1. Mind-Reading Technology
The Economist, in a rare moment of hyperbole, gets a bit ahead of itself in declaring an era of mind-reading upon us. But they do raise the requisite questions about freedom and the relationship between the state and individual (see here). Clearly real mind-reading technology with any degree of scientific reliability is, if it’s possible at all, a long way off. And I’ve always been skeptical, or perhaps confused is a better word, about how one would verify the accuracy of the results of any mind-reading technology when ultimately such tests rely almost entirely upon the honesty of the test subject.
2. Skeptics Fire Back At BEST
Immovable climate skeptic James Delingpole of the UK Daily Telegraph responds to the BEST results that claim to prove global warming beyond dispute.
3. Surprise! The Media Finds More Dirt On Leading GOP Conservative Candidate!
Politco apparently has dug up two former co-workers at the National Restaurant Association that claim to have accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment back in the 90s. I’ll reserve judgment on whether the reporting on these allegations is accurate or not (though by early appearances they appear genuine). I’m more interested to see if Cain intends to play the Clarence Thomas card, which I think he has every right to do given the ongoing media narrative of racism being behind every attack on minority public figures in American history.
31.10.11
28.10.11
Early Edition
1. Perry May Duck Future Debates
When you look and sound like a retarded chimp up past his bedtime during these debates I can imagine why you’d want to avoid as many of them as possible.
2. Paul Ryan’s Stock Continues to Rise
Peggy Noonan contrasts the Obama strategy of mindless, petty division with Paul Ryan’s thoughtful style of problem solving supported by carefully explained philosophy. If you haven’t watched Ryan’s speech at the Heritage Foundation you might want to check it out here, it was very well done and should serve to both shame and motivate the President to clean up his act.
3. The Speed of Thought
Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman talks to NPR about human thought and how he thinks we’re not as great as we think we are at decision-making. His theories of System 1 and System 2 thinking are very relevant to previous conversations on free will and unconscious versus conscious thought. While Kahneman does not advance a “no free will” position, he does emphasize the overwhelming influence of chemicals, etc on brain activity and, consequently, decision-making.
When you look and sound like a retarded chimp up past his bedtime during these debates I can imagine why you’d want to avoid as many of them as possible.
2. Paul Ryan’s Stock Continues to Rise
Peggy Noonan contrasts the Obama strategy of mindless, petty division with Paul Ryan’s thoughtful style of problem solving supported by carefully explained philosophy. If you haven’t watched Ryan’s speech at the Heritage Foundation you might want to check it out here, it was very well done and should serve to both shame and motivate the President to clean up his act.
3. The Speed of Thought
Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman talks to NPR about human thought and how he thinks we’re not as great as we think we are at decision-making. His theories of System 1 and System 2 thinking are very relevant to previous conversations on free will and unconscious versus conscious thought. While Kahneman does not advance a “no free will” position, he does emphasize the overwhelming influence of chemicals, etc on brain activity and, consequently, decision-making.
27.10.11
Late Edition
1. Filmmaker Claims Photographic Proof of Alien Influence
Give me a computer with SimpleText and I’ll give you an “attributable” Stephen Hawking quote too. I’m sorry, too soon?
2. CBO Chief: There’s No Way To Determine If Stimulus Created Jobs, Major Tax Reform Will Lead To Growth
Somebody’s got to put a muzzle on this loose cannon Elmendorf. He’s too concerned about sound fiscal and budgetary policy to understand what really matters here. Which, clearly, is re-election.
3. FoxNews Panel Embarrassed To Have To Interview Ron Paul
Great discussion, though some of the questions are softball time-wasters. Juan Williams can’t help but prod Ron Paul about a third party run (which can only help Obama). Krauthammer looks like someone pooped in his Fruit Loops when Paul talks about al Qaeda in Iraq. Glad to see Paul understands his delivery needs improvement, question is what he’s going to do about it. He did surprise me when he said he’d probably vote for the FairTax (with some reservations). Great thing about a Paul presidency is that the worst case scenario is that he’s completely marginalized and ignored, his veto overriden on issues with overwhelming Congressional support, which is something that would tickle him pink anyway (the executive branch being marginalized by Congress, that is).
Give me a computer with SimpleText and I’ll give you an “attributable” Stephen Hawking quote too. I’m sorry, too soon?
2. CBO Chief: There’s No Way To Determine If Stimulus Created Jobs, Major Tax Reform Will Lead To Growth
Somebody’s got to put a muzzle on this loose cannon Elmendorf. He’s too concerned about sound fiscal and budgetary policy to understand what really matters here. Which, clearly, is re-election.
3. FoxNews Panel Embarrassed To Have To Interview Ron Paul
Great discussion, though some of the questions are softball time-wasters. Juan Williams can’t help but prod Ron Paul about a third party run (which can only help Obama). Krauthammer looks like someone pooped in his Fruit Loops when Paul talks about al Qaeda in Iraq. Glad to see Paul understands his delivery needs improvement, question is what he’s going to do about it. He did surprise me when he said he’d probably vote for the FairTax (with some reservations). Great thing about a Paul presidency is that the worst case scenario is that he’s completely marginalized and ignored, his veto overriden on issues with overwhelming Congressional support, which is something that would tickle him pink anyway (the executive branch being marginalized by Congress, that is).
26.10.11
Late Edition
1. More On Cain’s Abortion Stance
This is a tortured apologia for Cain’s equivocating on the abortion issue. The author is projecting his own libertarian predispositions on Cain, which is probably what Cain is going for with his confounding and inarticulate attempts to clarify his position (perhaps he’s learning a thing or two from Obama’s 2008 campaign). I think Cain is trying to have it both ways, and if he thinks that abortion should be legal in all cases either at the federal or state level but that he personally does not support it he’s going to have to say that pretty explicitly, otherwise he’s going to face a backlash from somebody at some point. And I’d rather it be sooner than later so that, if he’s our nominee, he’s had plenty of time to recover prior to the general. Part of his strategy, however, may be to play to the black community, who has a disproportionately large figure of women that undergo abortions. Right or wrong, this issue is too huge to be treated with such carelessness.
2. Libertarian Cato Institute Gives Perry Tax Plan a B+
Finds the Perry flat tax falls short in the elimination of loopholes, deductions, exemptions, etc, and seeks clarification on how the optional element will work (switch back from year to year or commit for a fixed period?), whether it eliminates the double tax on interest, and a few other things. Echoes my comments from yesterday about preferring this system over Cain’s 9-9-9 plan.
3. Can The US Learn To Live With Islamism?
Great piece from Time wondering if the West can and will learn to live with Islamist democracies in the Arab world.
4. Professor A$$douche Almost Had Me…
…Until I reached the last two paragraphs.
This is a tortured apologia for Cain’s equivocating on the abortion issue. The author is projecting his own libertarian predispositions on Cain, which is probably what Cain is going for with his confounding and inarticulate attempts to clarify his position (perhaps he’s learning a thing or two from Obama’s 2008 campaign). I think Cain is trying to have it both ways, and if he thinks that abortion should be legal in all cases either at the federal or state level but that he personally does not support it he’s going to have to say that pretty explicitly, otherwise he’s going to face a backlash from somebody at some point. And I’d rather it be sooner than later so that, if he’s our nominee, he’s had plenty of time to recover prior to the general. Part of his strategy, however, may be to play to the black community, who has a disproportionately large figure of women that undergo abortions. Right or wrong, this issue is too huge to be treated with such carelessness.
2. Libertarian Cato Institute Gives Perry Tax Plan a B+
Finds the Perry flat tax falls short in the elimination of loopholes, deductions, exemptions, etc, and seeks clarification on how the optional element will work (switch back from year to year or commit for a fixed period?), whether it eliminates the double tax on interest, and a few other things. Echoes my comments from yesterday about preferring this system over Cain’s 9-9-9 plan.
3. Can The US Learn To Live With Islamism?
Great piece from Time wondering if the West can and will learn to live with Islamist democracies in the Arab world.
4. Professor A$$douche Almost Had Me…
…Until I reached the last two paragraphs.
Morning Extra
The Economist published an interesting rundown on changes in consumer spending during 2007-2010. Nothing earth-shattering, but there's a few noteworthy outliers:
"Processed vegetables" (I read this as canned food) - has increased in real dollars, but the jump in nominal dollars is what's really scary. We may be trying to be "healthier", but more likely I think poorer people are priced out of fresh and are switching to canned, which is also not cheap these days. Ominous.
Real spending on tobacco, as the article notes, is way down. That's good I guess. I wonder how much is health-driven, and how much is due to a spat of statewide public smoking bans in the past few years?
Spending on eating out has dropped dramatically in terms of real dollars, and interestingly in similar proportion to spending on alcohol.
Utilities/home fuel spending is way way up, reflecting higher oil prices and a stressed electrical grid, most likely.
Last tidbit: Spending on gasoline and clothing both decreased overall, but both showed parallel decreases in real and nominal spending. This indicates to me that consumption parallels price changes in an almost 1:1 manner, but that could be a red herring. I am, after all, not an economist.
"Processed vegetables" (I read this as canned food) - has increased in real dollars, but the jump in nominal dollars is what's really scary. We may be trying to be "healthier", but more likely I think poorer people are priced out of fresh and are switching to canned, which is also not cheap these days. Ominous.
Real spending on tobacco, as the article notes, is way down. That's good I guess. I wonder how much is health-driven, and how much is due to a spat of statewide public smoking bans in the past few years?
Spending on eating out has dropped dramatically in terms of real dollars, and interestingly in similar proportion to spending on alcohol.
Utilities/home fuel spending is way way up, reflecting higher oil prices and a stressed electrical grid, most likely.
Last tidbit: Spending on gasoline and clothing both decreased overall, but both showed parallel decreases in real and nominal spending. This indicates to me that consumption parallels price changes in an almost 1:1 manner, but that could be a red herring. I am, after all, not an economist.
Early Edition
1. South Dakota Social Services Is Kidnapping Children
I understand that when underprivileged folks have a microphone thrust into their face and a sympathetic ear offerred that embellishment is a common occurrence, but regardless of whether the Howes are embellishing their story for the benefit of the reporter, this situation is still totally unacceptable. Social workers unilaterally empowered to take your children away on suspicion of wrongdoing? Forget the cultural elements of this story, this is wrong no matter where it occurs. Are there families out there neglecting, abusing and exploiting their children? Absolutely there are, and that is unforgivably tragic. But empowering government bureaucrats to steal your children and bar you from accessing them without due process of law? The absolute apathy of the bureaucrats interviewed in this piece is staggering.
2. More On Tunisian Elections
I’m heartened by what I’m reading on this. A youth demographic that is suspicious of the leading Islamist party, a population jealous of its accumulated rights, and no clear majority in Parliament, meaning a coalition of secular and religious parties will be required in order to govern. The voting occurred without violence or, as far as we can tell, massive fraud.
3. Feds Targeting California Marijuana Growers
Given the way our government usually works/thinks regarding lining its pockets and increasing the breadth of its authority, I’m continually amazed that legalization of marijuana has not gotten more traction. Legalizing would afford federal and state governments an enormous source of new tax revenues, a brand new industry to regulate, and so much else. But I guess then the US attorney’s office couldn’t order private landowners to use their property in a certain way or risk losing it altogether.
I understand that when underprivileged folks have a microphone thrust into their face and a sympathetic ear offerred that embellishment is a common occurrence, but regardless of whether the Howes are embellishing their story for the benefit of the reporter, this situation is still totally unacceptable. Social workers unilaterally empowered to take your children away on suspicion of wrongdoing? Forget the cultural elements of this story, this is wrong no matter where it occurs. Are there families out there neglecting, abusing and exploiting their children? Absolutely there are, and that is unforgivably tragic. But empowering government bureaucrats to steal your children and bar you from accessing them without due process of law? The absolute apathy of the bureaucrats interviewed in this piece is staggering.
2. More On Tunisian Elections
I’m heartened by what I’m reading on this. A youth demographic that is suspicious of the leading Islamist party, a population jealous of its accumulated rights, and no clear majority in Parliament, meaning a coalition of secular and religious parties will be required in order to govern. The voting occurred without violence or, as far as we can tell, massive fraud.
3. Feds Targeting California Marijuana Growers
Given the way our government usually works/thinks regarding lining its pockets and increasing the breadth of its authority, I’m continually amazed that legalization of marijuana has not gotten more traction. Legalizing would afford federal and state governments an enormous source of new tax revenues, a brand new industry to regulate, and so much else. But I guess then the US attorney’s office couldn’t order private landowners to use their property in a certain way or risk losing it altogether.
25.10.11
Late Edition
1. OMG, The Earth Has Warmed For Reals
I know there are hardcore spectics out there that don’t think that warming is occurring but I think the vast majority of folks are more skeptical of the anthropogenic argument than the actual warming. “Proving” that warming is occurring or has occurred is just fine, the planet has done so many times in its history. And another thing: why would any climate scientist, given the checkered recent history of shoddy peer review and politicization, even think about deviating from the standard peer review process by doing what they have done and inviting fanfare and attention to their work prior to extensive peer review? Also, I thought this was settled science as of like 2008 or something. They’re still doing studies on this?
2. Google Gets a Gold Star
Great big gold star for Google, but while the requests they can disclose are a great thing, I’m really far more concerned about the more than 50,000 requests issued via “National Security Letter” or the other “requests” Google is forced to cooperate with thanks to the sweeping powers granted to the federal government to combat terrorism.
3. Can We Just Agree That Everyone Is Crazy?
The war over who is more anti-science continues to rage on. Kind of funny to watch. Still a plague on both their houses; religion and irrationality take many guises and can never be purged entirely from the human condition. It’s the folks who want to compel me to do something about their irrational beliefs that ought to be publicly derided.
I know there are hardcore spectics out there that don’t think that warming is occurring but I think the vast majority of folks are more skeptical of the anthropogenic argument than the actual warming. “Proving” that warming is occurring or has occurred is just fine, the planet has done so many times in its history. And another thing: why would any climate scientist, given the checkered recent history of shoddy peer review and politicization, even think about deviating from the standard peer review process by doing what they have done and inviting fanfare and attention to their work prior to extensive peer review? Also, I thought this was settled science as of like 2008 or something. They’re still doing studies on this?
2. Google Gets a Gold Star
Great big gold star for Google, but while the requests they can disclose are a great thing, I’m really far more concerned about the more than 50,000 requests issued via “National Security Letter” or the other “requests” Google is forced to cooperate with thanks to the sweeping powers granted to the federal government to combat terrorism.
3. Can We Just Agree That Everyone Is Crazy?
The war over who is more anti-science continues to rage on. Kind of funny to watch. Still a plague on both their houses; religion and irrationality take many guises and can never be purged entirely from the human condition. It’s the folks who want to compel me to do something about their irrational beliefs that ought to be publicly derided.
Early Edition
1. Paul Raises $2.75M in Five Days
I read these articles and, while $3 million is only a fraction of the $15 million a complete chucklehead like Perry has on hand, am amazed at the fact that this figure is composed almost entirely of small donations from individuals rather than major corporations, special interests, etc. It makes one wonder what Paul would be capable of if he were to take on serious financial backers. But then I suppose he wouldn’t be Ron Paul. Unless of course those backers understood and agreed that their support would not equate to political favors in a Paul administration. But then why would they back him…
2. Steve Forbes… I Mean Rick Perry… Unveils New Tax Plan
Perry hits all the high notes of GOP fiscal rhetoric with his new plan. He’s recycling Forbes’flat federal income tax plan with some changes from the 1996 2000 GOP primaries (small wonder, considering Forbes is both advising and now officially backing Perry) and throwing in a Balanced Budget Amendment, entitlement reform, and a limitation on taxation to in-country income only. He also says the corporate income tax would first be lowered to 20%, then temporarily lowered to 5.25% as a short term measure to lure offshore investments back to the US. While I think Perry’s a dead end, this is a smart campaign move. People liked “9-9-9” because it was a slogan that kept things simple. Well, Perry’s making things even simpler with just “20”. That’s one number less than Cain! The one to cinch the nomination will be the first to reach a single digit slogan for their tax reform plan. There isn’t too much about Perry’s plan I hate, and considering it came from Forbes that makes sense. I wish it were an abolition of the current income tax and a replacement with a federal consumption tax but if I have to pick between a plan that has a flat consumption tax coupled with a personal income tax and a corporate income tax and a plan that just has a flat personal income tax and corporate income tax then I think I’ll go with the latter. The fewer and lower the taxes Americans pay the better off we are.
3. Present-Day David Brooks Continues To Wish He Could Go Back In Time and B*tch-Slap 2008 David Brooks
Brooks sees Obama’s obvious play to his base as a losing strategy for re-election, and he’s absolutely right. Even if Obama clings tenaciously to his base, he’s going to alienate independents and conservatives even further (if that’s possible) and wind up with such a narrow share of the general election vote that he’ll make Jimmy Carter look like a rock star.
I read these articles and, while $3 million is only a fraction of the $15 million a complete chucklehead like Perry has on hand, am amazed at the fact that this figure is composed almost entirely of small donations from individuals rather than major corporations, special interests, etc. It makes one wonder what Paul would be capable of if he were to take on serious financial backers. But then I suppose he wouldn’t be Ron Paul. Unless of course those backers understood and agreed that their support would not equate to political favors in a Paul administration. But then why would they back him…
2. Steve Forbes… I Mean Rick Perry… Unveils New Tax Plan
Perry hits all the high notes of GOP fiscal rhetoric with his new plan. He’s recycling Forbes’flat federal income tax plan with some changes from the 1996 2000 GOP primaries (small wonder, considering Forbes is both advising and now officially backing Perry) and throwing in a Balanced Budget Amendment, entitlement reform, and a limitation on taxation to in-country income only. He also says the corporate income tax would first be lowered to 20%, then temporarily lowered to 5.25% as a short term measure to lure offshore investments back to the US. While I think Perry’s a dead end, this is a smart campaign move. People liked “9-9-9” because it was a slogan that kept things simple. Well, Perry’s making things even simpler with just “20”. That’s one number less than Cain! The one to cinch the nomination will be the first to reach a single digit slogan for their tax reform plan. There isn’t too much about Perry’s plan I hate, and considering it came from Forbes that makes sense. I wish it were an abolition of the current income tax and a replacement with a federal consumption tax but if I have to pick between a plan that has a flat consumption tax coupled with a personal income tax and a corporate income tax and a plan that just has a flat personal income tax and corporate income tax then I think I’ll go with the latter. The fewer and lower the taxes Americans pay the better off we are.
3. Present-Day David Brooks Continues To Wish He Could Go Back In Time and B*tch-Slap 2008 David Brooks
Brooks sees Obama’s obvious play to his base as a losing strategy for re-election, and he’s absolutely right. Even if Obama clings tenaciously to his base, he’s going to alienate independents and conservatives even further (if that’s possible) and wind up with such a narrow share of the general election vote that he’ll make Jimmy Carter look like a rock star.
24.10.11
Late Edition
1. iSkin
The future is now. Turn your skin into a touchpad. This could revolutionize human intimacy. Wait, what? I mean ergonomics.
2. Whoops! Fundamentalism!
This is about as alarming a debut as you could imagine for the new Libyan government, short of calling for the destruction of Israel and decapitating a Western journalist on live television. Still, from what I understand this Jalil guy is at best a more secular moderate and at worst an opportunist. He's likely doing this to keep the Islamist elements of the revolution appeased until the difficult work of drawing up a constitution begins. If this Sharia thing survives a constitutional convention or Jalil and company start talking jihad, death to America, etc then I'll be really ill at ease. At least we can still withhold Ghadafi's frozen assets (I bet you thought I was going to say "corpse") if they keep talking crazy.
The future is now. Turn your skin into a touchpad. This could revolutionize human intimacy. Wait, what? I mean ergonomics.
2. Whoops! Fundamentalism!
This is about as alarming a debut as you could imagine for the new Libyan government, short of calling for the destruction of Israel and decapitating a Western journalist on live television. Still, from what I understand this Jalil guy is at best a more secular moderate and at worst an opportunist. He's likely doing this to keep the Islamist elements of the revolution appeased until the difficult work of drawing up a constitution begins. If this Sharia thing survives a constitutional convention or Jalil and company start talking jihad, death to America, etc then I'll be really ill at ease. At least we can still withhold Ghadafi's frozen assets (I bet you thought I was going to say "corpse") if they keep talking crazy.
Early Edition
1. Owning the Moon
This is absolutely ludicrous, particularly Bigelow’s claims that there are compelling and profitable reasons to stake out a claim on the moon. Owning the moon would without doubt not be profitable for the United States at all, at least not anytime this century. If private enterprise wants to make a go of it, I’m all for it. If they’re successful, the US can buy tracts of moon land from them on which to build whatever it likes. But for God’s sakes, no more space race nonsense!
2. Green Berets
I’m a bit torn on the US military contracting for alternative energy for strategic reasons. I absolutely understand the non-environmental motivation behind it, and in terms of government funding cutting-edge technologies or alternative energies, I’m of the mind that the military is really the only part of government that has any business doing it. But being intimately familiar with defense contracting and all the antics that go on in it, and coupled with the fiasco that the administration’s “green shoots” policy of alternative energy subsidies that essentially amount to kick-backs and crony capitalism, I have serious misgivings about how this will work out practically. And of course I’m extremely wary of the military being used to advance a political/environmental agenda.
3. Tunisian Elections
The latest on the Tunisian elections, the first free elections in the nation’s history. It’s too early to say anything with certainty, but the early leader seems to be a moderate Islamist party, which, from reports, seems to have been an expected development. The party’s willingness to join other coalitions, regardless of whether it wins an outright majority in the Parliament, in order to ensure this caretaker government is as broad and collaborative as possible is encouraging. Will continue to watch with interest.
4. School Report Cards to Include Your Child’s BMI?
This is insane, absolutely insane. An Ohio law that requires schools to measure their students’ BMIs and report them via the Ohio Health Department to their parents seems to be facing some broad resistance from state schools, with nearly 40% of the state’s school districts opting out of collecting the measurements. The argument, I would assume, for even involving the schools in this is that they provide lunch to the children five out of seven days of the week and so they’re in part responsible for the child’s health. But school lunch, which of course is in no way is required to be purchased at school, only constitutes 24% of the meals those children consume. The other whopping 76% comes from home. So why in the hell does this argument continue to gain traction (rhetorical question)?
This is absolutely ludicrous, particularly Bigelow’s claims that there are compelling and profitable reasons to stake out a claim on the moon. Owning the moon would without doubt not be profitable for the United States at all, at least not anytime this century. If private enterprise wants to make a go of it, I’m all for it. If they’re successful, the US can buy tracts of moon land from them on which to build whatever it likes. But for God’s sakes, no more space race nonsense!
2. Green Berets
I’m a bit torn on the US military contracting for alternative energy for strategic reasons. I absolutely understand the non-environmental motivation behind it, and in terms of government funding cutting-edge technologies or alternative energies, I’m of the mind that the military is really the only part of government that has any business doing it. But being intimately familiar with defense contracting and all the antics that go on in it, and coupled with the fiasco that the administration’s “green shoots” policy of alternative energy subsidies that essentially amount to kick-backs and crony capitalism, I have serious misgivings about how this will work out practically. And of course I’m extremely wary of the military being used to advance a political/environmental agenda.
3. Tunisian Elections
The latest on the Tunisian elections, the first free elections in the nation’s history. It’s too early to say anything with certainty, but the early leader seems to be a moderate Islamist party, which, from reports, seems to have been an expected development. The party’s willingness to join other coalitions, regardless of whether it wins an outright majority in the Parliament, in order to ensure this caretaker government is as broad and collaborative as possible is encouraging. Will continue to watch with interest.
4. School Report Cards to Include Your Child’s BMI?
This is insane, absolutely insane. An Ohio law that requires schools to measure their students’ BMIs and report them via the Ohio Health Department to their parents seems to be facing some broad resistance from state schools, with nearly 40% of the state’s school districts opting out of collecting the measurements. The argument, I would assume, for even involving the schools in this is that they provide lunch to the children five out of seven days of the week and so they’re in part responsible for the child’s health. But school lunch, which of course is in no way is required to be purchased at school, only constitutes 24% of the meals those children consume. The other whopping 76% comes from home. So why in the hell does this argument continue to gain traction (rhetorical question)?
21.10.11
Friday Perspectives
1. Response to So About That International Banking Conspiracy
This post should be actually be title "Why engineers should not do economics" or "Stock Market 101". Originally this looked like a very interesting piece. Some engineers in Europe were using an advanced network modeling algorithm on stock ownership ties: a statistical method I have considered using myself, and an area of research quite in line with my own. The implications of the study have such import as well. The world's corporations are controlled by the likes of Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Franklin Templeton...
...wait, Franklin Templeton? Investment banks controlling the world in a seedy web of lies makes sense... but an investment manager? The guys that hold retail brokerage accounts and issue mutual funds? I smell fish...
The problem is thus - They are looking where the shares of all the world's publicly held corporations sit, an interesting prospect. The problem with the Orbis Database they use is the problem with any public stock registry, you really just see where the stock is sitting. That can often be very different from who owns it. All these investment banks and managers show up because they have something in common - they have brokerages. And brokerages hold stock for other people. This is called holding stock in "street name". The physical stock certificate sits in vault at the brokerage - say UBS - and they mark in the books that Mr. Soros has 100,000 shares of Exxon mobile. It will show up that UBS holds the shares, but they don't own them or vote them. In the end, its a nifty statistical analysis that produces a pretty cool graphic, but if you wanted to know which financial institutions house most of the worlds shares, any broker or trader could have told you that. Good use of university resources.
2. Response to Life after Debt
If you view countries as corporations (which is typically a really bad analogy to make, but bear with me) this article actually makes a lot of sense. The US probably shouldn't be completely unleveraged - debt does in fact have its advantages. One of the primary advantages of debt to a company is that it commits excess cash to a purpose (paying off bondholders) and so managers are less likely to waste that money and endanger the company. The problem with the US, or any country, is that there is very little accountability for the public "managers" that decide how money gets spent. If money gets wasted - Oh well, not my money. This limits the disciplinary power of debt. Debt also provides cash which can be used in value added projects - again a problem for governments, because they tend not to add value. But some things they undertake do, such as infrastructure improvements. This means that governments, like corporations, have an "optimal" level of debt they should strive for. Ultimately, I think it would be very responsible if a political candidate actually addresses this. If someone came out and said, "We don't need to pay down the US debt, we just need to pay down any of it that isn't being invested in to fixed infrastructure" they will very much have impressed me.
This post should be actually be title "Why engineers should not do economics" or "Stock Market 101". Originally this looked like a very interesting piece. Some engineers in Europe were using an advanced network modeling algorithm on stock ownership ties: a statistical method I have considered using myself, and an area of research quite in line with my own. The implications of the study have such import as well. The world's corporations are controlled by the likes of Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Franklin Templeton...
...wait, Franklin Templeton? Investment banks controlling the world in a seedy web of lies makes sense... but an investment manager? The guys that hold retail brokerage accounts and issue mutual funds? I smell fish...
The problem is thus - They are looking where the shares of all the world's publicly held corporations sit, an interesting prospect. The problem with the Orbis Database they use is the problem with any public stock registry, you really just see where the stock is sitting. That can often be very different from who owns it. All these investment banks and managers show up because they have something in common - they have brokerages. And brokerages hold stock for other people. This is called holding stock in "street name". The physical stock certificate sits in vault at the brokerage - say UBS - and they mark in the books that Mr. Soros has 100,000 shares of Exxon mobile. It will show up that UBS holds the shares, but they don't own them or vote them. In the end, its a nifty statistical analysis that produces a pretty cool graphic, but if you wanted to know which financial institutions house most of the worlds shares, any broker or trader could have told you that. Good use of university resources.
2. Response to Life after Debt
If you view countries as corporations (which is typically a really bad analogy to make, but bear with me) this article actually makes a lot of sense. The US probably shouldn't be completely unleveraged - debt does in fact have its advantages. One of the primary advantages of debt to a company is that it commits excess cash to a purpose (paying off bondholders) and so managers are less likely to waste that money and endanger the company. The problem with the US, or any country, is that there is very little accountability for the public "managers" that decide how money gets spent. If money gets wasted - Oh well, not my money. This limits the disciplinary power of debt. Debt also provides cash which can be used in value added projects - again a problem for governments, because they tend not to add value. But some things they undertake do, such as infrastructure improvements. This means that governments, like corporations, have an "optimal" level of debt they should strive for. Ultimately, I think it would be very responsible if a political candidate actually addresses this. If someone came out and said, "We don't need to pay down the US debt, we just need to pay down any of it that isn't being invested in to fixed infrastructure" they will very much have impressed me.
Late Edition
1. Full Troop Withdrawal From Iraq
All politics aside, this is great news, so long as our contractors continue to train Iraqi military and police forces and the copious intelligence assets that we have undoubtedly put into play at all levels of the Iraqi government and military keep feeding us everything they have on Iran. The question is, will these troops come home only to find themselves refitted for Afghan deployment in another six months?
2. Ripple Effect of Gaddafi’s Death
For the most part I’m as cynical as they come. The jury is still out on whether the Arab Spring’s democratic ideal will or even can be realized in a region with little democratic tradition and sharp tribal and sectarian divides. It’s not looking good in Egypt where, rather than tearing out a regime root and branch, the opposition chased Mubarak from power while his military bureacracy was allowed to remain in control of the state. Tunisia looks more promising, though until the results of their elections it’s difficult to say if anything resembling a functioning government has been established to ratify a constitution. Now Libya, with the death of Gaddafi and the fall of Sirte, is under the total control of the disparate opposition groups that compose the NTC. Disarming the militias, locking up weapons and forming a national army and police force will be the first keys to ensuring a democratic process free of political violence can even take place. Until those things are undertaken, however, much is up in the air. But occasionally the cynic in me is overtaken by the Jeffersonian revolutionary, and I can’t help but cheer when a dictator is pulled out of a sewer drain and brought to rough justice by the people he oppressed with impunity for nearly half a century. I become even more thrilled when I hear the opposition movements in Syria and Yemen warning their authoritarian regimes to take a good long look: they’re next. Sic semper tyrannus, indeed. No longer just the motto of the State of Virginia, but the impetus of a broad democratic movement in a land with a history that ought to make such a phenomenon impossible. While it’s entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that all of these movements may wind up more closely resembling the French and Iranian Revolutions than the American, for the time being I continue to quietly root for these democratic opposition movements, tempering my enthusiasm with the healthy and cynical axiom that liberty is not, in fact, inevitable, and that its birth is one of arduous labor, frequent violence, and chaos.
3. “Life After Debt”
This is so depressing to read given our current state of decrepitude. It’s also disturbing and horrific how reliant our country is upon debt.
All politics aside, this is great news, so long as our contractors continue to train Iraqi military and police forces and the copious intelligence assets that we have undoubtedly put into play at all levels of the Iraqi government and military keep feeding us everything they have on Iran. The question is, will these troops come home only to find themselves refitted for Afghan deployment in another six months?
2. Ripple Effect of Gaddafi’s Death
For the most part I’m as cynical as they come. The jury is still out on whether the Arab Spring’s democratic ideal will or even can be realized in a region with little democratic tradition and sharp tribal and sectarian divides. It’s not looking good in Egypt where, rather than tearing out a regime root and branch, the opposition chased Mubarak from power while his military bureacracy was allowed to remain in control of the state. Tunisia looks more promising, though until the results of their elections it’s difficult to say if anything resembling a functioning government has been established to ratify a constitution. Now Libya, with the death of Gaddafi and the fall of Sirte, is under the total control of the disparate opposition groups that compose the NTC. Disarming the militias, locking up weapons and forming a national army and police force will be the first keys to ensuring a democratic process free of political violence can even take place. Until those things are undertaken, however, much is up in the air. But occasionally the cynic in me is overtaken by the Jeffersonian revolutionary, and I can’t help but cheer when a dictator is pulled out of a sewer drain and brought to rough justice by the people he oppressed with impunity for nearly half a century. I become even more thrilled when I hear the opposition movements in Syria and Yemen warning their authoritarian regimes to take a good long look: they’re next. Sic semper tyrannus, indeed. No longer just the motto of the State of Virginia, but the impetus of a broad democratic movement in a land with a history that ought to make such a phenomenon impossible. While it’s entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that all of these movements may wind up more closely resembling the French and Iranian Revolutions than the American, for the time being I continue to quietly root for these democratic opposition movements, tempering my enthusiasm with the healthy and cynical axiom that liberty is not, in fact, inevitable, and that its birth is one of arduous labor, frequent violence, and chaos.
3. “Life After Debt”
This is so depressing to read given our current state of decrepitude. It’s also disturbing and horrific how reliant our country is upon debt.
Early Edition
1. Experience and the Presidency
An article excoriating Obama’s lack of leadership experience as the underlying factor in his presidency’s failure. It also should serve as a reminder that the challenger he faces in 2012 needs to have relevant leadership experience combined with a demonstrable mastery of the issues confronting the next president (foreign policy, economy and budget). A lot of people would interpret this as necessarily a Washington insider, but this is absolutely not the case. There are many members of Congress that have made a career opposing establishment culture, and there are many governors across the country whose entire agenda has been driven by opposition to Washington and the protection of their state’s interest. All that to say, the whole Tea Party 2010 phenomenon was great; inexperienced newcomers for whom politics is merely the expression of concerned citizenry and not a career is exactly what the House of Respresentatives is all about. But when we start talking about the presidency, it’s important for those who oppose Obama on the grounds that he is a radical neophyte to avoid falling into the hypocritical trap of pushing an equally bumbling novice into his place on the grounds of ideological purity.
2. Libya
There’s a lot of talk of Libya being a vindication of President Obama’s “foreign policy” (I’m frankly not sure if President Obama has a foreign policy, or if he’s outsourced it all to Secretary Clinton). I do have to say that, in broad strokes, I think President Obama got Libya right (though his execution was sloppy and downright foolish in certain respects). Before I get drowned out by the inevitable caterwauling, what I mean by that is that he had the sense/boldness to pursue a policy in which the United States diffused responsibility for military action in an Arab nation among other participants (including Arabs) and played a role of, at best, a first among equals. Whether or not President Obama did this out of courage is debatable, but the move itself was politically courageous in that it defied the jingoistic notion parroted by the neocons that America must lead whatever fight it decides to pursue (we do not; we should merely be the best fighter among many for reasons of national pride). If the United States makes a conscious decision to rollback the neocon nation-building agenda that’s crippled our ability to credibly exercise our foreign policy, then adventures like the one in Libya become what they used to be only two decades ago: drop in the bucket investments that yield huge dividends for minimal costs. Here is a situation where the Alliance and the United Nations responded to the direct and explicit call of oppressed peoples representing a broad opposition movement to assist them in establishing a pluralistic government, pledged to pay us back for our involvement, and did not require the deployment of conventional ground forces on our part or an indefinite commitment. The total cost to date has been roughly $2 billion, all of which could be paid back by the Libyan NTC if Gaddafi’s frozen assets (roughly $32 billion) are unfrozen and turned over to the NTC, minus our cut. I don’t want this to turn into a full-blown article about the merits of the Libyan operation, I imagine the other aspects of my views of its merits will be borne out in ensuing commentary.
3. “Clovis First” Officially Dead
And neolithic human civilization, with all its mastadon, giant-sloth and predatory flightless bird hunting, is badass.
4. Cain “Clarifies” His Pro-Life Stance
So it seems Cain was simply trying to deflect Piers Morgan’s questions about the extremity of his anti-abortion views and wasn’t putting forward a nuanced, “hands off” approach to abortion with respect to the federal government. Fail. Where I fault Cain is that, despite his reputation for plain-spokenness, he seems too often to try to wriggle out of difficult questions with misdirection (how often have you heard him give a quick, non-answer and then quickly say “Now, secondly…” and move onto another completely unrelated statement). He also sometimes doesn't seem to grasp the implications of his answers or statements to the public's perception of his agenda. The overall impression one gets from these repeated gaffes (he got roasted in the last debate for not only saying in an interview that he could see himself offering a transfer of Gitmo prisoners for a captured American soldier, but his bumbling attempts to completely disown the statement) is that there is either no cohesive policy underlining his campaign or that he is far too unprepared for these interviews in terms of mastering the issues. Bottom line is, while I tried to give him a chance, Herman Cain does not seem to deserve his front-runner spot.
An article excoriating Obama’s lack of leadership experience as the underlying factor in his presidency’s failure. It also should serve as a reminder that the challenger he faces in 2012 needs to have relevant leadership experience combined with a demonstrable mastery of the issues confronting the next president (foreign policy, economy and budget). A lot of people would interpret this as necessarily a Washington insider, but this is absolutely not the case. There are many members of Congress that have made a career opposing establishment culture, and there are many governors across the country whose entire agenda has been driven by opposition to Washington and the protection of their state’s interest. All that to say, the whole Tea Party 2010 phenomenon was great; inexperienced newcomers for whom politics is merely the expression of concerned citizenry and not a career is exactly what the House of Respresentatives is all about. But when we start talking about the presidency, it’s important for those who oppose Obama on the grounds that he is a radical neophyte to avoid falling into the hypocritical trap of pushing an equally bumbling novice into his place on the grounds of ideological purity.
2. Libya
There’s a lot of talk of Libya being a vindication of President Obama’s “foreign policy” (I’m frankly not sure if President Obama has a foreign policy, or if he’s outsourced it all to Secretary Clinton). I do have to say that, in broad strokes, I think President Obama got Libya right (though his execution was sloppy and downright foolish in certain respects). Before I get drowned out by the inevitable caterwauling, what I mean by that is that he had the sense/boldness to pursue a policy in which the United States diffused responsibility for military action in an Arab nation among other participants (including Arabs) and played a role of, at best, a first among equals. Whether or not President Obama did this out of courage is debatable, but the move itself was politically courageous in that it defied the jingoistic notion parroted by the neocons that America must lead whatever fight it decides to pursue (we do not; we should merely be the best fighter among many for reasons of national pride). If the United States makes a conscious decision to rollback the neocon nation-building agenda that’s crippled our ability to credibly exercise our foreign policy, then adventures like the one in Libya become what they used to be only two decades ago: drop in the bucket investments that yield huge dividends for minimal costs. Here is a situation where the Alliance and the United Nations responded to the direct and explicit call of oppressed peoples representing a broad opposition movement to assist them in establishing a pluralistic government, pledged to pay us back for our involvement, and did not require the deployment of conventional ground forces on our part or an indefinite commitment. The total cost to date has been roughly $2 billion, all of which could be paid back by the Libyan NTC if Gaddafi’s frozen assets (roughly $32 billion) are unfrozen and turned over to the NTC, minus our cut. I don’t want this to turn into a full-blown article about the merits of the Libyan operation, I imagine the other aspects of my views of its merits will be borne out in ensuing commentary.
3. “Clovis First” Officially Dead
And neolithic human civilization, with all its mastadon, giant-sloth and predatory flightless bird hunting, is badass.
4. Cain “Clarifies” His Pro-Life Stance
So it seems Cain was simply trying to deflect Piers Morgan’s questions about the extremity of his anti-abortion views and wasn’t putting forward a nuanced, “hands off” approach to abortion with respect to the federal government. Fail. Where I fault Cain is that, despite his reputation for plain-spokenness, he seems too often to try to wriggle out of difficult questions with misdirection (how often have you heard him give a quick, non-answer and then quickly say “Now, secondly…” and move onto another completely unrelated statement). He also sometimes doesn't seem to grasp the implications of his answers or statements to the public's perception of his agenda. The overall impression one gets from these repeated gaffes (he got roasted in the last debate for not only saying in an interview that he could see himself offering a transfer of Gitmo prisoners for a captured American soldier, but his bumbling attempts to completely disown the statement) is that there is either no cohesive policy underlining his campaign or that he is far too unprepared for these interviews in terms of mastering the issues. Bottom line is, while I tried to give him a chance, Herman Cain does not seem to deserve his front-runner spot.
20.10.11
Late Edition
1. Cain Is Totally Befuddling
In this video it sounds like Herman Cain is saying that he is opposed to any kind of federal abortion ban, though he is personally opposed to abortion in all cases. I'm not entirely sure that's the position he's articulated in the past, however. Either he tried to dodge Piers Morgan with a deceptive little sidebar to avoid discussing the extremity of his anti-abortion position, or this is his legit policy position. I don't know the answer, and would be grateful if someone could provide clarity.
2. So About That International Banking Conspiracy....
Very interesting article from PopSci on a report that has found that a very tightly knit network of companies control the entire global economy in a model that resembles an economic "super-entity," as they put it.
3. Carrying Capacity in a World of 7 Billion
I'm sure this article will startle some, but I take a rather stoic approach to this. So long as market pressures aren't too heavily suppressed, the developed and developing world will naturally adjust to the increased resource pressures. It's the undeveloped world that will continue to have minimal carrying capacity and face massive die-offs if left unassisted, over-exploited and in perpetual conflict.
In this video it sounds like Herman Cain is saying that he is opposed to any kind of federal abortion ban, though he is personally opposed to abortion in all cases. I'm not entirely sure that's the position he's articulated in the past, however. Either he tried to dodge Piers Morgan with a deceptive little sidebar to avoid discussing the extremity of his anti-abortion position, or this is his legit policy position. I don't know the answer, and would be grateful if someone could provide clarity.
2. So About That International Banking Conspiracy....
Very interesting article from PopSci on a report that has found that a very tightly knit network of companies control the entire global economy in a model that resembles an economic "super-entity," as they put it.
3. Carrying Capacity in a World of 7 Billion
I'm sure this article will startle some, but I take a rather stoic approach to this. So long as market pressures aren't too heavily suppressed, the developed and developing world will naturally adjust to the increased resource pressures. It's the undeveloped world that will continue to have minimal carrying capacity and face massive die-offs if left unassisted, over-exploited and in perpetual conflict.
Early Edition
1. Early Reports of Ghadafi’s Capture or Possible Death
He knew the risks when he opted for a protective detail consisting of attractive young women.
2. South Carolina Voting Reform
Great story on South Carolina’s voting reform law that requires a state-issued photo ID in order to vote. The typical liberal opposition based on the lack of access on the part of the poor and elderly to such IDs is examined and, I have to say, is not very compelling. A handful of examples that are said to represent a significant demographic are cited, but in nearly every case they are elderly minority folks that seem to suffer more from lack of motivation than lack of means. The state even goes so far as to drive out to one of the people referenced in the story and get their ID taken care of within three days. Indeed, it looks like South Carolina is offerring free transportation to anyone in need of a state-issued photo ID in order to ensure that every opportunity is afforded to citizens to avoid disenfranchisement. I still think the risk posed to a free society from fraud outweighs the benefit of “lassaiz-faire” voting rights without any attempt at ID verification. In two or three more generations there will be no excuse whatsoever for not being able to produce a state-issued photo ID at the polls. The new low-income senior citizens at that time will have grown up in the system, had their two cars, internet and flat screen televisions.
3. Santorum on Gay Marriage
Was pleased to see Krauthammer challenge Santorum on gay marriage. While Santorum does argue passionately and with evident political skill, the fundamental foundation of his argument is contradictory to his supposed devotion to small government with limited rights. He would cede authority to the state to make a determination as to not only what is in the best interests of the individual, but what is best for the children. If this were a discussion on education, Santorum would be railing about the federal government making unilateral decisions about what must and must not be in the curriculum on the grounds that parents and localities are in a better position to judge what is best for their children (and incidentally he would be right). But on marriage, Santorum is willing to leverage his social views via the coercion of the state to enforce his particular vision of what is best for other people’s children. More than a little hypocritical.
4. Last Gasp of the Neocons
Leslie Gelb with a piece on what he calls the resurrection of the neocons, brought about by the Iranian provocation. What he fears is a resurrection I consider to be their last gasp. Going to war with Iran is not something to be taken lightly and certainly something for which our country is not prepared. Something must be done, make no mistake, but a full-fledged war should be an avenue of last resort. War with Iran would require all of our resources and a mental readiness to confront their almost certain use of the most brutal terrorism within US borders as a means to wage it.
He knew the risks when he opted for a protective detail consisting of attractive young women.
2. South Carolina Voting Reform
Great story on South Carolina’s voting reform law that requires a state-issued photo ID in order to vote. The typical liberal opposition based on the lack of access on the part of the poor and elderly to such IDs is examined and, I have to say, is not very compelling. A handful of examples that are said to represent a significant demographic are cited, but in nearly every case they are elderly minority folks that seem to suffer more from lack of motivation than lack of means. The state even goes so far as to drive out to one of the people referenced in the story and get their ID taken care of within three days. Indeed, it looks like South Carolina is offerring free transportation to anyone in need of a state-issued photo ID in order to ensure that every opportunity is afforded to citizens to avoid disenfranchisement. I still think the risk posed to a free society from fraud outweighs the benefit of “lassaiz-faire” voting rights without any attempt at ID verification. In two or three more generations there will be no excuse whatsoever for not being able to produce a state-issued photo ID at the polls. The new low-income senior citizens at that time will have grown up in the system, had their two cars, internet and flat screen televisions.
3. Santorum on Gay Marriage
Was pleased to see Krauthammer challenge Santorum on gay marriage. While Santorum does argue passionately and with evident political skill, the fundamental foundation of his argument is contradictory to his supposed devotion to small government with limited rights. He would cede authority to the state to make a determination as to not only what is in the best interests of the individual, but what is best for the children. If this were a discussion on education, Santorum would be railing about the federal government making unilateral decisions about what must and must not be in the curriculum on the grounds that parents and localities are in a better position to judge what is best for their children (and incidentally he would be right). But on marriage, Santorum is willing to leverage his social views via the coercion of the state to enforce his particular vision of what is best for other people’s children. More than a little hypocritical.
4. Last Gasp of the Neocons
Leslie Gelb with a piece on what he calls the resurrection of the neocons, brought about by the Iranian provocation. What he fears is a resurrection I consider to be their last gasp. Going to war with Iran is not something to be taken lightly and certainly something for which our country is not prepared. Something must be done, make no mistake, but a full-fledged war should be an avenue of last resort. War with Iran would require all of our resources and a mental readiness to confront their almost certain use of the most brutal terrorism within US borders as a means to wage it.
19.10.11
Late Edition
1. Transhumanism and Liberty
As transhumanism progresses further and further this is a question that is all the more important to resolve. Unfortunately science is usually the first victim in politics, so leaving this up to the politicians is probably not the right answer. While Bailey protests that the unenhanced would pose no threat to the enhanced, history and even current events do not bear this out. There are health care concerns in a welfare state such as ours. Why would the state bear the burdensome cost of those who won't help themselves by enhancing their immunities? There's education. Why must the state expend extra money on unenhanced, less intelligent students that consume a disproportionate amount of their teachers' time, attention and resources? While I sympathize with Bailey's libertarian utopian ideal of the state having no say in these matters and letting the market settle it all, the truth is that the state would almost certainly either coerce the unenhanced into enhancements, punish them via the tax code (which amounts to the same thing), punish us all by banning certain enhancements (which Bailey's debate opponent seems to favor), or punish the enhanced/wealthy into paying for even more extravagant social programs to protect the unenhanced. I agree with Bailey that transhumanism in and of itself is not incompatible with or a threat to the concept of liberty, but unfortunately the libertarian ideal does not exist and isn't likely to in our lifetime. So long as a portion of the American public remains uneducated and afraid of genetic enhancements (thanks to scaremongering from both right- and leftwing radicals) that prolong their children's lives and increase their intelligence and productivity, they'll vote for shrill politicians to keep everyone from having access to them.
2. Washington DC Overtakes Silicon Valley as Wealthiest City in America
What with the K Street lobbyists representing corporate interests that have grown ever larger and closer to government, the growth in the bureaucracy and the recession nationwide decimating industry, I suppose this shouldn't surprise. But it is still both shocking and extremely telling that the center of government has overtaken what is widely considered the center of innovation and private industry as the wealthiest city in America. Whatever it portends, it's certainly a handy fun-fact for the GOP hopefuls.
As transhumanism progresses further and further this is a question that is all the more important to resolve. Unfortunately science is usually the first victim in politics, so leaving this up to the politicians is probably not the right answer. While Bailey protests that the unenhanced would pose no threat to the enhanced, history and even current events do not bear this out. There are health care concerns in a welfare state such as ours. Why would the state bear the burdensome cost of those who won't help themselves by enhancing their immunities? There's education. Why must the state expend extra money on unenhanced, less intelligent students that consume a disproportionate amount of their teachers' time, attention and resources? While I sympathize with Bailey's libertarian utopian ideal of the state having no say in these matters and letting the market settle it all, the truth is that the state would almost certainly either coerce the unenhanced into enhancements, punish them via the tax code (which amounts to the same thing), punish us all by banning certain enhancements (which Bailey's debate opponent seems to favor), or punish the enhanced/wealthy into paying for even more extravagant social programs to protect the unenhanced. I agree with Bailey that transhumanism in and of itself is not incompatible with or a threat to the concept of liberty, but unfortunately the libertarian ideal does not exist and isn't likely to in our lifetime. So long as a portion of the American public remains uneducated and afraid of genetic enhancements (thanks to scaremongering from both right- and leftwing radicals) that prolong their children's lives and increase their intelligence and productivity, they'll vote for shrill politicians to keep everyone from having access to them.
2. Washington DC Overtakes Silicon Valley as Wealthiest City in America
What with the K Street lobbyists representing corporate interests that have grown ever larger and closer to government, the growth in the bureaucracy and the recession nationwide decimating industry, I suppose this shouldn't surprise. But it is still both shocking and extremely telling that the center of government has overtaken what is widely considered the center of innovation and private industry as the wealthiest city in America. Whatever it portends, it's certainly a handy fun-fact for the GOP hopefuls.
Early Edition
1. Is That a Tiger in the Front Yard?
This is insane. So far it sounds like the sheriff’s office has gunned down 35 of the nearly 50 exotic animals that escaped from the preserve (I believe this is The Wilds, I can’t think of any other exotic private game preserve in Zanesville, OH). But there are F-ing lions, tigers, bears and wolves roaming free, probably frightened and pissed off, and while I’m impressed that they’ve bagged as many of the animals as they have in such a short amount of time, I imagine there will be a few that elude capture/killing for a little while.
2. Romney Wins (Again); Gingrich Gets His First Bloody Nose; Cain Founders; Perry Falls Flat (Again)
Gingrich got his nose bloodied for the first time last night when he finally went on offense against Romeny on health care. His strategy up to this point (and it’s a good one) has been to steadfastly avoid criticizing his primary opponents; he strayed from it and got his hat handed to him by Romney. Very interesting to watch, and more than a little disappointing. I don’t care what the media, the polls or anyone else says, Cain is foundering. 9-9-9 got hit from every side last night and all he could say were his typical taglines, calling the criticisms “knee jerk reactions” (what the hell does that even mean) and telling the American people to do the math themselves and ignore all of the independent analyses in favor of his own analysis. Not too terribly compelling. While I agree that he should get credit for starting a conversation, I think there are far better plans that would be more worthy of the political capital the next president will have to spend to get them passed. It’s amazing how badly Perry sucks. He tried to get aggressive but his attacks were all either low-blows, blatantly hypocritical or were met with vigorous boos by the crowd. Bachmann sounds ever more crazy, proudly touting her plan to build a double-walled fence along the entire Southern border. Romney is once again, unfortunately, the undisputed winner.
3. Life is Precious
Not in the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” kind of way, but rather statistically-speaking, life on other planets seems clearly far rarer than lifeless planets (though more common than originally thought). Even if living planets were even-steven with lifeless planets, the universe is so infinitely vast and so thinly dispersed (relatively speaking) that when one extrapolates the likelihood of intelligent life capable of contacting us actually sending a signal that reaches us before our planet or theirs dies, the prospect of extraterrestrial contact is (probably mercifully) woefully unlikely.
This is insane. So far it sounds like the sheriff’s office has gunned down 35 of the nearly 50 exotic animals that escaped from the preserve (I believe this is The Wilds, I can’t think of any other exotic private game preserve in Zanesville, OH). But there are F-ing lions, tigers, bears and wolves roaming free, probably frightened and pissed off, and while I’m impressed that they’ve bagged as many of the animals as they have in such a short amount of time, I imagine there will be a few that elude capture/killing for a little while.
2. Romney Wins (Again); Gingrich Gets His First Bloody Nose; Cain Founders; Perry Falls Flat (Again)
Gingrich got his nose bloodied for the first time last night when he finally went on offense against Romeny on health care. His strategy up to this point (and it’s a good one) has been to steadfastly avoid criticizing his primary opponents; he strayed from it and got his hat handed to him by Romney. Very interesting to watch, and more than a little disappointing. I don’t care what the media, the polls or anyone else says, Cain is foundering. 9-9-9 got hit from every side last night and all he could say were his typical taglines, calling the criticisms “knee jerk reactions” (what the hell does that even mean) and telling the American people to do the math themselves and ignore all of the independent analyses in favor of his own analysis. Not too terribly compelling. While I agree that he should get credit for starting a conversation, I think there are far better plans that would be more worthy of the political capital the next president will have to spend to get them passed. It’s amazing how badly Perry sucks. He tried to get aggressive but his attacks were all either low-blows, blatantly hypocritical or were met with vigorous boos by the crowd. Bachmann sounds ever more crazy, proudly touting her plan to build a double-walled fence along the entire Southern border. Romney is once again, unfortunately, the undisputed winner.
3. Life is Precious
Not in the “Chicken Soup for the Soul” kind of way, but rather statistically-speaking, life on other planets seems clearly far rarer than lifeless planets (though more common than originally thought). Even if living planets were even-steven with lifeless planets, the universe is so infinitely vast and so thinly dispersed (relatively speaking) that when one extrapolates the likelihood of intelligent life capable of contacting us actually sending a signal that reaches us before our planet or theirs dies, the prospect of extraterrestrial contact is (probably mercifully) woefully unlikely.
18.10.11
Late Edition
1. Focus on the Fed; Paul Slighted Yet Again
Great piece from the Weekly Standard on the need of any serious GOP contender to press the advantage on monetary policy and the Fed. It insults, however, with the following line: "Among the Republican presidential candidates, Newt Gingrich seems furthest along in understanding that the exclusion of monetary policy from the debate is a mortal threat to Republicans in 2012." Gingrich? I can think of another candidate for whom the Fed and sound money have been central campaign issues for quite some time now.
2. Private Space
Commercial space flight creeps along toward reality. I knew that New Mexico lobbied hard for Spaceport America to be built in the state, but I wasn't aware that the facility is taxpayer funded, and to what extent. Not sure how I feel about that, but I guess it's the people of New Mexico's bag, not mine (unless the taxpayers referenced are federal taxpayers).
Great piece from the Weekly Standard on the need of any serious GOP contender to press the advantage on monetary policy and the Fed. It insults, however, with the following line: "Among the Republican presidential candidates, Newt Gingrich seems furthest along in understanding that the exclusion of monetary policy from the debate is a mortal threat to Republicans in 2012." Gingrich? I can think of another candidate for whom the Fed and sound money have been central campaign issues for quite some time now.
2. Private Space
Commercial space flight creeps along toward reality. I knew that New Mexico lobbied hard for Spaceport America to be built in the state, but I wasn't aware that the facility is taxpayer funded, and to what extent. Not sure how I feel about that, but I guess it's the people of New Mexico's bag, not mine (unless the taxpayers referenced are federal taxpayers).
17.10.11
Late Edition
1. Analysis of Media Coverage in 2012 Presidential Race
The Project for Excellence in Jouralism has conducted a study of media coverage of all 2012 presidential candidates (including Barack Obama) and released its results. Unsurprisingly, Ron Paul ranks among the three that have received the least media coverage (the other two being Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman), though he has the highest rating among all of the candidates in terms of positive mention in the blogosphere. At the top of the list in terms of positive coverage is, believe it or not, Rick Perry. The Project reports that Barack Obama has received the most negative coverage of all of the major candidates.
2. More on Anti-Science Politicians
There are two things at issue here. One is the safety of genetically modified foods and the other is whether they should be labeled as genetically modified or not. I don’t see any reason why the latter is a problem, just so long as people understand that the vast majority of the products they see on the shelves at the supermarket would wind up with such a label. If the regulations applied to the rest of the agricultural industry were enforced in the “organic” sector (they are not), I’d wager many of the foods peddled by organic farmers would wind up with a big old “GM” label as well. As to the former, there is currently no compelling evidence that GM foods have led to any significant illness or side effect. None. As a matter of fact, GM foods present the greatest opportunity in world history of finally realizing the goal of ending the global hunger epidemic. But Greenpeace douche bags with flamethrowers are happy to destroy GM crops grown by researches that could likely have saved millions of lives, and politicians in Washington “have concerns.”
3. Constitutionally-Protected Ignorance
This article would be hilarious if it weren’t so infuriating. There are far too many misrepresentations of the constitutionalist viewpoint to be counted, but chief among them are the belief that the “original intent” of the Founders is infallible. Constitutionalists are happy to admit the Founders may have been wrong (SLAVERY), its just that they understand that the constitution is one of enumerated powers and strict construction and, in order to add new federal powers or alter it a constitutional amendment should be adopted. The second is the canard, dropped casually early in the article by the author in a rare and hypocritical moment of Framer-intent-referencing, that the Framers established Congress for the express purpose of collecting taxes. While one of the chief powers of Congress is to collect taxes, every single one of the Framers warned against overburdensome taxes as a form of pecuniary slavery, and the country spent well more than a century without a federal income tax while attending to its business quite nicely. I’ll concede the point to the author that there are many conservatives who claim to know and love the constitution but espouse all sorts of social positions that are anathema to it, and that we would all do well to jealously guard the constitution against any politician claiming to best represent it, but this gentleman seems to prefer shadow-boxing to having a constitutional argument with real constitutionalists.
4. Computers Doing Our Research B*tch-Work
Interesting, and akin to the whole “crowd-sourcing” breakthrough via gaming for HIV earlier this year.
5. FBI’s DNA Database
Great news, the FBI is updating its DNA database (you weren’t aware that they had one?) and doesn’t seem to have any idea of the scientifically-sound approach to running matches against it! So (surprise!) you may be getting your front door knocked in for mailing anthrax to the White House! “Oh, you’re innocent, eh? Tell it to the military tribunal... once your indefinite detention is served.”
6. Green Energy Hurting the Middle Class
Amazed at this very well-written expose from Slate, of all places, of the corruption and pocket-lining that is the administration’s green-energy agenda, the practical effect of which is that the rich get richer while absolutely no benefit of any kind is seen by the middle class.
The Project for Excellence in Jouralism has conducted a study of media coverage of all 2012 presidential candidates (including Barack Obama) and released its results. Unsurprisingly, Ron Paul ranks among the three that have received the least media coverage (the other two being Rick Santorum and Jon Huntsman), though he has the highest rating among all of the candidates in terms of positive mention in the blogosphere. At the top of the list in terms of positive coverage is, believe it or not, Rick Perry. The Project reports that Barack Obama has received the most negative coverage of all of the major candidates.
2. More on Anti-Science Politicians
There are two things at issue here. One is the safety of genetically modified foods and the other is whether they should be labeled as genetically modified or not. I don’t see any reason why the latter is a problem, just so long as people understand that the vast majority of the products they see on the shelves at the supermarket would wind up with such a label. If the regulations applied to the rest of the agricultural industry were enforced in the “organic” sector (they are not), I’d wager many of the foods peddled by organic farmers would wind up with a big old “GM” label as well. As to the former, there is currently no compelling evidence that GM foods have led to any significant illness or side effect. None. As a matter of fact, GM foods present the greatest opportunity in world history of finally realizing the goal of ending the global hunger epidemic. But Greenpeace douche bags with flamethrowers are happy to destroy GM crops grown by researches that could likely have saved millions of lives, and politicians in Washington “have concerns.”
3. Constitutionally-Protected Ignorance
This article would be hilarious if it weren’t so infuriating. There are far too many misrepresentations of the constitutionalist viewpoint to be counted, but chief among them are the belief that the “original intent” of the Founders is infallible. Constitutionalists are happy to admit the Founders may have been wrong (SLAVERY), its just that they understand that the constitution is one of enumerated powers and strict construction and, in order to add new federal powers or alter it a constitutional amendment should be adopted. The second is the canard, dropped casually early in the article by the author in a rare and hypocritical moment of Framer-intent-referencing, that the Framers established Congress for the express purpose of collecting taxes. While one of the chief powers of Congress is to collect taxes, every single one of the Framers warned against overburdensome taxes as a form of pecuniary slavery, and the country spent well more than a century without a federal income tax while attending to its business quite nicely. I’ll concede the point to the author that there are many conservatives who claim to know and love the constitution but espouse all sorts of social positions that are anathema to it, and that we would all do well to jealously guard the constitution against any politician claiming to best represent it, but this gentleman seems to prefer shadow-boxing to having a constitutional argument with real constitutionalists.
4. Computers Doing Our Research B*tch-Work
Interesting, and akin to the whole “crowd-sourcing” breakthrough via gaming for HIV earlier this year.
5. FBI’s DNA Database
Great news, the FBI is updating its DNA database (you weren’t aware that they had one?) and doesn’t seem to have any idea of the scientifically-sound approach to running matches against it! So (surprise!) you may be getting your front door knocked in for mailing anthrax to the White House! “Oh, you’re innocent, eh? Tell it to the military tribunal... once your indefinite detention is served.”
6. Green Energy Hurting the Middle Class
Amazed at this very well-written expose from Slate, of all places, of the corruption and pocket-lining that is the administration’s green-energy agenda, the practical effect of which is that the rich get richer while absolutely no benefit of any kind is seen by the middle class.
Early Edition
1. The Bullsh*t Moose Party
Great piece that obliquely reflects some of the sentiments from the Salon article cited in Thursday’s Late Edition, that the social upheaval we’ve experienced recently in the form of the Tea Party and now Occupy Wall Street is not, as the establishment and the media keep peddling, a call for moderation and compromise. Moderation and compromise are the parents of stagnation and have resulted in the promulgation of the crippling status quo these two disparate movements are rebelling against. Now may well be the ideal time for the rise of a third party, but it certainly won’t be a “No Labels” fusion ticket that mashes up two establishmentarians. A Ron Paul/Ralph Nader coalition held together by the glue of anti-establishment fury would probably be a more accurate reflection of the mood of these movements. But the utter impossibility of such a coalition actually coalescing, let alone performing well in a general election, suggests that the path to drastic reform lies with the existing two parties. Which is why such a coalition might seem so appealing in the first place. My brain hurts.
2. We’re All Leeches
I could focus on the inflammatory comments made about “coded racism” in this video but I’d actually much rather draw attention to the ensuing conversation about transfer payments and dependency in our society. Without knowing it, I think, this group lays bare just how pervasive (and perverse) our system of dependency is as a result of our tax code. Nearly everyone in this country is living off of the forced goodwill of someone else, even those who have no need of it, and as they discuss, hardly anyone is conscious of it! Mortgage tax deductions, Medicare, Social Security, etc, etc. The answer to this isn’t to maintain the system as is on the basis that it helps everyone, it’s to rip the system out at the roots and start over.
3. Cracking the Eusociality Code
I’ll warn that this article is dense and time-consuming, but I found it very rewarding and incredibly relevant to our recent discussions on free will, the human brain, morality and the human “superorganism”. It focuses on evolutionary biologist EO Wilson and, once you get past the flowery personal bits in the prologue, the complicated challenge presented to traditional evolutionary biology by eusocial species such as humans, termites and ants (why individual organisms cede certain rights or specialize within groups). In the end, the conversation veers toward recently discussed concepts among us about the role evolutionary biology plays in brain functioning and the ordering of human society at large.
4. More on Cain
This article delves into Cain’s background and controversial positions, as well as the politics of race. I strongly believe that, when one takes a close look at Cain’s platform, particularly on social issues, there’s little to differentiate him from a Michele Bachmann, and that his rise is likely only temporary as his time in the spotlight reveals some of the same inadequacies that saw Ms. Bachmann’s precipitous fall. The only thing that could save him from fading into obscurity is the infatuation on the part of the media and some Republicans with his race.
Great piece that obliquely reflects some of the sentiments from the Salon article cited in Thursday’s Late Edition, that the social upheaval we’ve experienced recently in the form of the Tea Party and now Occupy Wall Street is not, as the establishment and the media keep peddling, a call for moderation and compromise. Moderation and compromise are the parents of stagnation and have resulted in the promulgation of the crippling status quo these two disparate movements are rebelling against. Now may well be the ideal time for the rise of a third party, but it certainly won’t be a “No Labels” fusion ticket that mashes up two establishmentarians. A Ron Paul/Ralph Nader coalition held together by the glue of anti-establishment fury would probably be a more accurate reflection of the mood of these movements. But the utter impossibility of such a coalition actually coalescing, let alone performing well in a general election, suggests that the path to drastic reform lies with the existing two parties. Which is why such a coalition might seem so appealing in the first place. My brain hurts.
2. We’re All Leeches
I could focus on the inflammatory comments made about “coded racism” in this video but I’d actually much rather draw attention to the ensuing conversation about transfer payments and dependency in our society. Without knowing it, I think, this group lays bare just how pervasive (and perverse) our system of dependency is as a result of our tax code. Nearly everyone in this country is living off of the forced goodwill of someone else, even those who have no need of it, and as they discuss, hardly anyone is conscious of it! Mortgage tax deductions, Medicare, Social Security, etc, etc. The answer to this isn’t to maintain the system as is on the basis that it helps everyone, it’s to rip the system out at the roots and start over.
3. Cracking the Eusociality Code
I’ll warn that this article is dense and time-consuming, but I found it very rewarding and incredibly relevant to our recent discussions on free will, the human brain, morality and the human “superorganism”. It focuses on evolutionary biologist EO Wilson and, once you get past the flowery personal bits in the prologue, the complicated challenge presented to traditional evolutionary biology by eusocial species such as humans, termites and ants (why individual organisms cede certain rights or specialize within groups). In the end, the conversation veers toward recently discussed concepts among us about the role evolutionary biology plays in brain functioning and the ordering of human society at large.
4. More on Cain
This article delves into Cain’s background and controversial positions, as well as the politics of race. I strongly believe that, when one takes a close look at Cain’s platform, particularly on social issues, there’s little to differentiate him from a Michele Bachmann, and that his rise is likely only temporary as his time in the spotlight reveals some of the same inadequacies that saw Ms. Bachmann’s precipitous fall. The only thing that could save him from fading into obscurity is the infatuation on the part of the media and some Republicans with his race.
14.10.11
Late Edition
1. Christopher Columbus Caused the Little Ice Age
As if he didn't have enough to answer for.
2. Kids Don't Get Religion Without Help
Absolutely fascinating. The concept that human beings are born with an evolutionarily programmed predisposition to explain their surroundings via the supernatural is challenged by this study, in which children demonstrate that their minds don't run immediately to the supernatural. While this by no means disproves this hypothesis, it certainly raises questions about how and when we acquire this tendency. It also begs the question of what more our kids might be capable of if we don't indocrinate them into religion during their developmental years.
As if he didn't have enough to answer for.
2. Kids Don't Get Religion Without Help
Absolutely fascinating. The concept that human beings are born with an evolutionarily programmed predisposition to explain their surroundings via the supernatural is challenged by this study, in which children demonstrate that their minds don't run immediately to the supernatural. While this by no means disproves this hypothesis, it certainly raises questions about how and when we acquire this tendency. It also begs the question of what more our kids might be capable of if we don't indocrinate them into religion during their developmental years.
Early Edition
1. Making Ray Guns Cool Again
This piece from the Economist sheds some light on the ongoing military development of electromagnetic weapons that can disable enemy ground vehicles, ships, aircraft and missiles. The appeal of this technology seems to be its non-lethality (apart from the disabled aircraft of course, I imagine that ejector seat’ll get fried too), though if it is deployed its eventual escalation will without doubt lead to space-based or missile-delivered systems that can target entire cities and defense grids as we once fantasized nuclear EMP would do, killing thousands if not millions. Perhaps another reason not to rely too heavily on removing the human element from the battlefield.
2. Autism vs Altruism
This study seems to supply further support for the long-held supposition that autism ditches two related and genetically hard-wired human brain codings: the “theory of mind,” which allows us to relate to others by recognizing our own mental states in them, and the concept of “reputation” that promotes altruism, both of which have allowed us to out-cooperate every other species on the planet. What fascinates me about this is how it offers a reminder of the fact that our evolution has been one that, through our brain development, pushes individuals away from independence and iconoclasm and strongly reinforces cooperation and submission to strong leadership or groupthink. We are programmed to constantly seek the approval of our group and will sacrifice a surprisingly great deal in order to either receive group acceptance or achieve group leadership ourselves.
3. The Price of Leadership: Being a Dumbass?
I know this is cliched, but during election cycles I can’t help but think this: Is it just me, or does everyone, literally everyone, holding an official leadership position in politics sound like a complete and total dumbass when they speak in front of an audience? Saying stupid things, uttering demonstrable falsehoods, getting their history wrong, or talking about science as if it were some obnoxious cult. The video of President Obama linked above, along with this from Nancy Pelosi and this now-famous bit from Rick Perry, is cringe-inducing for any thinking person. I can’t help but feel this phenomenon is directly related to some of the dynamics of our evolution covered in Item 2 above.
This piece from the Economist sheds some light on the ongoing military development of electromagnetic weapons that can disable enemy ground vehicles, ships, aircraft and missiles. The appeal of this technology seems to be its non-lethality (apart from the disabled aircraft of course, I imagine that ejector seat’ll get fried too), though if it is deployed its eventual escalation will without doubt lead to space-based or missile-delivered systems that can target entire cities and defense grids as we once fantasized nuclear EMP would do, killing thousands if not millions. Perhaps another reason not to rely too heavily on removing the human element from the battlefield.
2. Autism vs Altruism
This study seems to supply further support for the long-held supposition that autism ditches two related and genetically hard-wired human brain codings: the “theory of mind,” which allows us to relate to others by recognizing our own mental states in them, and the concept of “reputation” that promotes altruism, both of which have allowed us to out-cooperate every other species on the planet. What fascinates me about this is how it offers a reminder of the fact that our evolution has been one that, through our brain development, pushes individuals away from independence and iconoclasm and strongly reinforces cooperation and submission to strong leadership or groupthink. We are programmed to constantly seek the approval of our group and will sacrifice a surprisingly great deal in order to either receive group acceptance or achieve group leadership ourselves.
3. The Price of Leadership: Being a Dumbass?
I know this is cliched, but during election cycles I can’t help but think this: Is it just me, or does everyone, literally everyone, holding an official leadership position in politics sound like a complete and total dumbass when they speak in front of an audience? Saying stupid things, uttering demonstrable falsehoods, getting their history wrong, or talking about science as if it were some obnoxious cult. The video of President Obama linked above, along with this from Nancy Pelosi and this now-famous bit from Rick Perry, is cringe-inducing for any thinking person. I can’t help but feel this phenomenon is directly related to some of the dynamics of our evolution covered in Item 2 above.
13.10.11
Late Edition
1. The Moustache of Understanding
A piece from Salon that slams what it refers to as “bogus centrism,” a movement peopled by the likes of Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, Michael Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz that is based solely on sounding conciliatory and reasonable but is, in fact, vapid, condescending and platitudinous. Salon indicts the movement as swiping the Left’s, and specifically Obama’s, policy positions and rebranding them as moderate compromises. I have to say I think they’re correct. Rather than a genuine “fusion” or “big tent” movement, akin to the Ron Paul revolution, this seems more like an inside-the-beltway marketing ploy to keep some careers solvent during times that are decidedly unkind for liberals or establishmentarians… or progressives, or centrists, or No Labelers…. or whatever the hell they’re calling themselves this week.
2. Herman Cain Takes the Lead
The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll shows Cain surging to first place in the GOP primary with 27%. Romney follows closely at 23% while Perry somehow clings to third with 16%. Ron Paul hovers just beneath the three front-runners with 11%. I’m personally not sure if Cain’s ascent is based more on his performance or on Perry’s lack thereof, but one can’t help but wonder whether Paul can break into third if he performs well in the next debate and raises the energy level of his campaign.
3. The Iranian Question
The recently uncovered plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States on American soil strongly implicates Iran. But this isn’t even close to the first such discovery demonstrating a clear link between the Iranian government and terrorist activity aimed at the US, nor the most provacative. The question is, what can we do about it? And it’s a real brain-buster. Endless sanctions have been leveled at Iran for decades. Russia and China, strategic allies (read: customers) of Iran, sit on the UN Security Council and would likely veto anything too drastic, even given this dramatic revelation. This article talks about using this incident to win the hearts and minds of the people of the Middle East and unite them against Iran. Huh? Military action seems impossible given our current overextension, not to mention Iran’s well-developed network of proxy militant groups capable of launching punitive strikes on American soil, the country’s challenging (to put it mildly) terrain, and its not inconsiderable conventional military capability. So all we’re left with is our own clandestine methods: fanning the flames of discontent among Iran’s highly organized opposition movement, continued acts of sabotage and perhaps, if we’re smart, an extremely comprehensive and very public expose of the full measure of what we know the Iranians have bankrolled or planned in the past decade in the way of terrorism.
4. Phoenix Jones Unmasked
Thanks to this gentleman, cliched dialogue straight out of a Batman or Spider-Man script is being spouted by people like me. Is Phoenix Jones (aka Benjamin John Francis Fodor) a hero or a menace? Well I don't live in Seattle (thank God) so I don't know. The minarchist in me likes the idea of a private citizen with the physical prowess to literally fight criminals taking to the streets of his local community to protect his neighbors (though ideally those neighbors would all carry guns and be lethally trained with them). But the intensely private neighbor in me wonders what the hell kind of person puts on (let alone buys) a rubber superhero costume and leaves his son alone at night to go and pepper spray pimps in the face. I'd rather he just walk around at night in street clothes with a gun on his hip, his identity plain, beating the living daylights out of any remaining criminals that don't know yet to stay the hell away from him by reputation.
A piece from Salon that slams what it refers to as “bogus centrism,” a movement peopled by the likes of Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, Michael Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz that is based solely on sounding conciliatory and reasonable but is, in fact, vapid, condescending and platitudinous. Salon indicts the movement as swiping the Left’s, and specifically Obama’s, policy positions and rebranding them as moderate compromises. I have to say I think they’re correct. Rather than a genuine “fusion” or “big tent” movement, akin to the Ron Paul revolution, this seems more like an inside-the-beltway marketing ploy to keep some careers solvent during times that are decidedly unkind for liberals or establishmentarians… or progressives, or centrists, or No Labelers…. or whatever the hell they’re calling themselves this week.
2. Herman Cain Takes the Lead
The latest NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll shows Cain surging to first place in the GOP primary with 27%. Romney follows closely at 23% while Perry somehow clings to third with 16%. Ron Paul hovers just beneath the three front-runners with 11%. I’m personally not sure if Cain’s ascent is based more on his performance or on Perry’s lack thereof, but one can’t help but wonder whether Paul can break into third if he performs well in the next debate and raises the energy level of his campaign.
3. The Iranian Question
The recently uncovered plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States on American soil strongly implicates Iran. But this isn’t even close to the first such discovery demonstrating a clear link between the Iranian government and terrorist activity aimed at the US, nor the most provacative. The question is, what can we do about it? And it’s a real brain-buster. Endless sanctions have been leveled at Iran for decades. Russia and China, strategic allies (read: customers) of Iran, sit on the UN Security Council and would likely veto anything too drastic, even given this dramatic revelation. This article talks about using this incident to win the hearts and minds of the people of the Middle East and unite them against Iran. Huh? Military action seems impossible given our current overextension, not to mention Iran’s well-developed network of proxy militant groups capable of launching punitive strikes on American soil, the country’s challenging (to put it mildly) terrain, and its not inconsiderable conventional military capability. So all we’re left with is our own clandestine methods: fanning the flames of discontent among Iran’s highly organized opposition movement, continued acts of sabotage and perhaps, if we’re smart, an extremely comprehensive and very public expose of the full measure of what we know the Iranians have bankrolled or planned in the past decade in the way of terrorism.
4. Phoenix Jones Unmasked
Thanks to this gentleman, cliched dialogue straight out of a Batman or Spider-Man script is being spouted by people like me. Is Phoenix Jones (aka Benjamin John Francis Fodor) a hero or a menace? Well I don't live in Seattle (thank God) so I don't know. The minarchist in me likes the idea of a private citizen with the physical prowess to literally fight criminals taking to the streets of his local community to protect his neighbors (though ideally those neighbors would all carry guns and be lethally trained with them). But the intensely private neighbor in me wonders what the hell kind of person puts on (let alone buys) a rubber superhero costume and leaves his son alone at night to go and pepper spray pimps in the face. I'd rather he just walk around at night in street clothes with a gun on his hip, his identity plain, beating the living daylights out of any remaining criminals that don't know yet to stay the hell away from him by reputation.
Early Edition
1. Clinton continues to look good in a three-piece suit while undercutting the president’s proposed tax policy.
It’s abundantly clear that Bill Clinton either doesn’t care if President Obama wins re-election or is currently engaged in a passive-aggressive strategy to aid in his defeat. What isn’t necessarily as clear is why. Is Obama too liberal for Clinton? Has Obama been too ruinous for the Democratic Party? Is it retaliation for the Obama campaign’s (temporary) fracturing of the Clinton bloc within the DNC? Or retaliation for dashing both Clintons’ hopes of a return to the White House? Perhaps least likely of all: does Clinton have a primary challenger in mind?
2. Romney’s Mormonism won’t cost him the critical evangelical vote.
Of course it won’t, because there’s a difference between Mormonism and Mormons. Mormonism is religious slapstick. Mormons are sober, socially conservative, family-focused and successful business people actively involved in their communities and politics.
3. Reports of al Qaeda’s demise may be greatly exaggerated.
Assuming the key leadership of al Qaeda™ is eventually eradicated in its entirety, there is an essential debate that needs to happen as to whether that constitutes a victory in the now rebranded War on Terror that will allow us to bring our troops home. A critical aspect of that debate will, of course, be that destroying al Qaeda’s leadership doesn’t equate to a destruction of the Fort Hood and Umar Farooq-Abdulmutallab brand of low-cost, low-tech Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. I suppose that’s another compelling reason for Congressionally-declared war against a clearly defined enemy with pre-defined victory conditions.
4. “My poverty but not my will consents.”
This is one of many examples of a clear confusion of bioethicism and social policy that has resulted from the broadening of the scope of bioethics itself. What caught my eye was the assertion by Ellison and Meliker that paying women for their eggs might induce a disproportionate number of poor women (under duress, seems to be the inaccurate and underlying presumption) to put themselves at risk of health problems. This whole notion that the impoverished may somehow be less responsible for entering into an agreement after being made fully aware of the risks to their own health, apart from being baseless, doesn’t seem to have any place in bioethics.
It’s abundantly clear that Bill Clinton either doesn’t care if President Obama wins re-election or is currently engaged in a passive-aggressive strategy to aid in his defeat. What isn’t necessarily as clear is why. Is Obama too liberal for Clinton? Has Obama been too ruinous for the Democratic Party? Is it retaliation for the Obama campaign’s (temporary) fracturing of the Clinton bloc within the DNC? Or retaliation for dashing both Clintons’ hopes of a return to the White House? Perhaps least likely of all: does Clinton have a primary challenger in mind?
2. Romney’s Mormonism won’t cost him the critical evangelical vote.
Of course it won’t, because there’s a difference between Mormonism and Mormons. Mormonism is religious slapstick. Mormons are sober, socially conservative, family-focused and successful business people actively involved in their communities and politics.
3. Reports of al Qaeda’s demise may be greatly exaggerated.
Assuming the key leadership of al Qaeda™ is eventually eradicated in its entirety, there is an essential debate that needs to happen as to whether that constitutes a victory in the now rebranded War on Terror that will allow us to bring our troops home. A critical aspect of that debate will, of course, be that destroying al Qaeda’s leadership doesn’t equate to a destruction of the Fort Hood and Umar Farooq-Abdulmutallab brand of low-cost, low-tech Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. I suppose that’s another compelling reason for Congressionally-declared war against a clearly defined enemy with pre-defined victory conditions.
4. “My poverty but not my will consents.”
This is one of many examples of a clear confusion of bioethicism and social policy that has resulted from the broadening of the scope of bioethics itself. What caught my eye was the assertion by Ellison and Meliker that paying women for their eggs might induce a disproportionate number of poor women (under duress, seems to be the inaccurate and underlying presumption) to put themselves at risk of health problems. This whole notion that the impoverished may somehow be less responsible for entering into an agreement after being made fully aware of the risks to their own health, apart from being baseless, doesn’t seem to have any place in bioethics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)