year. In addition, my executive mandates for crumple zones and airbags on all domestic jets will come into full force next year, despite the vigorous lobbying efforts of myopic corporate interests and pro-business physicists who have attempted to deprive each and every American of their basic human rights."

President Nader then spent the remainder of his address savaging his critics in the private and public sector that had failed to understand his unique and intrinsically superior vision for the future of America. "Much progress has been made, but key pieces of legislation, such as my 'No Child Left Unencased In A Layer Of Protective Foam' and 'Domestic Surveillance of Those Who Would Question My Greatness' still languish at the hands of a gutless and unenlightened Congress. History will no doubt harshly judge these so-called 'legislators'".

In a widely expected move the Democratic/Republican Response, which was to be given by Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.), was declared "rhetorically unsound" in an emergency move by the Department of Safety and subsequently failed to air.

Scriptorium Gets It Right Again

2008-02-15T00:07:00.000-08:00

There is an archetype seen most often in the history of science of the great or near-great man whose enjoys a period of renown, but whose stature diminishes over time as his ideas become outdated, unfashionable or obsolete. Consider Cuvier and his promotion of geological catastrophism , Joseph Priestley and his defense of phlogiston theory, or Louis Agassiz, whose legacy as the foremost American scientist of his day was tarnished by his ideas about racial inequality. I always chuckle at the story (alas, probably apocryphal) about Agassiz' symbolic "fall from grace" at Stanford during the San Francisco earthquake:

During the 1906 temblor, the stone shelf supporting a marble statue of Swiss naturalist and geologist Louis Agassiz ... failed, causing the statue to plunge into the ground below. There are several accounts of the outcome. One student wrote, “A big marble statue of Agassiz was toppled off his perch on the outside of the quad and fell foremost into the ground (right through a cement walk) up to his shoulders, and still sticks there, legs in the air and his hand held out gracefully. People came running from the quad with such sober faces, but when they saw him they couldn’t help laughing, and one fellow went up and shook hands with him"... President David Starr Jordan wrote, “Somebody—Dr. Angell, perhaps—remarked that ‘Agassiz was great in the abstract but not in the concrete.’”

In the realm of politics ideas rise and fall in more subjective ways based on public perceptions, marketability and the like. Right now the man of the hour is of course Barack Obama. But my friend John Mark Reynolds (who has been blogging the campaign heavily and well at Scriptorium) presciently points out that it Obama's moment in the sun is destined to be short-lived. John Mark has been blogging thick and fast during this current election cycle and deserves yet another plug (I think once a year is not too excessive).

She's not Dead Yet

2008-02-13T01:11:00.000-08:00

The Short Attention Span Theater that is the Mainstream Media are once again "guiding" the American public, this time to the realization that Obama will win the Democratic nomination. While that is an outcome I would welcome, I think it is still far from a foregone conclusion. And while I'd like to entertain a scenario where the infamous Hillary turns out on closer inspection to be just another pitiable, not-so-inevitable politician, I don't think that her bag of tricks has been emptied yet. The question is will she decide on some drastic nuclear option her strategists have held in reserve until now? I think so. Of course Hillary really is having some trouble but in this land of ours, where perception is reality, anything big and dramatic done to win hearts and minds can perhaps backfire. Even so, I bet there are probably a couple of banks of computers managed by Team Cinton in some dark basement running models of possible anti-Obama scenarios even as I write this.

If you need a glimpse into what an America dominated by progressives would look like

2008-02-08T10:39:00.000-08:00

Look no further than the once-mighty Great Britain

A Class Act

2008-02-08T01:48:00.000-08:00

Even though as a teetotaler he can not join me, I raise a glass to Mitt Romney. While I never fully embraced his candidacy (he was my third choice) I admire his character. It takes a big man to lose as gracefully as he did.

Now it's Huckabee's turn to rise to the occasion. I think it is sad but telling that this "evangelical" candidate has not only not stepped up like Mitt but has so willingly played the spoiler.

John McCain faces an uphill battle. He will need all our support - not just faint praise - to overcome the Democratic juggernaut. The blogosphere is abuzz with calls to put aside difference and to remember that an aging Supreme Court and the continuing war in Iraq could present huge social and geopolitical turning points for our nation, and they are right.

SupayDupayFatFatTuesdayExpialidocious

2008-02-06T00:10:00.000-08:00

Well, there will be a lot of hand-wringing and commentary the next few days as the media, having to find something to talk about for the next year, present Much Ado About Inevitability. The reality is that while Huckabee has thrust his rusty Bowie knife a little farther into the solar plexus of Mitt Romney than was anticipated and Hillary is going to have to up the ante even further to destroy Obama, there were no real surprises today. Rush, in what could only be described as an ill-timed and atypical miscalculation on his part, has formally joined the Anybody But McCain crowd and endorsed Romney. And in related news, Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan's remarks about supporting Hilary should McCain win the nomination will hopefully continue to marginalize their appeal as conservative media figures, although Buchanan manages to be wrong about most everything without losing any prestige. I was also reminded today of the fact that McCain is almost as embarrassing a public speaker as George Bush, alternating between a child-like, hushed tone that sounds calculated to calm fears about his legendary temper and a shrill, mock-forceful tone used for more aggressive rhetoric. You know, maybe I'm getting old and paranoid but it really does seem like the MSM's touting of McCain as the best hope against a vulnerable Clinton or Obama is just sandbagging to make a Democratic White House even more inevitable in 2008.

Now don't get me wrong: I will be supporting McCain if, as is likely, he becomes the Republican nominee. And maybe, just maybe, the mystical appeal that has carried him this far will continue past the nomination, translate into crossover votes and culminate in victory in November. It could happen. Just be on the lookout for these guys:

I'm here all night, folks. And remember, there's a two drink minimum.

The Masses are thinking, Whence comes the thought of the World!

2008-02-02T12:31:00.000-08:00

I don't know if it's ironic or a case of schadenfreude or maybe a little of both, but we seem to be at a time in national politics where the idealogues of both parties find themselves frustrated and shut out by the majority of voters. The dyed-in-the-wool conservatives' call for "anybody but McCain" and the progressive/MoveOn.org support of Obama seem to have fallen on deaf ears. While it's true that Romney and/or Obama in the general would make for a much more engaging race (as both are in my opinion possessed of a sense of decency that their more favored opponents lack), that appears to be a very remote possibility. And while I'm not gonna go the Pauline Kael route and wonder who is actually voting for McCain, I do wonder what his appeal is beyond

A) feelings akin to "he's waited long enough - let's give him a shot",
B) vague appeals to patriotism pertaining to his Vietnam service,
C) confusion of political expediency with bipartisanship, or
D) dubious polling data.

Hillary on the other hand, has (aided by the media) produced a sort of nationalized Stockholm Syndrome, with everyone primed to love their captor and dutifully submit to her inevitable yoke.

I think the outcome is already a done deal (see below), but neither of the front runners inspires. And that's really the saddest thing, because this election cycle saw a unique opportunity for change, and a slate of contenders with real character and substance running for both parties' nomination.

Car Crashes and the Peception of Time

2008-01-31T01:16:00.000-08:00

I didn't see it coming, but in a flash the next 10 months have been transformed from a messy but productive political cycle into a massive and inevitable car crash. Only a few weeks ago time and talent and debate seemed limitless. Then the diverse field of presidential hopefuls began one by one to pack up and go home like some reality TV show. Most of the best and brightest were shown the door, leaving only a couple of bland but cunning players (and a few spoilers and crazies) left standing.

And now it all falls into place. Romney and his last gasp of twice-removed idealism and hope will be snuffed out by Huckabee's very Southern passive-aggressive end game. Paul will stay on as a kind of crazy Kucinich-like figure. Hillary will continue to redefine (downward) what's allowable for political expediency as she rather messily crushes Barack Obama. Then it's on to the general, where McCain will lose his temper and mumble through debates just enough to negate Mrs. Clinton's very high negatives and assure her of an easy victory.

The one thing I hoped against hope would never come to pass is here. It has already played out. The players are all in motion. The media will continue to blather on about nothing in particular, like play by play at a one-sided football game.

It's just physics now.

happiness

2008-01-29T00:52:00.000-08:00

My son Zeke when he was a baby.

Plan C

2008-01-25T14:34:00.000-08:00

Now that Plan A (Thompson) is dead and Plan B (Giuliani) is looking more and more remote it's time for Plan C:

Romney or McCain?

I'm leaning toward Romney but I really think both are unelectable in the general. As far as McCain goes, does no one see the parallels between him as the nominee and Bob Dole's disastrous candidacy? He seems (like I thought of Dole at the time) totally unelectable - old, gruff and scarred by years of political compromises in Congress. He's even shares the traits of a military background and a war-related disability with Bob Dole. The constant drumbeat from the MSM promoting him only confirms my sense of dread, and even though the polls say that he runs best against Hillary or Obama I still think he will get creamed. Of course Romney (like Hillary) has very high negatives, mostly because of his Mormonism. I don't know if he would do any better than McCain in the general.

I guess I'll keep hoping for a brokered convention for now.

Speaking of "Cloverfield"...

2008-01-25T11:53:00.000-08:00

I've been following the growth of the community that have bought in to the Cloverfield viral marketing strategy, tracking down cryptic messages in fake MySpace pages and corporate websites. While it's all a lot of fun for folks with nothing better to do, I find it funny that the scientific investigative techniques on display have missed a couple of salient points:

1. Anything organic and ambulatory that was 500 feet tall would collapse and die of its own weight in a few seconds. As Steven Gould pointed out (and Intelligent Design confirmed), everything that we see on Earth is the "right size". Humans, for example, can't be a lot bigger or smaller than we are, as is evidenced by the health problems and short lifespans of very tall and very short people. In addition, all really large animals look the same because the options for possible body plans diminish with size, just as the ratio of a body's volume to surface area (which diminishes with size) rules out the possibility of huge insects (which respire through their skin).

2. Being large by itself doesn't give you invincibility from weaponry, and organic matter (meat) is not particularly blast-resistant. A blue whale (which can only live in the ocean because of the physical restrictions alluded to above) can get to be 100 feet, but one well-placed cruise missile would be more than enough to kill it.

There, I'm glad I got that off my chest. I know I'm a killjoy, but the "selective skepticism" on display in these kinds of social events is used in other arenas to pretty vile ends.

And don't even get me started about the Matrix. Humans as an efficient energy source? Grr....

Heading Off Clinton Derangement Syndrome

2008-01-23T21:29:00.000-08:00

First, a frank "post-mortem" of the Thompson campaign.

A Little Fable, by Franz Kafka

"Alas," said the mouse, "the whole world is growing smaller every day. At the beginning it was so big that I was afraid, I kept running and running, and I was glad when I saw walls far away to the right and left, but these long walls have narrowed so quickly that I am in the last chamber already, and there in the corner stands the trap that I must run into."

"You only need to change your direction," said the cat, and ate it up.

The inevitablility of a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton succession looms over us like the Cloverfield monster, roaring and smashing things in a fury that will only end with it worrying us in its toothy maw and spitting us back out again. Seeing the same dirty tricks, media love fest, and conservative apoplexy once more is discouraging.

Of course, nothing in politics is inevitable, and the Clintons' lust for power and self-promotion may well do them in. But I believe it is important take precautionary measures to repudiate the grim, nihilistic view typified in Kafka's "Little Fable". We have seen how that plays out on the other side of the aisle as Bush Derangement Syndrome: the rage and despair that leads to a kind of societal psychotic break with reality. I will work and advocate for a presidential candidate that can make this country a better place, and support whoever is elected as my president. Partisanship in the service of concrete ideals and substantive moral battles is a God-given right, but it's time to re-evaluate Arthur Vandenberg's wise words:

'To me "bipartisan foreign policy" means a mutual effort, under our indispensable two-Party system, to unite our official voice at the water’s edge so that America speaks with maximum authority against those who would divide and conquer us and the free world.'

That's a much better quote to end with than Kafka.

"A last post, and a very last, and yet another..."

2008-01-21T19:10:00.000-08:00

...about Fred. This post is frozen in time, but this time tomorrow we'll know if he's still in and, if he does pull out, who he will endorse. That will be a sticky wicket - it seems most of his supporters are drifting to Romney, but McCain is a close friend. I'm guessing Huckabee is not on the short list. He doesn't seem the type to jockey for a vice-presidential bid, but he would be a huge asset to a more moderate candidate like McCain or Giuliani.

Update: I guess we'll have to wait a little longer. It's a nice sentiment , but 'if you can't be Reagan, be Goldwater' misses the point that Goldwater actually got the nomination.

Update: It's happened, not with a bang but with a whimper and upstaged by the suspicious death of an actor and the cattiness of the Dem debate. I guess he's more open to a Veep spot than I first thought - he could really burnish the conservative credentials of McCain or Giuliani.

While idealism was a strong draw for me, Fred also appeals as a man with character who could run a presidential campaign without appearing to sell his soul. The press' portrayal of him as lazy (aided by his open contempt for much of the MSM) and his decision not to play by the rules were enough to do him in.

I think this get its just right.

Immanentizing the Mediocriton, or South Carolina on my Mind

2008-01-19T22:08:00.000-08:00

I always said I had a dismal record predicting presidential politics. Fred is taking on water and Rudy has yet to get on the radar. Hilary is having to call in a lot more favors than she'd hoped, but is starting to close the deal. It's pretty obvious she would eviscerate Huck or Romney in the general even if they had the chance (I think Rudy stands the best chance against her, but I'm increasingly asking myself "What do I know?"). I can only hope there will be maneuvering room come February 6 and that things aren't nailed down by then, but after all the months of hand-wringing and speculation it is increasingly shaping up the way folks called it a year ago as a Hilary/McCain debacle - and I think we all know how that will turn out.

We'll see.

Idealism, continued

2008-01-18T19:40:00.000-08:00

The South Carolina primary is tomorrow. While the pollsters have been spectacularly wrong these past few weeks, I don't think Fred Thompson is headed for a win. Barring that, it's going to be hardfor him to gather the money, press or momentum to pull off an upset in one of the Super Tuesday states. Of course anything can happen and the prospect of a convention without a clear nominee could be pretty interesting. What is surprising is the strong showing of safe, moderate candidates, namely McCain and Huckabee. I'm reminded of the interview with Derek Smalls, the bass player in the movie Spinal Tap:

"We're very lucky in the band in that we have two visionaries, David and Nigel, they're like poets, like Shelley and Byron. They're two distinct types of visionaries, it's like fire and ice, basically. I feel my role in the band is to be somewhere in the middle of that, kind of like lukewarm water."

It seems like America is getting in touch with its inner Smalls.

Pretty Low - Even for Them

2008-01-18T13:03:00.000-08:00

The Clintons have delevoped a new strategy: playing the Postmodern Race Card. It's as bizarre as it is despicable. They're obliquely portaying Obama as the "black" candidate while simultaneously calling in favors and support from the Sharpton/Jackson/Johnson black political establishment - who are backing Hillary, because an Obama candidacy (a successful black candidate who is succeeding with a color-blind message) poses a direct threat to their power, which is predicated on extortion, victimhood and liberal guilt.

Ick.

Sorting out Partisanship, Ideology and Character

2008-01-17T09:56:00.000-08:00

Hyperpartisanship. Moonbats. Republitards. The other side is "drinking the Kool-Aid", ignoring reality. The other side despises you and by extension, all mankind. We live in a dystopian police state where a monied elite all but owns the government. We live in a nanny state where corrupt Congressmen try to legislate behavior while having no moral center themselves.

Partisan rancor is at levels not seen since the turn of the last century. Progressives are enraged by the halt in the steady march of the progressive agenda that for the last fifty years seemed inevitable. Conservatives are angered by the erosion of values caused by years of liberal policies and are hunkering down in the trenches, unwilling to give up the any of the policy gains of the last decade.

For a guy who loves Howard Dean, LA Times writer Ronald Brownstein makes the point very eloquently in The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America. Except for a few "but they started it first" snipes, he explains how both parties have driven out moderates and created a climate where the goal is not a working bipartisan relationship but a "Fifty-One Percent Solution" so that as a majority they can legislate without the need for bipartisanship. Ideology has been sharpened and compromise denigrated.

In the current presidential race all the Democratic candidates are constantly harping on the word "Change". In the context of the current political climate it seems to be a code word for a return to the progressive ideals of the past and a break with the current partisan rancor. The implication is as long as Progressives get their way, partisanship will cease.

The Republican candidates are a less homogeneous lot. Huckabee, McCain and to a certain extent Romney are walking a fine line between honoring the conservative base and touting their coalition-building credentials to put Moderates, Independents and Democrats at ease. Thompson and Giuliani have seem to say "here I am, warts and all - take me or leave me". While their actual policy positions are considerably different, Giuliani's checkered, out-in-the-open past and Thompson's good-ol-boy, rags-to-riches stories recommend them to me as real people with real character.

And so, there are my biases. Of course I can be fooled, and my record at picking presidential winners is pretty abysmal. But I'll take character over specific policies any day.

Up to a point, that is.

"Ach! der Menge gefällt, was auf den Marktplatz taugt"

2008-01-16T20:11:00.000-08:00

I've tried listening to LA talk radio for the last few months. I thought it would be a chance to stay informed, instead I was introduced to the Right Wing version of Entertainment Tonight. Beside Rush (who I can listen to for about 30 minutes) and Dr. Laura (I max out on her at about 15) I enjoyed John Ziegler for the short time he was on air; he was as much a participant in the local lowbrow offerings as anyone else, but he seemed to have a good heart at times. Well, he seems to have tangled with a few of the huge egos there and gotten unceremoniously canned. Since this is talk radio, he's set up a website complete with soundbites to tell his sad story and air his grievances. There is not a white hat in sight.

I guess NPR can consistently win on quality because the bar everywhere else is set so low.

(Click the image for animated goodness).

Hillary and Her Italian Suppositories

2008-01-15T13:53:00.000-08:00

from Roger Kimball

heh heh

I Can't Be The Only One Who Thinks...

2008-01-15T04:02:00.000-08:00

...that the MSM is pushing McCain as the GOP nominee to assure that a Democrat is elected. I am incredibly suspicious of the polls that all say McCain is the best bet for the Republicans against Hillary and Obama. It just doesn't feel right. Maybe it's a corollary to the "white guilt" the MSM posited for getting it so wrong in NH - people surveyed favoring Obama because they felt it was the right thing to do but then voting differently. Maybe people just can't admit to disliking a decorated war hero who by golly is still out there pressing flesh at 71 after what seems like 10 failed attempts at the nomination, but when the general comes they won't be able to pull the lever for that cranky old guy when Obama is so dreamy or Hillary is so...

Maybe I just need to get outside more.

Fred Finally Becomes a Player?

2008-01-12T22:44:00.000-08:00

Fred Thompson has taken his sweet time, but seems finally to be catching fire. Of course, there's a whole lotta primaries left, and it looks we could have no clear nominee even by convention time. Heck, we could have 5 different winners for the first five major Republican primaries! For the first time in living memory we have a presidential election without a single incumbent (president or vice president) in the race. Of course, everybody on the left feels that the Democrats are poised for victory no matter who is nominated because of the huge anti-Bush sentiment in this country. But as many have pointed out, there will be no Bush on the ticket.

In any event, we have a horse race - on both sides. The Democrat side is currently a Battle Royale between two heavily-financed and fairly inexperienced candidates. With a finite amount of time and money and a large field, it looks as if all the GOP candidates are strategizing like crazy, looking for that the magic formula that will deliver the oh-so-elusive "momentum". The MSM is living up to its incredibly low standards, grasping at every twist and turn as definitive proof that the candidate of the moment is the inevitable nominee, but it looks as if the American public are becoming increasingly distrustful of their pronouncements. Well, if Fred can maintain the energy level he showed in the SC Debate and somehow end up with the nomination, I would look forward to seeing a dialed-in, no-bs Thompson debating the inspirational-but-content-free Obama or the Clinton-light Hillary. Of course, in that event Lyndon Johnson's infamous "Daisy" ad in 1964 is nothing compared to the kind of onslaught Thompson would face in the general. Prepare for MoveOn.org video of Fred eating babies.

The South Carolina Debate: A Dissenting View

2008-01-10T23:32:00.000-08:00

It remains to be seen if it is too little, too late, but Fred Thompson's performance in tonight's debate was thoughtful, focused and assertive. He owns all the issues and is a solid guy, but his disdain for the less savory aspects of the political process and media-hostile style have perhaps been his undoing. I would be proud to have him as our president.

John McCain is the Bob Dole of the 2008 race - a respected war hero, battle-scarred, with years of campaigns and the baggage that only comes from decades of Congressional sausage-making. Like Dole he is dour, old and unelectable in the general - I only hope Republicans don't make the same mistake and nominate him.

It is easy to see Mike Huckabee as another Clinton - polished and eminently likable, spouting rhetoric that soothes but does not nourish. But he seems less self-aggrandizing and far less knowledgeable than his predecessor in the Governor's Mansion. He's not quite an empty suit, but behind those crafty verbal thrusts and parries lies a man that I feel is less than qualified for the job.

Mitt Romney is a kind of a political Rorschach test - his sense of destiny, political pedigree, Mormon uprightness and almost stereotypical good looks provoke in some a sort of reverence. I see a man driven for all the wrong reasons and trying too hard.

Ron Paul (say it like Matt Damon in "Team America"). Okay, I'm done with him.

Rudy Giuliani has been a bit of a revelation. If Fred can't catch fire in SC and elsewhere, his well-informed, upbeat message trumps whatever doubts I have about his conservative credentials. He's my solid second choice at this point.

Randomness

2007-12-22T01:42:00.000-08:00

What a drag it is getting old
I find it humorous that as the Boomers age, the thinkers and artists among them by and large still cling to their youthful pronouncements, unaware of or unwilling to acknowledge their often painfully apparent callowness.

I guess honest introspection hurts your chances of your work being reissued and distributed by Starbucks.

The Politicization of Culture, or "It's 1968 All Over Again (Except Without the Idealism)"

2007-12-15T13:36:00.000-08:00

"I am Legend as Political Manifesto"

Why Serious Films Aren't Making It At The Box Office

The Progressive movement hasn't been given as much to be angry about since Ronald Reagan. Deciding to embrace new media rather than ignore it, progressives in a position to advance their agenda feel that everything from sports articles to popular movies to advertising is fair game to carry the message. The messages try to grab you by the lapels and scream in your face:

Don't you see the awful things that are happening?

Our President is the triple embodiment of Pure Stupidity, Religious Hypocrisy and Pure Evil!

Global warming will kill us all in a few years!

Everybody hates us because we are so greedy and stupid!

Christianity is even worse than Islam and Israel is even worse that us, so shut up about terrorism already!

Our military atrocities mean we are worse than our enemies!

It would be flip to dismiss these sentiments out of hand. Progressives are the Canaries in our Coal Mine, sounding the alarm and speaking (selective) truth to power. I should and do consider their arguments. George Bush has a worldview antithetical to many on the Left, and his strengths are often blunted by his arrogance. In addition, his checkered record as president makes him an even better target than Reagan, whose many successes eventually silenced a few critics. War is a terrible thing, and this foreign proxy war seems like another Viet Nam to those for whom Viet Nam was a rallying cry, a clear sign that the people in power are evil and despise us. Christians are unfortunately people and as a result possess many of the failings of people - greed, sloth, anger and hypocrisy being just a few. I can see how it is tempting to lay much of our country's problems at their feet since the majority of our citizens (especially - as Progressives are wont to point out - the stupid ones!) profess a belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ.

By and large, people are not buying the Progressive line. But that just makes the Progressives even angrier. The rhetoric gets shriller and more unreasonable.

I am not sure where it all will end.

Norman Mailer

2007-11-12T10:58:00.000-08:00

What is the Christian response to the death of a man who spread as much spiritual damage through the culture as Norman Mailer? The writer is dead, but his legacy of unbridled egotism, vanity, lust and depravity will continue to lure thousands of fragile intellects down his dead-end path for years to come.

He wasn't even a good writer.

Vonnegut's Last Laugh

2007-09-29T13:02:00.000-07:00

Slaughterhouse Five was for me, like many of my generation, a seminal book by a guy I could relate to. Kurt Vonnegut, the "above average" geek who wrote science fiction stories, the sensitive, childlike man who found himself adrift in the very adult activities of World War II, who weathered all those grown-up trials and came through the other side still a child and convinced of the absurdity of life, was a character after my own heart. His Billy Pilgrim placidly observed the horrors of war and Vonnegut's imaginings of a postwar America. One of the things Vonnegut foresaw in late twentieth century America was that it would be balkanized into several smaller nations to reduce its power and hence its threat to world political stability. While his vision was never realized and politically naive (what historical precedence is there for any nation, much less the most powerful nation on Earth, relinquishing any of its power voluntarily?) the balkanization of American Culture continues apace. American intellectuals, among other groups, have moved from imagining themselves a demimonde of like minded spirits spread among the population at large to "the Society" itself, with the rest of the population as phantom observers. How else explain pundits like Daniel Lazare, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Carlin Romano confidently proclaiming the end of faith and scoffing away the last vestiges of our religious trappings in a country where 98% of the populace believe in God? Intellectuals, like celebrities and the very rich have often felt that their reality and/or morality have little to do with the rest of the world. Technological innovation has made it progressively easier to actually create an insular and alternate reality, given sufficient means.

Vonnegut's success as a writer allowed him to remain an outsized misantropic child to the very end (comparisons of Vonnegut to Mark Twain I think focus more on outward resemblances than actual philosophies of life, ignoring Twain's humanitarian core) surrounded by fans who shared his worldview. His balkanized America, while never a political reality, has become a societal one.

The Subtle Poison of Gould's NOMA

2007-09-28T12:08:00.000-07:00

My kids were watching the film "Facing the Giants" in the car the other day. It's an inspirational sports film with an overtly Christian message shot in Georgia on a budget of $100,000 using mostly amateur talent. Listening to the coach unabashedly use Christian concepts to inspire and motivate his players, I was struck by both the strangeness and rightness of what what was unfolding. The solidity, depth and "rightness" of his Christian viewpoint resonated much more deeply than any standard Hollywood feelgood humanist dialog, but at the same time I thought "in the real world, this coach would be considered a kook and fired on the spot".

Looking into the film online, I discovered that it had done well (eventually grossing $10,000,000 in very limited distribution) while being savaged by the critics. This review from the Austin Chronicle really hit home:

"...its feel-good storyline, shopworn message, and bottomless sermonizing would have played better in Sunday school than on the big screen, which is — let’s face it — Babylon’s turf."

Here is the reality of Life in 21st Century America, the result of the triumph of cultural humanism, as put forward by people like Stephen Jay Gould in his idea of Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA):

"the magisterium of science covers the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for example, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty)."

I'm sure for many in this country (sadly, even for many Christians) the above sounds not only temperate but fair and reasonable. The catch, as I'm sure Gould knew, is in the way things are divided. Anything dealing with Reality or Truth is the province of Science. The sly assignation of questions of "ultimate meaning" to religion appears to venerate it while at the same time stripping it of any of its intrinsic value in our life. The result of NOMA's tacit acceptance in our culture is that God is put in a very small box. Any reference to Him outside church is now unwelcome, and any reference in the larger culture must honor "equal time" commitments to any and all competing religious views, further weakening its impact. A film like "Facing the Giants" flies in the face of that, and it produced a visceral and negative reaction from secular critics precisely because it chose to ignore Mr. Gould's rules. Well, I'm all for pissing off the right people. Bravo to director and star Alex Kendrick.

gotta love British candor

2007-09-26T13:35:00.000-07:00

While I have little desire to relocate to The Land of Fried Bread and Lager, their understatement and lack of pretense can be very refreshing. Take these selections from bios on the British Film Institute site:

Julie Andrews:
"It seems a shame that she, quintessentially English, has wasted herself on many feeble American films when she could have found feeble films at home - and 'home' needed her more."

Tom Baker:

Stardom made him proprietorial, and he berated directors, producers and 'ordinary' scripts. He was ill for much of his record-breaking seventh year as the Doctor and, when faced with a new producer, incoming 'juvenile' assistants and a ratings slump, he announced his retirement in October 1980. Before leaving the programme Baker wed his assistant Romana - actress Lalla Ward - although the marriage lasted just 18 months.

Baker's final Doctor Who was shown in March 1981 and he subsequently struggled with typecasting, retreating to the theatre and runs of Treasure Island, Educating Rita, Hedda Gabler and She Stoops to Conquer...

The typecasting receded in the 1990s - he was now physically heavier and the famous curls had begun to grey, while directors who had grown up watching Doctor Who began to cast him...

Compare these to the typical American writing on celebrities, which either treats them as maincured, PR-vetted High Priests of Culture or seedy scandal sheet fodder.

P.S. Eek! The above-mentioned Lalla Ward is now telegenic wife and illustrator to Current Pop Science Atheist Rockstar Richard Dawkins (well, "current" given the death of Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay Gould and limited mobility of Stephen Hawking) who is perhaps one of the most arrogant people on the planet. Check out his latest offer (sorry no link): damn your soul to Hell and get a free DVD!

Small world.

What Is foxnews.com Trying to Tell Us?

2007-07-21T19:34:00.000-07:00

Keith Ellison: Muslims and Atheists and Nazis, Oh My!

2007-07-16T12:07:00.000-07:00

Will the state of public discourse, freighted with postmodern ironies and disengenuous anti-intellectual sloganeering, ever emerge from its current condition as something resembling principled, reasoned debate? I don't consider myself naive, or a fool, or even an old fogey pining for "the good old days". I understand that (for now) postmodern America overlooks hypocrisy or character deficiencies in anyone as long as the person or persons involved a) have no moral standards to begin with, b) are perceived as "fighting the good fight" in a different cause deemed worthy to the given worldview, or c) are part of a protected class created as a result of priviledge-based guilt, notions of a universally inclusive, morally neutral society, or in reaction to perceived historical injustices. So those who fail us and also fail to meet the above requirements are given the equivalent of a "Go Directly to Jail - Do Not Get 15 More Minutes" card and the rest are perhaps rapped on the knuckles but are otherwise free to go. How else explain can one explain Al Sharpton, or the Clinton Dynasty?

In addition, the growing partisan desire to "defend one's own" and "get the word out at all costs" has led to even higher level of sniping and crosstalk, instead of issue-oriented debate. As a result loons and publicity hounds with suspect motives like Anne Coulter and Michael Moore are still getting airtime because their high visibility and easily identifiable ideology trump their often insidious rhetoric.

I guess it's going to get worse before it gets better because, like tryouts for a new season of reality TV, there seems to be no shortage of new applicants for the Crazy (Like a Fox?) Club.

The Newest Kid on the Block is a freshman Muslim congressman named Keith Ellison. Ellison's remarks at at a noontime speech before the group Atheists for Human Rights have already made the rounds in the blogosphere and are now radiating out into the world at large. This is the same Ellison who, aided by a one-two punch from a sympathetic MSM and a couple of comically rabid reactionary pundits, successfully painted his colleague Virgil Goode as a racist when Goode objected to Ellison's decision to be sworn into office using the Qu'ran.

It sounds strange to use "muslim pundit" and "chutzspah" in the same sentence, but I guess we're all Semites on this bus. In any case, here are a few choice excerpts from the afore-mentioned love fest from Gehenna:

"You'll always find this Muslim standing up for your right to be atheists"
Well, at least he used a qualifying "this", but apart from the fact that he makes no sense (does this mean he is a "bad" Muslim?) the statement not only makes the incredible claim that Islam is the only tolerant religion in the world but does so in the most nauseatingly sycophantic tone pssible. That's pretty good for a 13 word sentence!

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it and it put the leader of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted. The fact is that I'm not saying [Sept. 11] was a plan, or anything like that because, you know, that's how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you."

The "Bush is Hitler" slur in the above has been remarked on everywhere, but I think this paragraph's real significance is it's detailing of an increasingly common tactic of the Political Thug:

1. Make a sweeping and offensive statement.
2. Give the statement the appearance of historical credibility or deeper truth.
3. Immediately and subtly qualify your statement to cover your rear in case of controversy.
4. Take a last postmodern swipe at the opposition by complaining about the fact that you have to even engage in such subterfuge, thereby retaining your ideological purity among your listeners.

How someone can make such a public pronouncement and still feel a sense of personal dignity is beyond me. I mean, the checks cash and the people applaud, but it's just you and your Maker and your reflection in the hotel mirror when all is said and done.

Finally, if you thought the above was some kind of political joke or Theater of the Absurd, Atheists for Human Rights spokesperson Marie Castle provides the punch line:

"We're trying to upgrade the image of atheists. They don't think we have a moral compass."

As with a child who exhibits bad behavior to get attention it is tempting to shout, Sean Hannity-like, "Where's the outrage here!?" but you know that's only giving this guy what he wants. The current political climate rewards these kind of outbursts by giving people like Keith Ellison a platform - unless, of course, their target is white males or the current administration.

L'Homme d'Acier

2007-07-14T01:22:00.001-07:00

It's okay - all my ancestors were French.

Salon's Glenn Greenwald, or why do these guys always have such friendly drawings for their byline?

2007-07-13T12:48:00.000-07:00

Glenn Greenwald is a Salon columnist who almost makes you think he's a conservative plant. His mean-spirited, virulently partisan writing would probably make anyone outside of his normal Salon/Huffington Post/Kos readership cringe. Why then, you ask, am I even bothering to write about him? Perhaps because this past hour is one I will never get back, and by documenting what I've found I can save someone else the trouble. Okay, that's neither true nor honest, for there is already too much reliance on secondary sources and canned rhetoric in the world. So, for no good reason, here is a fairly complete sampling of the titles of Glenn Greenwald's blog entries for the past few weeks followed by my own commentary. I found myself getting more confrontational as I wrote, so I apologize upfront for the general tone - next time I won't try to read so much bad-tempered writing in one sitting.

Tucker Carlson, stalwart defender of sexual privacy A good introduction to the world of Glenn Greenwald, a world where sarcasm, cherry-picking facts and a generous helping of self-righteous anger are your unwavering diet.

Our broken political discourse A standard if unoriginal topic for discussion in political circles becomes unintentionally ironic given his tone. C'mon, Glenn - be part of the solution.

Sen. David Vitter, a leading Christian social conservative Sigh. Sarcasm again. What's unsaid here is that if you're possessed of an amoral or materialist worldview then you can't to be labeled a hypocrite - just ask Jon ("So, was that out of line? Well I'm only a comedian!") Stewart.

The ongoing journalistic scandal at the New York Times and
The NYT's growing pro-war fan club Mr. Greenwald fumes that the usually reliable liberal Paper of Record has drunk the wrong Kool-Aid. Well I thought dissent was patriotic.

Yesterday's ruling on NSA warrantless eavesdropping Spinning a setback into a victory based on wordy technicalities is certainly nothing new in political circles, but Mr. Greenwald's greatest strength seems to lie in this very lack of novelty, this dogged insistance on sticking to familiar talking points. Oh my goodness! I just had the thought - perhaps he think he's the liberal George Bush! Well, no wonder he's so angry!

Why has world opinion of the U.S. changed dramatically since 2000? Perhaps the millionth expression of liberal incredulity over how the current Administration can't see the obvious uncoolness of it's brazen nationalism and utter lack of introspective nihilism.

Notes on A Tragic Legacy - "Various matters concerning my book, including its debut on the NYT BestSeller List"

The tragic collapse of America's standing in the world Mr. Greenwald's unending reliance on standard liberal tropes has by now lulled me into a dream state where I see an image of Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda staring intensely into the camera cheek to cheek, a single tear from each commingling in mute encomium to the infinite sadness of a progressive Paradise Lost.

Lewis Libby owes his freedom to our corrupt political elite Even more galling is that in Bush's America patriots like Mark Rich are afraid to show their faces outside of New York and LA. Oh well, you can't get good Chinese takeout in Flyover States anyway.

Michael Gordon trains his stenographer weapons on Iran Once again noting that if the NYT can't be counted on to toe the line, the "real" War - the War of Ideas - is going very badly. Wake up, sheeples!

Our rotted press corps, a division of "Camp Victory" The irony of lambasting the press corps using the same "if you're not for us, you're against us" logic of his simian evil twin seems to be lost on him.

Interview with Helen Thomas If you're going to interview someone else to hammer home your own speaking points, it's probably safest to choose someone who thinks as much like you as possible.

How did the Bush administration use its secret eavesdropping powers? Without pieces like this, it's easy to forget that many liberal pundits are, sadly, a product of their environment, relying heavily on the scaremongering and distrust of authority they learned from all those scary dystopian books and movies they were exposed to in high school.

Blogs and the establishment media Summary: "Without the fearless liberal blogosphere around to recognize my inestimable genius, you would all now be reading William Bennett purchased under duress from the state-run Barnes and Noble."

Standards of American justice under George W. Bush Hmm, higher or lower? I know - let's ask our friends at the NYT Op-Ed page!

A Tragic Legacy released today
FDL Book Salon FireDogLake momentarily relieves Mr. Greenwald of his tireless self-promotion duties.

McClatchy reports on shift in Iraq propaganda and
Everyone we fight in Iraq is now "al-Qaida" Flogging - I'm sure he thinks boldly - the familiar liberal canard that Al Qaeda in Iraq is a nothing more than a Bushite fabrication designed to facilitate the Administration's consolidation of power. I didn't read far enough to see if he gets bonus points for making references to a) The Skull and Bones Society b) Bush family ties to Arab sheiks or c) Orwellian ideas of continual war and thought crime.

Krauthammer's plan to deny Palestinians gas and electricity A fitting last citation and another bold, Greenwaldian choice - ridiculing a braver and much deeper intellect by using his Weapons of Choice: misrepresentation and sarcasm.

Well, with writing that runs the gamut from "conservatives are really stupid and evil" to "did I mention I'm on the NYT Bestseller list?" you can count on Mr. Greenwald to always meet your expectations. By the way, the practices elaborated on above called to mind another prominent example of the genre, although the pundit pictured on the left seems a little unsure of his greatness, thus requiring the strategic placement of cuddly animals and a distant admirer. I'll have to keep a lookout now, for perhaps we are witnessing the emergence of a new phenomenon: The Acid-Tongued-but-Cartoon-genic Blogger.

UPDATE: I have just been reading about Mr. Sullivan's recent pronouncements as well as some long-standing controversies regarding him of which I was unaware. (really I'm just too busy to keep up and too disconnected to care). In retrospect, my singling out of him now feels more like overkill. He has refined the Art of Alienating All Hues of the Political Spectrum and brought it to a level not seen since Richard Nixon, and to further dwell on his situation would be petty. He is also a man with some vestiges of religious sensibility, so I think he would rather have my prayers than my feeble attempts at humor.

It's All My Fault

2007-06-28T17:29:00.000-07:00

Don't Cry for Me, San Ber'dino (Feet of Clay, Part 2)

2007-06-28T11:12:00.000-07:00

It's hard to believe, but Frank Zappa has been dead for 14 years now. He always was an iconoclast and a loner, but like R Crumb his ambition and unique and misogynistic talent was right for the times and carried him into the limelight. He was a prolific serious composer with a love of doo-wop, but seemed to realize early on that the racy, rockier side of his avant garde sensibilities sold better than his cerebral atonal work. Whether this compromise was something he embraced happily or not I'll never know, but I think it contributed to the sneering undercurrent of intellectual elitism that runs through almost all of his work. In a sense he was equally disgusted with everything. As for his fans, he he spent most of the 80s producing songs whose bathroom humor appealed to his audience's basest instincts while their delivery and composition derided that same audience for their inability to appreciate his polyrhythmic complexities (it also didn't help that a deranged Brit pushed him off the stage in 1971 and put him in a wheelchair for a year). He continually complained about the inability of his band members and orchestras to play his music correctly; his experiences with the London Symphony left him so upset that he added a disclaimer on that album as to the performance's accuracy. For the recording industry, the business side of the arts, Britain and the US Government he harbored a special and unwavering contempt that found expression in songs like "Baby Snakes", his acrimonious break with his long-time manager Herb Cohen in 1976 and his anti-censorship crusades in the 80s. He was passionate about music as an exercise of the will, an ideal construct with the the composer at the apex and hordes of willing performers and listeners arranged below. He ended his life composing on the Synclavier, finally doing away with any and all collaborators.

I was a big fan of his music until about 1979; after that everything sounded shrill and disappointing to my ears. I realized that there was perhaps one song in all of the albums I had (and that was every album of his in print at the time) that you could say was "beautiful" - the title track on his album "Sleep Dirt". Even there he undercuts the piece's impact by ending it abruptly with some inane studio banter. Sincerity and tonal beauty were simply not a part of his vocabulary.

Frank Zappa was diagnosed with inoperable prostate cancer in the early 90s. I don't think he was the kind of person who would have mellowed with age and he died far too young. Maybe his childhood in Baltimore, surrounded by poverty and the toxic chemicals his Dad worked with and brought home hastened his end. Maybe it was the thousands of cigarettes he smoked even as he derided the widespread drug use of the 70s. His wife and children have tried to carry on his legacy even while trying to establish their own identity in his giant shadow. He was posthumously inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but almost as an afterthought and with little fanfare; the presenter, Lou Reed, had been a sworn enemy of Zappa's since the 60s. The family have hundreds of hours of unreleased material in a temperature-controlled vault, but only time will tell what will remain of this brilliant, misunderstood, caustic, industrious and perhaps fragile individual.

pic

2007-06-27T20:54:00.000-07:00

from my days posting at Fark.com

Feet of Clay Department

2007-06-27T20:40:00.000-07:00

Way after the fact, I finally connect the dots about a couple of heroes (read anti-heroes) of my misspent youth, with varying results.

Tony Hendra is a brilliant writer and satirist who worked on National Lampoon, Spy (a guilty pleasure of mine), and the movie Spinal Tap. Lately he has written the spiritual confessional Father Joe (2004) and the anti-evangelical fantasy (imagine a book-length riff on the Kris Kristofferson song "Jesus Was a Capricorn") The Messiah of Morris Avenue. Father Joe was supposed to be a purging of sorts, a middle-aged dissolute’s account of his discovery of grace and spirituality through his friendship with a monk. The always gloriously wrong Andrew Sullivan praised it to the skies. Maybe in his Sullivanish way when he wrote sentences like “These ideas of sin that we have are not really sin” he was speaking as much about himself as Hendra. Who knows? In any event Sullivan’s review made the book a runaway hit; this confessional of a debauched man who’d come clean and found a kind of acceptance was touted as the perfect Father’s Day gift.

I then found an amazing review by Carolyn See in the Washington Post:

To be frank, I didn't much care for the book…Hendra's voice was sour, peevish…I was snide, I suppose: "It's a book for men who think of themselves as trapped, misunderstood geniuses," I wrote, "so it should sell well"…

Flash forward a few weeks. I'm drinking coffee and watching morning television and there's a desperately nervous woman being interviewed. She's Tony Hendra's daughter and she's saying, in a barely audible voice, that her father molested her when she was a child…

The younger Hendra’s book, How to Cook Your Daughter (2006; the title comes from a short story written by her dad shortly before the alleged incidents begin) chronicles life in the 70s with her self-obsessed, drug-addled, philandering father. The older Hendra denied her allegations of abuse and suggested his daughter was mentally ill, but some legwork done by the New York Times confirmed many of the specifics. Perhaps the most damning fact, however, is Hendra’s subsequent behavior: cutting off all contact with his daughter, he has returned to writing satire but with a bitter partisan edge and a smugness reminiscent of Christopher Hitchens at his worst. He often blogs at the Huffington Post, where last Thanksgiving he offered a mock prayer that opened with a request for the speedy death of VP Cheney and rapidly went downhill from there. Even without his daughter’s revelations, it seems that any sort of conversion he experienced with Father Joe was short-lived.

In retrospect, a few of the bright lights from that era have prospered: Bill Murray, Harold Ramis and P. J. O’Rourke come to mind. But for every O’Rourke (who incidentally, Hendra loathes, perhaps because he replaced Hendra as editor at National Lampoon) it seems there are dozens of Doug Kenneys, Michael O'Donoghues, and John Belushis. And Tony Hendras.

more to come...

Watch Out! It's CulturalRelativism Man!

2007-06-13T19:05:00.000-07:00

Actually, he probably shouldn't be smoking.

EjectEjectEjectEject!

2007-06-13T18:49:00.000-07:00

Tora! Tora! Tora!

Bill Whittle of EjectEjectEject! is a Big Idea Guy par excellence. His lengthy essays always leave you saying to yourself "Yeah, that's just what I've been thinking all along but have felt too intellectually confused by the liberal zeitgeist to thoughtfully articulate it". The sporadic nature of the essays also leave you wanting more. Now Bill has simultaneously unloaded perhaps the heaviest articulation of his philosophy and summoned the faithful to create an online community of like-minded believers. I wish him all the best, although the avowedly secular nature of the endeavor is probably not ideal for me. But anyone who loves clear-headed and fearless analysis who doesn't already have Mr. Whittle's RSS feed on their reader of choice should do so immediately.

Stereotypes - the Great Conservative Time Saver and a Renewed Promise to Write Some More

2007-06-04T19:00:00.000-07:00

Too much time away and where to begin? There is so much to talk about. I've been subscribed for a while to a few standard left-wing blogs such as the Daily Kos and The Huffington Post. It is important to be able to confront/consider all points - the Right would be poorer without the Left and vice versa. But although Best of the Web's James Taranto's concept of the "Angry Left" is perhaps an over-generalization, I still see very little to contradict it in the Left-Wing Blogosphere. Like Bernard Goldberg (although unlike Goldberg he is an excellent writer), his points are very apt. And in spite of voices like Goldberg and Taranto the concept of activist journalism (facts are secondary to the greater and usually progressive truth) has continued to thrive by adopting quasi-scientific terminology (such as "post-normal science") to justify its existence.

Science is now more than ever the "moral engine" that drives the Progressive movement. In a world where trickle-down versions of scientific Big Ideas like Evolution, String Theory, Relativity and Behavioral Sciences seem to offer the average humanistic intellectual something like Truth and with the Humanities immolating itself in a bonfire of nihilism, the Progressive Movement sees the continued march of humanism as the only way to a rational, happy future. Who would have thought that the bold standard carried by men like Voltaire and Nietzsche would end up in the hands of Gene Roddenberry? And if it's hard not to see the appeal in progressive activist journalism to someone like me, then it must be near impossible for someone on the other end of the political spectrum .

...And the only thing that can cure it is MORE COWBELL!

2007-03-21T14:15:00.000-07:00

Okay, I know that Fox News is getting hammered in the liberal media these days, but this is kinda funny.

The first good news to come out of my home town since Carly Patterson

2007-01-24T14:16:00.000-08:00

You may have heard of him before. He parents are Indian. He was born and raised in Baton Rouge, LA. He went to Oxford as a Rhodes scholar and was drafted into LA politics shortly thereafter. He is a conservative Republican who is wicked smart and currently serves in Congress. He is running for governor against the severely compromised Ms. Blanco. Even a state as messed up as LA can't keep him down.

His name is Bobby Jindal.

I was first made aware of him by my dad who was impressed by his work as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals about 10 years ago.

Illinois (a state that gives LA a run for its money as most the corrupt in the Union) may have Barack, but we have Bobby. And he's only just getting started.

Busy Busy Monday

2007-01-22T17:53:00.000-08:00

So not too much today. I've been reading too much about the Middle East these days, so I can kill two birds with one stone by combining it with a tribute to the late, troubled genius of B Kliban.

Enjoy more of these here

It's another Taqiyya Sunrise

2007-01-20T23:35:00.000-08:00

From the Jerusalem Post:

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas on Saturday renewed his offer for a 10-year truce with Israel in return for the establishment of a temporary Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem.

Wow, I thought chutzpah was a Yiddish word

Sincere Apologies to Mr. Kliban

2007-01-19T18:36:00.000-08:00

Happy weekend!

The Democratic Executive in the 21st Century: a blueprint

2007-01-19T13:28:00.000-08:00

Occaisioned by a piece in Commentary by Joshua Muravchik on Carter.

Carter and Clinton: the models.

Two very different men on the surface, yet their similarities point us in the direction of what a successful Democratic nominee would look like. Their main shared traits seem to be:

1. Massive intellectual capacity - as far as IQ goes, both of these men are generally considered to be among the smartest to hold the office of president.

2. The lack of a solid core - this is a little more troublesome, but both men seem to lack a solid set of values, picking and choosing causes based not so much on their merits but rather on their appearance to others. The Muravchik piece and other biographies of Carter are filled with anecdotes where seemingly fundamental policy choices and campaign platforms are arrived at through a calculating, Machiavellian process. Clinton's similar methodology has been perhaps better documented, but the disconnect between public and private faces is very pronounced in both men.

3. An obsession with a historical legacy as something to be cultivated after leaving office, usually by choosing statesmanly causes that, as above, seem calculated rather than genuine.

4. Enigmatic and Self-Obsessed Personalities - this is a little vague and perhaps included in the traits above, but neither man really gives you the impression that you fully connect with what makes them tick. Both men have the ability in the moment to connect to people on a personal level, but this can be seen in retrospect as a skill rather than an inward trait.

It could be said that these are vague observations that are common to many ambitious men, not just politicians. But if Carter and Clinton are compared with their Republican counterparts (Reagan, the Bushes, and Ford) these men seem opaque, calculating and self-serving.

I would argue that their lack of a "center" and desire to disguise their private motivations are a almosta Party template (cemented by both men's unquestioned success) that are common to Kerry and Gore, but these unsuccessful candidates lacked either the intelligence or personal charisma to complete the picture and connect to voters.

Well that's as much of a thought piece as I'm good for on a Friday. Have a great weekend!

Why? Because they try harder!

2007-01-19T11:16:00.000-08:00

Volokh Conspiracy: Former Member of CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) Board Files Complaint with Justice Department About (Among Others) "the 'Jewish Lobby'"

I guess that's how you stay ahead of the competition. Use the system. Use the "Arab Street". Use foreign aid. Throw up the specter of internment camps and Kristallnacht.

BTW, I wonder whether the whole inversion of Nazi persecution of the Jews ("now they're killing all the Palestinians! Oh, the irony!") by the Arab Press is really even acknowledged or believed or is some self-contained trope used to deflect criticisms and internal strife. Besides the fact that it's untrue on the face of it and patently unfunny, there is the kind of crass opportunism of the bazaar in trying to simultaneously leverage a historical event for your own advantage and at the same time trying to deny that the event even happened.

CAIR to be #1

2007-01-18T15:54:00.000-08:00

...now that that it has surpassed the NAACP and other civil rights organizations in whining and preying upon liberal guilt. This according to my unscientific poll - well, actually it's more anecdotal evidence than a true poll, but...

Okay, I made that statistic up. But doesn't it just feel right?

Fin de partie

2007-01-18T11:13:00.000-08:00

I suppose today is a slow news day since the blogosphere is full of very speculative thought pieces on Iraq, 2008 and Scooter Libby.

I would like to add to this ragout by putting forward this possibly historically interesting but nevertheless borderline useless proposal:

We elected the wrong Bush.

As the war with Iraq almost inevitably continues ( I don't think that, in hindsight, we can imagine any scenario that would have presented a quick and easy victory there) the winning of hearts and minds at home and the ability to convey at least the appearance of nuance and diplomacy abroad have become more desired qualities than indomitable resolve and populist appeal. Both Bushes may be all of these things and both may have brought us to this same juncture, but in a way we have reached the endgame in Iraq, and Jeb's Bishop cuts a much more useful figure than W's bellicose Knight.

It is one of the ironies of history that the best and brightest do not always rise to the top, and Jeb's earlier successes on the smaller stage of Florida may have precluded him from holding an office where he could have done his country a better service. In any case, I doubt that the US is ready for a yet another Bush (or even a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton-Bush cycle) in the White House.

I wonder how history will assess it all?

Last Picture Post, I Promise...

2007-01-17T17:10:00.000-08:00

too much work makes grenma no writee...

Welcome Back, American Idol (I guess)

2007-01-16T22:13:00.000-08:00

We don't own a TV right now, but I caught a bit on my downstairs neighbor's beautiful HD plasma screen

2007-01-16T22:10:00.000-08:00

Actually, I am Uebermann

Pluggage

2007-01-16T17:50:00.000-08:00

Middlebrow - John Mark Reynolds hardly needs my plug to be noticed, but he is a great guy and a friend and covers a wide range of topics. I agree on a lot of what he says about Romney, troubled and perhaps uninformed as I am about mainstream Mormonism.

Besides his usual fare on Theology and Politics he's also an inveterate film and theater buff and a card-carrying Disneyland aficianado.

What more can you ask for?

Taranto: Things that make you go "Ouch"

2007-01-16T17:37:00.000-08:00

From BOTW today, on Obama's tepid showing among Black politcos:

"Our view is that Obama threatens Jackson, Sharpton and Belafonte precisely because he has an appeal that transcends race. If Obama is able to gain widespread appeal as a national political figure, it undermines the basis of white guilt, namely the assumption that America remains a deeply racist society. Men like Jackson, Sharpton and Belafonte have made their careers on the exploitation of white guilt. Obama is a threat to their power and livelihood. "

That's gotta hurt. But Al and Jesse are no strangers to pain (albeit perhaps more in their past than present), and, as they say, "Pain is God's megaphone".

But as New Orleans and a few of my own personal shortcomings can attest, suffering is no guarantee of growth or change. Human nature often (wrongly) tries to tell us the easiest course is to just hunker down until the pain goes away.

2007-01-15T12:50:00.000-08:00

Becker and Posner take on "Libertarian Paternalism":

A libertarian paternalist is happy to accept information arguments for government regulation of behavior, but typically stresses other considerations.

Ugh. What a waste of electrons.

I think to wax legalistic about this issue or to bring Mill into it only empowers a specious debate and obfuscates the real issues. Mill had the luxury of appealing for individual freedoms in a culture that was largely monolithic and whose behavior was already circumscribed by a host of universally recognized laws. Like a Picasso or a Kandinsky, he could "push" against the dominant paradigm because there was something to push against. We have no such luxury. Our social contracts are vague and polymorphous, so Science as the final (and only unquestioned) arbiter is allowed to creep in to the discourse. But Science can make no value-based arguments, so the bait-and-switch leaves us with an impoverished arguments that gets bogged down in legal footnotes.

Ham-Berglar, or Schadenfreude on the Right

2007-01-15T11:52:00.000-08:00

This whole Sandy Berger thing is gotten a little too post-post modern. The Right is fuming and polishing off their ever un-popular "b-but Clinton " shtick (and they said Reagan was a Teflon president!), the Press is ignoring, the Blogosphere is teeming with petitions and the Administration, who has already dealt very gingerly with the guy through the Justice Dept., is saying nothing.

Stuff:

The reheated "b-but Clinton" trope makes me uncomfortable and a little ashamed because of the parallels to the current "Chimpy McBush" (or is it Chimpy McHitler?) rhetoric on the Left. While the Right tends to exercise slightly more restraint (unlike the Left, the Right is at least theoretically held in check by its own appeals to a standard of morality), I am chastened by what jerks we conservatives can be.

The whole Berger affair is strange (at least to an outsider like me) because of the appearance of plans within plans on both sides. Is the Bush Administration trying to retain the high ground by letting the Blogosphere doing its dirty work? Is there dirt that Berger/Clinton has that constrained the Bush Justice Dept? Is this really an example of closet Dems at work in the rank and file of the Dept? How have Bill and Hilary still ended up smelling like roses?

My head a splode.

Blogging is an art, same as any other method of self-expression. Some are better at it than others. - hugh macleod

2007-01-15T10:58:00.000-08:00

The world does not need another blog, but this is a tiny little "s*** or get off the pot" moment for your humble correspondent. I will attempt to focus on politics, culture and their intersection with larger philosophical and theological issues. I will set a few guidelines:

1. No (or very sparing) use of mean-spiritedness, sarcasm, or self-serving wit.
2. A promise to get over the blank submission box and start typing already.

As for the rest, we'll just have to see.

RG

Everything takes three times longer than it should. Especially the money part. - hugh macleod

I would only add: it still takes three times longer if you figure in the "three times longer" beforehand