Congressional Lottery Redux

I've mentioned the idea of selecting Congress by lottery instead of elections as a way of eliminating campaign finance corruption. On further consideration, I find that my idea also helps curtail some of the serious problems inherent in the two party system.

To recap my earlier argument, the problems with campaign finance would go away if we no longer had campaigns. One way to do away with campaigns is to do away with elections. We could just as effectively choose Congress in a lottery. That way, anything that anyone gave to a Congressperson would be a transparent bribe.

Another benefit of the Lottery System is that political parties would no longer be primarily concerned with electioneering and winning elections. We would doubtless still have factions but these would be concerned first and foremost with governance rather than campaigning. We would likely avoid the dangerous situation that we have now where one of the major political parties, the GOP, is incompetent to govern effectively when it gets power and invariably makes a mess of things.

The current system has led to a duopoly of two parties which exclude all other factions or potential factions from meaningful participation in the political process. The Lottery System would smooth the way for multiple parties and shifting alliances and coalitions with less potential for polarization into two hostile camps intent on thwarting one another. Congresspersons would be able to form coalitions for special purposes rather than toeing strict party lines. They would be able to remain independent from parties altogether if it suited them. The Lottery System would permit a broader range of views to be represented in Congress.

While we are changing the system to eliminate corruption inherent in political campaigns, let us also make Congress more representative. 435 members is way too few for a population in excess of 300 million. Let's double the number of Congressonal districts to 870 to bring Congresspersons closer to their constituents and to allow for greater diversity of opinions, backgrounds, and perspectives. Better yet, let's triple them to 1,305.

Under the Lottery System, Congresspersons would be selected at random from the residents of each district. The only disqualifications would be youth, felony convictions and receipt of money from any governmental source during the previous ten years, including government contracts. I propose that their terms in office be at least 6 years so that they are not cycled out just as they are learning the ropes. No person would be required to serve if they were unwilling to do so. If the selectee declined to serve, the next name would be drawn until a selectee accepted the position. If we are careful about how districts are drawn, the resulting Congress will invariable look like America. About half of the members will be women. A wide range of age cohorts would be represented, and the distribution of classes in Congress would largely mirror those in the country. In short, we would have a truly representative body.

The Senate, if we decide to keep it at all, could be returned to the original system where its members were selected by state legislatures or it could be chosen by random lottery. I propose that the powers of the Senate be significantly curtailed and that it be limited to voting on legislation passed by the House rather than advancing its own legislation and to advice and consent. In the case of advice and consent, the Senate should be obliged in all instances to give an up or down vote on every nominee within 60 days of nomination and on every treaty within 180 days of submission to the Senate. If it does not, the nominee or treaty should be deemed confirmed or ratified.

Tea Party "Contract from America" a Fiscal Suicide Pact | Crooks and Liars

Tea Party "Contract from America" a Fiscal Suicide Pact Crooks and Liars

This story has an interesting graphic about the sources of the deficit.

Another reason I am a skeptic when it comes to Tea Party claims that they are for lower taxes and smaller government is the unfeasability of their schemes.

Nobody on the right (except some of the right leaning libertarians) ever talks about reductions in military spending and ending expensive wars or about realistic plans to cut spending significantly. They simply have other priorities on which they would spend money or create deficits, the most important being cutting taxes on the relatively affluent. They'll borrow and shift the burden to future generations just as they have always done in my adult lifetime. They'll make a huge mess and leave it to Democrats to clean it up if they can. Government will be no smaller, and overall taxes will be higher (albeit deferred).

Why I Don't Believe Teabaggers

Why don't I believe the Teabaggers when they say want smaller government and more freedom? First, I've heard this same crap by so called conservatives many times before, and it has always been false. Second, they lie or are just so misled about so many easily checked facts that they render themselves utterly trustworthy. Third, their authoritarian fellow travellers are not exactly testimonials to their freedom loving.

Garden and Bird News

Our new handyman came by and fixed the raised beds that I made so incompetently last year and built me a third bed. He is going to put in a fourth bed on Friday, so we will have 400 square feet (with the herb garden and strawberry patch) under cultivation plus the berry patch. With our CSA membership, we are going to be swimming in produce, so I reckon we'll have to do some canning or other preservation. My family in Georgia used to say about our huge harvest that "we eat what we can and what we can't we can".

I have my work cut out hauling wheelbarrows of top soil from the driveway to the garden beds, but I aim to do it and to plant all the beds by this weekend. We planted one already when we had that hot spell a week or so ago.

For the first time this year, I am daunted by pond maintenance. Mucking the pond by hand this years smacks of effort. I used not to mind it, but I am overcome with sloth or something this year. A pond guy is coming by to give me an estimate on muck removal and suggestions on how to reduce sediment flowing into the pond. If I can afford his solutions, I'll do it. Otherwise, I was thinking of getting a trash pump and sucking the muck out of the pond and spreading it on the lawn. That's what I was doing with the wheelbarrow loads. The grass is greener on the muck.

Jasper is getting into fair weather Kong fetching shape. He's already hunting amphibians for hours on end.

We have a new species of bird, the great crested flycatcher. I hope he eats as many flies as he can and invites his whole clan. No hummers yet. The goldfinches are getting golder by the day.

I bought a propane grill- a CharBroil Red and have been cooking out every chance I get.

Life is so much better when winter is over.

Anti-government?

I have seen protesters several times in the last couple of weeks referred to as "anti-government". Yet, when they prevail, they immediately form a government.

So you think slavery wasn't at the heart of the Confederacy…

PZ Myers nails it. So you think slavery wasn't at the heart of the Confederacy…

We're Doomed

I got a little depressed when I found out that Andromeda and the Milky Way are on a collision course. Odds are that this will have a negative impact on survival of whatever we've evolved into by then. This means we have only 4.5 billion years to become an intergalactic civilization. There's not a moment to waste.

Afterlife Schmafterlife

I lean toward universalism but I don't really have strongly held beliefs about the afterlife. It's a mystery as far as I'm concerned, and I'll know what I need to know when I need to know it.

The concept of hell is bothersome. I trust that if hell exists God has His reasons and that them as are consigned to hell belong there. I trust that ending up in hell will be in furtherance of God's plan. I assume that God will cause the resurrected saints to forget about the tormented souls in hell or that He will construct them in a way that will enable them to embrace the fact. Some folks would doubtless be disappointed if there were no hell. I would not. It seems to me that God would not resurrect the damned just to destroy them or subject them to eternal suffering. And if there is a hell, perhaps it's temporary so that when the damned have learned their lesson they can join the saints. I just don't know. How could I? Nobody ever comes back and explains anything.

I'm not sure about hell at all. I'm not even sure about heaven or the whole idea of the afterlife. What a gift it is just to have lived at all and to have been a sentient being. We should be grateful for that and not squander it on hopes for pie in the sky when we die. If there is an afterlife, then it's a bonus. I trust that God knows what is best for us. I would still follow Jesus even if the promise of life everlasting be a myth.

SCOTUS Endorsements

What is wanted on the Supreme Court is a greater diversity of professional background. There are enough law professors and career jurists on the court already. I reckon somebody with an executive or legislative background would be an asset to the court and to the country. For example, Governor Granholm of Michigan or Secretary of State Clinton might make excellent justices and would bring new and important perspectives. It would be helpful to have someone on the court who actually knows how the government really works and can speak to the likely practical impacts of decisions.

Wonkette : Romney Beats Ron Paul By Exactly One Vote In GOP Confederate Straw Poll

Wonkette : Romney Beats Ron Paul By Exactly One Vote In GOP Confederate Straw Poll

As Wonkette puts it:

"An unelectable Taxachusetts liberal gazillionaire, an unelectable libertarian extremist, an unelectable idiot teevee host and an unelectable chocolate-sucking amoral has-been … it’s the cream of the crop, Republican-style!"

Can this really be the GOP field? Maybe these are all just placeholder candidates while the real potential candidates wait and see whether there really is any kind of shot in 2012.

Taibbi Takes Brooks to Task for Douchebaggery

Brooks: Let Them Eat Work - Matt Taibbi - Taibblog - True/Slant

Seriously, Brooks claims rich peoiple deserve to be rich because they work harder.

"Only a person who has never actually held a real job could say something like this. There is, of course, a huge difference between working 80 hours a week in a profession that you love and which promises you vast financial rewards, and working 80 hours a week digging ditches for a septic-tank company, or listening to impatient assholes scream at you at some airport ticket counter all day long, or even teaching disinterested, uncontrollable kids in some crappy school district with metal detectors on every door.
Most of the work in this world completely sucks balls and the only reward most people get for their work is just barely enough money to survive, if that. The 95% of people out there who spend all day long shoveling the dogshit of life for subsistence wages are basically keeping things running just well enough so that David Brooks, me and the rest of that lucky 5% of mostly college-educated yuppies can live embarrassingly rewarding and interesting lives in which society throws gobs of money at us for pushing ideas around on paper (frequently, not even good ideas) and taking mutual-admiration-society business lunches in London and Paris and Las Vegas with our overpaid peers."

My Take on the WBTS

Confederate history has been in the news lately thanks to Virginia's proclamation that April is Confederate History Month and the omission of slavery in the original proclamation. The governor of Virginia knew what he was doing. Even though he apologized for his "mistake", everybody knows where his heart really is. Slavery was bad. Nudge nudge wink wink.

Now folks are arguing about how we should feel about the Confederacy and what the Confederacy was all about. My confederate bona fides are as good as anyone's. I'm the direct descendant of at least eight Confederate veterans and the indirect descendant of many more. There's not a single Union soldier in my family tree. I am interested in the history of the time and the role my family played in it and how we were impacted by it.

Only one of my Confederate ancestors owned any slaves. The rest were poor farmers or tradesmen who worked their own land or plied their own trade without the help of enslaved persons. I don't aim to piss on the graves of my ancestors, and I don't aim to attribute grand motives to them. Each had his own reasons for fighting. Some were conscripted. Others responded to the call to defend their state in the same way that so many bastards have been duped throughout human history. At least one of them was probably defending the institution of slavery by which he profited. Every one of them would have been better off if he hadn't been involved in the war. The South should have stayed in the Union and argued the point about slavery through legitimate processes. If abolition resulted, then the South should have manned up and accepted it. I like to imagine that my ancestors would have been on board with something like that rather than tearing their country apart.

I doubt that any of them gave a second thought to tariffs or abstract constitutional arguments. The war was not of their making. They were caught up in it as pawns of powerful elites. What the war was "about" for each of them we can no longer say. In a larger historical sense, the war was about defending the right of people to own other people and about the fundamental structure of the United States of America. The pro-slavery side lost. The concept of the US as a loose confederation of sovereign states also lost.

Those who advocate a system of state sovereignty with a weak federal government should perhaps avoid coupling their argument with an apparent nostalgia for slavery. There's nothing inherently immoral about the idea of such a government structure, and it ought to be discussed on its merits. And forget about turning back the clock and revising the interpretation of the Constitution that has prevailed for a century and a half. If we want a weak federal government with strong states, we'll need a new constitution or some radical amendments. The idea should be put to the political test for what it is, a radical rethinking of the structure of the government.

States' "rights" has been so often deployed in the context of the reprehensible (slavery, Jim Crow) that it has become almost universally recognized as code for racism. That's what Reagan meant when he talked about respecting states' rights in 1980. He was appealing to disaffected southern voters still angry over civil rights legislation. The GOP is still engaged in this "Southern Strategy". They poison discussion about the concept of decentralization by coupling it with reactionary and authoritarian ideas.

Let's stop talking about the frakking WBTS, and start talking about decentralization on its own merits. Moreover, let's discuss it pragmatically and accept ad arguendo that some things are more appropriate for decentralization than others. Let's talk about it in the context of actual policies and issues that matter today and forget about what the government was like in 1840 or what the Founding Fathers would have preferred. They're dead, and it's the living who will have to contend with our constitutional arrangements.

Embarrassing Mistake

This morning on the way to work on the Taconic, my carpool companion spied a state trooper on the side of the road pointing a device at us. Fearing that it might be an RPG, we opened fire on him. It turned out to be a radar gun. Was my face red or what?

Corporations are Creatures of the State so the State Should Create Them Diffrently

One way for ordinary people to deal with corporate power is to get state legislatures to enact more stringent rules for operating as a corporation like what existed before general incorporation laws became common. Back in the day, states granted charters more sparingly, and strings were attached. Moreover, states could revoke charters whenever it seemed to be in the public interest to do so. Charters were for limited time periods and required renewal. Charters were for limited purposes, and corporations had to get permission to change their line of business. The liability scheme could also be modified to keep executives honest. Corporations could be required to act in the pubic interest, and public directors could be mandated.

Stuff in the News

bpsycho posts about the collateral murder video and Oliver Willis's hissy fit about liberals who criticize the military: http://www.psychopolitik.com/2010/04/if-you-dont-know-them-by-now/

I don't reckon pointing out bad acts necessarily constitutes a blanket condemnation of all servicemembers. I have observed a lot of right wingers among my FaceBook acquaintances who go to great lengths to defend even egregious crimes like the one in the video. War is ugly sometimes, they say, so what can you do? Avoid indiscriminate killing of civilians, for one thing. Observe the rules of engagement and the law of land warfare for another. Prosecute war criminals to the fullest extent of the law.

So the Pope knew about child molesting priests and was involved in the cover-up? D'uh! That would be true no matter which Cardinal had been elected Pope. Covering up and enabling were the policy of the Church, and you don't get to management in a top down hierarchy by bucking policy.

Afghan President Kharzai threatens to join the Taliban? What are we fightng for over there, again?

Rush Limbaugh is a Walrus

This is the the most awesome SadllyNo piece in a long time. http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/29831.html

We bought some plastic storage bins to stash our Christmas decorations and keep the voles from nesting in them. They had the above warning sign on them. I'm not sure what it means. Is it a warning to people that the bin is not suitable for storing a baby? Or do babies like to crawl into stoarge bins and pull the lids down on themselves? A baby that stupid would never understand the warning sign, so I'm guessing this is for adults. Never put your baby in a bin!

I never knew how irresistible babies found buckets. Apparently, they like to stick their heads in them. If they are full of liquid they will drown. I'm not sure those babies are smart enough to heed the warning sign I have seen on buckets that I own.

These were hazards that were never explained to me when I was a wee one. We knew about plastic bags.

We even had a vesre of a song: "Suffocation, we like suffocation. Suffocation, that's the game to play. First you take a plastic bag, then you put it on your head. Go to bed...wake up dead. Oh oh oh oh." We were warned about abandoned fridges as death traps and about the perils of blasting caps. Apparently, it was common back then just to leave blasting caps lying around. Forks and toasters did not mix. We did not fear buckets and bins, however.

I'm OK with Pedophile Priests as Long as They Don't Act on Their Pedophilia

I'm not Catholic, so as far as I'm concerned the Pope is just a guy in a funny hat. This Pope has even less moral authority from my perspective than your average Pope what with the handling of the priestly pedophilia scandal. It's not enough to transfer sexually abusive priests to parishes with less attractive children. Seriously, what does it take to get fired as a priest? The way it was handled makes it look as if the RCC condones child molestation by priests and considers the problem to be exposure rather than the abuse itself.

And now the defense of the Pope and the RCC seems to be to accuse critics of anti-Catholic bigotry. Talking about priestly child molesting is worse than priestly child molesting. This fits in with the notion that the problem is exposure rather than the abuse. Unless the RCC actually considers child molesting a priestly prerogative, it ought to acknowledge the mistakes it has made and pledge to do better in the future.

Standing on Principles

I have to hand it to Wm Norman Grigg for sticking to his principles. He continues to call out DHS and to defend the rights of recent terror suspects. I'm not so courageous. I have been very disturbed by the "Patriot Movement" and the possibility of domestic terrorism and by the tone of discourse from the right that appears to condone violence. Also, a part of me gets a kick out of seeing right wingers who were so gung ho about the security and surveillance apparatus when GW Bush ran it become targets of it.

New Talking Point for Wingnuts

I guess it's not really new, but it's used in a new context. Accuse people who point out Tea Party craziness of being "name callers". What's worse than advocating domestic terrorism? Pointing out that someone advocates domestic terrorism.

The idea is that the craziness of the Tea Partiers does not detract from their ideas. I reckon that would be true if the movement actually had any ideas and was anything other than a manifestation of a generalized reactionary discontent. In principle, the movement has certain not very controversial objectives such as smaller government and lower taxes, but it appears that the rank and file are willing to use violence to air their vaguely expressed grievances and, if not willing to use it or advocate it, to condone it. This makes it very hard to trust them on any issue or to take their positions seriously.

Why the Windies Will Never Dominate Again

West Indian acquaintances who learn that I am interested in cricket invariably ask me to explain why the West Indies, unstoppable for a decade not long ago, cannot recapture the days of glory. I usually just nod and remark on what a mystery it is and promise to look into it. The answer is pretty simple, though. The rest of the world adapted to the relentless pace attack that the West Indies mastered and monopolized during its Decade of Dominance. The rest of the world learned to hit fast bowling and to cultivate pace bowlers themselves. The West Indies needs a new trick if it aims to dominate again. Its population base is too small to allow it to outcompete year in and year out the teams from larger countries.

Another reason for the decline in the fortunes of West Indies cricket is a product of the earlier success. Youth cricket has become highly institutionalized in the West Indies with the result that "sandlot" cricket is an increasingly rare phenomenon. Youth are channeled into organized leagues, and playing outside the formal system is devalued. This drives many young would be cricketers away from the sport.

Still, you gotta love the Windies. They're America's team.

Easter's On Its Way

Good Friday is fast approaching, and I am so not ready. I need to practice with the CD player every chance I can between now and then. Maybe there will be a miracle, and I will do great. I'm definitely going to suck on Easter. We're doing a Vivaldi piece with lots of staggered "amens". I will never get this right in time. Fortunately, we in the chancel choir are doing only one Easter service. The early birds are getting a praise band. I suppose it will be all praise bands all the time within a few years.

Easter is on the first Sunday of the month, so I suppose we'll be having "communion". Or maybe we always have communion on Easter. I just don't remember. Our version of the Lord's Supper is not very memorable. We get a crouton and a thimble of grape juice that we ingest with great solemnity, and that's it. Most of the ceremony is taken up with the elders and deacons bringing the bread and juice to the congregation. The choir is singing throughout all this, but the congregation is just waiting to be served.

The church will be full with an overflow crowd in the fellowship hall watching everything on video. Who are these people? Where have they been since Christmas Eve?

At the end of the service, anyone who wants to is invited up to the choir to sing the Hallelujah Chorus. That's pretty fun.

This is the one Sunday where most people dress up, even the sullen teenagers.

I Still Suck

When I went to Montana, I took my music and a CD of the Cherubini Requiem that we're doing for Good Friday. It turned out that I had no time to listen to it or to look at the music, so I am way behind with Holy Week fast approaching. The other tenor better be ready.

I was also going to use the exercise room in the hotel every day. I didn't use it once. That's a setback in terms of my fitness program.

I was going to blog. I didn't.

I was going to eat right. I didn't.

If I had just admitted to myself from the get go that I was going to slack off from everything except the trial, I would be having a lot less self loathing right now. Or would I? I'd probably be full of self loathing for being the kind of person who could slack off without a second thought.

Mom's House Struck by Lightning

My mother's house in Georgia, where I spent my teenage years, was struck by lightning about 10 days ago and was destroyed. Nobody was injured. The house was insured. Mom has a trailer that she used to rent out to live in while she rebuilds. The outpouring of support has been overwhelming.

It's Fracking Good to be Home

We lost the trial of the matter I had been working on for eight years. I don't have a personal stake in the outcome, but it was still a disappointment. The forces of evil prevailed. I worked a lot harder than I am used to doing over the last two weeks in Montana, and I'm glad it's over so I can get back to my normal routine.

On the plus side, I enjoyed seeing some headlines that dealt with 'fracking" http://billingsgazette.com/search/?l=50&sd=desc&s=start_time&f=html&q=fracking

Wyoming is looking at stricter fracking rules. Some fracking legislation is getting attention. We don't talk so openly about fracking here in New York.

Speaking of fracking, I caught up on the episodes of Caprica that I missed while I was away.

No More Tribes, Please

Here in Montana, it's hard not to notice the circumstances of Indians on reservations. In a way, their circumstances are similar to those of non-Indians who are stuck in the disappearing small communities all over this state. Family farms give way to corporate farming, and jobs get scarcer and scarcer. In the dictionary, next to the word "bleak" there should be a picture of rural Montana.

In another way, the Indians have it even worse. Everything they have is tied up in the reservation and the tribe, and they are stranded in and tied to their remote and unproductive locations by a desire to maintain their cultural heritage.

I don't think it makes any sense to maintain the idea of tribal sovereignty in the 21st century. Congress has the power to abrogate every treaty with the Indians and ought to do so if it is in the interests of the US to do so. Let the US deed the reservations to the Indians or buy the land from them and put it into the BLM system. Let the US buy out of its treaty obligations and pay off individual Indian citizens and have done with it. Then they can move where they like and get jobs and maintain their culture, or not, as they see fit.

Let's face facts. There was a war, and the Indians lost. Let's not rub it in by maintaining a system of homelands for them that keeps them impoverished and in a perpetual state of dependency. Rather, let's assuage our collective consciences by throwing a lot of money at the Indians once and for all and treating them just like every other category of citizen. The federal and state governments can apologize for their sins and even hold truth and reconciliation commissions to air the grievances of Indian people and educate Americans about what bastards their ancestors were (unless they're immigrants). Existing casinos can be grandfathered in but transferred to corporations with Indian shareholders.

I Wish I Had Become an Astronaut Instead of a Lawyer

After three days of this trial and dealing with legions of lawyers, I remember why I hate being a lawyer and am convinced that I have wasted my life. I don't usually feel this way in my non-litigation role, thank the gods.

The adversarial system is supposed to reveal the truth. That's like saying that combining two turds will make a chocolate bar.

Even though all the missions are lame ass shuttle trips, it would be better than being a lawyer.

In Billings

I'm in Billings, MT and its sunny and in the fifties! The bad news is that I'm here for a two week trial in federal court and will be stuck with a flock of lawyers the whole time.

These civil trials are complex and expensive undertakings. The amount of paperwork boggles the mind. Nothing is more mind numbingly boring than working on these things, and I'm glad I'm a witness and face of the corporation rather than a litigator. There is a boxcar load of banker's boxes with files, and that's just on our side. We have a small army of lawyers and assistants to lawyers.

The worst part is that we are going to waste two weeks out of the lives of a dozen citizens who will be compelled to serve as jurors in our corporate squabble. How I pity them.

Why I Care

Folks sometimes ask me why I care about what happens to humanity in the far distant future. I don't even have children, so what do I care about posterity?

First let me address the idea that being childfree renders me less mindful of the future. The children of my siblings are as genetically related to me as my own grandchildren would have been if I had had any. In the vast scheme of things, this one generation difference is inconsequential. Even if my siblings didn't have offspring, I have enough relatives with shared genes to have a genetic stake in the future of my genus, assuming that this matters.

Secondly, I expect to upload into a computer when my meat body gives out and to live on as a machine for a very, very long time. I would like the environment and society to be pleasant and to support the advanced technology that I will need to occupy better and better machine forms.

Thirdly, if my robot plan does not pan out (and even if it does and my roobotic self wears out), I expect to be resurrected at the end of time, and I don't want to have to explain to folks who came after me why my generation was so shortsighted, selfish and douchey.

Away for Two Weeks

I drew the short straw. Montana for two weeks. Could be worse. Could be Texas.

Not Spacefarers?

By all accounts, it looks like the US has scrapped plans to go back to the moon. This probably means a Mars mission is off the agenda as well. Maybe the Chinese will pick up the slack and keep us on track as a spacefaring species. Maybe demand for Helium Three will inspire commercial space travel and exploration. I doubt it. What private entity would be that future oriented?

If the Chinese start going to space, the US will probably see this as a national security problem and get back in the space game. If space is going to be militarized, the US doesn't want to be on the earthside looking up. Maybe militarization would get space exploration jump started as each state competed to stake out extraterrestrial real estate.

What Tea Partiers Are

Tea Partiers are (a) dumbasses or (b) racists or (c) both. The orchestrators may be cynically using stupidity and racism for political purposes and may, in fact, be neither stupid nor racist (except in the sense that they have no scruples about stoking racist fires), just evil. In the end, does it matter if a problem is caused by stupidity versus evil?

Shark attacks plunge — thanks to economy? - Environment- msnbc.com

Shark attacks plunge — thanks to economy? - Environment- msnbc.com

Dr Lenny is Back!!!!!

http://howdt.blogspot.com/

Snow Story

The snowstorm knocked out our power for almost 48 hours from Thursday evening until Saturday evening. Our big hardships were the lack of running water and an inability to keep the fish tank at a high enough temperature to prevent fatalities. We have a wood stove that keeps the house about 50-55 degrees, and our cooker is propane and can be lit with matches. We have plenty of candles, torches and a lantern for light. But water stopped pumping from our well, and we had to melt snow to get water to flush the toilets. We bought drinking water and water to wash dishes and clean up at the store. There were no shortages or runs on things, but it was hellacious getting anywhere with all the downed tree branches and slippery roads.

We took showers at our gyms when they got power. I had a pit bull for a bed warmer, so we muddled through the inconvenience. We slept more than usual.

I realize that our forebears had no electricty and that they endured it quite well. But they didn't have quality cable programming and the internet to be deprived of. They didn't have to deal with Blackberries with low batteries and tropical fish. And they had facilities for getting along without power, such as hand pumps and outhouses and fireplaces and oil lamps. The better off ones had armies of servants who would provide the comforts we derive from our appliances and modern conveniences. So, really it was much worse for us who are not used to such privations.

Snow Abounds

If we had two 4 wheel drive vehicles, I wouldn't care if it snowed every day. Also, if the trees didn't fall over the power lines and kill our power, that would make snow days less problematic. And if dog poop didn't build up to epic proportions under the snow, who would even care? If all those problems went away, I'd say let it snow, let it snow, let it snow!

It's going to snow like hell whatever I say about it so I may as well make the best of it. Staying in and drinking isn't such a bad way to spend evenings, and snowstorms help you feel less guilty about it.

An Open Letter to Commode Designers

Dear Commode Designers:

I have some user comments on a couple of commode designs I have encountered recently, and I hope they will help you make improvements.

The commodes in the men's locker room at my gym have completely round bowls and seats, and when I sit on them it is very difficult to cause the openings in both my anus and my penis to be situated over the target area. If I sit back enough to clear the way for urine, I will poop on the seat, and if I place the poop chute over the target area, the urine flow will be directed onto my feet and my trousers that are resting on them. I have to stretch my "nozzle" uncomfortably and point it to make sure that the urine flow is direted to the target area. This is not a good design. If I were any bigger I would be unable to shit and pee at the same time.

The commodes in one of the men's rooms at the Minneapolis Airport feature a lip inside the bowl at the front which directs urine flow upward and outward and onto one's clothing, the floor, even the door of the stall. This is a bad feature. Did you even try this design before you submitted it?

Public commodes in the third world inevitably end up without seats. I don't know why this is so or what the seat thieves are doing with them or whether the manufacturers just don't include seats in sales to the third world. Whatever. Make a third world commode that doesn't require a seat or force you to perform feats of contortion that require major development of the quads and that would challenge a yogi. You'll probably get a Nobel Prize if you do this. Mention me in your speech.

I hope this helps.

Sincerely yours,

Vache Folle

John Yoo, Douchebag

If Goering had had John Yoo as his defense counsel at Nuremberg, he'd be alive today.

Sunday Sermon Takeaway

Our prophetic back up pastor preached today, always a treat. He preached on the temptation of Christ by the devil after fasting in the wilderness. He pointed out that The Holy Spirit led Jesus to the devil and that the temptation was not so God could make sure Jesus was ready. It was so Jesus would know He was ready. The devil was just doing his job.

Anyway, the point of the tests as they apply to us was trust in God and God's plan whatever that may be. The preacher asked us to consider whether we were living out all that God wanted us to be. I know what he was getting at, but it didn't entirely make sense from a Calvinist perspective. Of course I'm everything I am supposed to be. I hope that I will be better in the future, but that's not up to me now, is it?

Blackberry

I resisted the cell phone fot many years. I hate the frakking phone to begin with, and I sure as hell didn't want to get calls when I was out of the office or away from home. For emergencies, I kept a prepaid cell phone, and I never gave anyone the number. I don't think I even knew the number.

Then Mrs Vache Folle got me a Blackberry on which I can receive and send e-mails and go on-line. I can open most attachments. I never go out without it, and I refer to it often. I take pictures with it and play games on it. It kills time in waiting rooms, etc. I love it and don't know how I ever lived without it.

I still don't give out the phone number. I have never even turned on the ringer. If you need me, e-mail me. Mrs Vache Folle can text me through BBM, but nobody else can.

I'm reminded of the story of an old man who got a phone after fifty years. When he had visitors one day, the phone rang and rang, and a visitor asked if he were going to answer it. The old man replied, "It's for my convenience."

More Deuteronomy

It does not appear that the rest of Deuteronomy applies to me, either. Everything is directed to the Jews of that time. There's a lot of stoning called for, including stoning to death of rape victims who are raped within the confines of a town. I don't believe God sanctioned this and reckon this was just a preference of Moses or the author pretending to speak through Moses.

There's still no afterlife or Satan. If Israel follows the laws, it will prosper. Otherwise it won't. It will be blessed or cursed, as the case may be, depending on whether it abides by the law and eschews other gods. Reward and punishment are in this life, and the idea of the next life doesn't come up.

So much for the first five books of the OT. Unless they come up later, I can forget about them.

Nine Categories of Voters

In thinking about the relationship between cowardice and conservatism, I began to wonder if the degree of cowardice in personalities is normally distributed such that about half the people cluster around an average measurement where they are neither especially timid nor especially bold. On either end of the distribution would be the timids and the braves, each representing about a quarter of the population. Suppose also that intelligence and timidity are independent variables and that level of intelligence is unaffected by or unrelated to degree of timidity. That would mean that the population could be divided up into the following categories:

Stupid and cowardly folks would comprise the solid core constitiuency of the conservative movement. They amount to 6.25% of the population. No effort is needed to frighten them or to misinform them as they are already both extremely anxious and ignorant. They welcome a fascist police state as their only hope for security.

Normal and cowardly folks comprise 12.5% of the population. They are ready to be afraid, and their limited ability for abstract thought makes them prime targets for GOP misinformation. With their stupid and cowardly fellow travellers, they make up the reliable conservative base.

Smart and cowardly folks are 6.25% of the population. They want to be afraid, but they aren't entirely susceptible to right wing propaganda. They need at least a plausible threat and are as apt to direct their fear at conservatives as at any bogeyman the conservatives propose. They are not reliably Republican. At best, half can be counted on to vote Republican.

Stupid and brave folks are another 6.25%. They are not motivated by fear, but they can be duped into almost anything because of their stupidity. They are a wild card and can't be counted on by either side, but about half will end up with the GOP for random and inexplicable reasons.

(This gets us to the solid 25% that the GOP can count on no matter what, the same 25% that approved of GW Bush no matter how big a failure he was. The rest of the categories require the GOP to do some work.)

Normal and brave folks are 12.5% of the population. Fear does not motivate them, but they are not entirely immune to misinformation about other things. They cannot be counted on by the GOP.

Smart and brave folks are another 6.25%. They can't be frightened or fooled. Some of them are evil, however, and will support the GOP for personal gain eg Wall Street moguls.

Stupid and neither brave nor cowardly make up 12.5% of the population. These folks are up for grabs by the GOP because they can be made fearful by taking advantage of their stupidity.

Normal and neither brave nor cowardly is the largest category with 25% of the people. They are the battleground.

Smart and neither brave nor cowardly are 12.5%. They are a hard sell for the GOP without a plausible threat, and you can't fool them forever.

GOP and al Qaeda Depend on Fear

I have read in a couple of places over the last couple of years that people with more fearful personalities tend to be more conservative and, accordingly, to vote for the GOP. People who have more fearless personalities tend to be liberal and to vote for Democrats. Those in the middle are sometimes capable of being frightened enough to tilt them toward GOP candidates.

This is why it sometimes seems that the GOP and al Qaeda are in cahoots. They both want to frighten Americans, so there is a convergence of interests. If al Qaeda did not exist, the GOP would have to invent it. In a sense, the GOP did invent the version of al Qaeda that many of its dupes have bought into, the one where al Qaeda is an existential threat instead of a bunch of yahoos in some caves.

Presidents' Day

On this Presidents' Day, let us consider William Henry Harrison who gave an especially long inaugural address without a hat and who died from illness within a few weeks of taking office. He was one of only a few War Hero Presidents who gained his notoriety by defeating indigenous peoples and who had a catchy nickname: Tippecanoe. Had he lived, it is likley that the course of American history would have been largely unchanged. He also had a grandson who was an equally forgettable President.

My $0.02 on Iran

The regime in control of Iran right now (and their counterparts, the American GOP) is doing all it can to provoke the US into some aggressive and irresponsible action. Internal opposition is a problem for the regime, and it would be helpful for them to be able to rally the Iranian people around a nonexistent external threat. It would also help the American GOP for the hardliners to stay in power in Iran because they need as much instability in the world as possible in order to lend a modicum of credibility to their fearmongering. "Stay scary, Iran," is the GOP mantra. Hmm, that explains a lot of what the Bush/Cheney regime was up to.

Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy begins with a recap, like a new epidode of Lost. We are reminded of the curse that led to 40 years of wandering and given a summary of the various genocidal exploits of the Hebrews as they began to possess the Promised Land. Then, beginning in Chapter 5, Moses lays down the Law.

"Don't have any other gods besides God. Do not make any idols and worship them", Moses tellls the children of Israel. "Don't take the name of God in vain. Observe the Sabbath. Honor your parents. Don't murder, commit adultery or steal. Don't bear false witness. Don't covet. Obey these commandments, says Moses, and you will live and do well in the Promised Land. Moreover, keep these commandments and be ruthless and merciless, and you will possess the Promised Land and prosper.

"When you go into the Promised Land, destroy the religious buildings and cultic places of the people whom you encounter. God will set up a special place where you are to bring your sacrifices and eat before Him. Did I mention that you shouldn't eat blood? Kill anyone who even mentions serving other gods.

"Here's a list of animals you aren't allowed to eat. Be sure to tithe."

As far as I can tell, none of these commandments is directed at me but at the children of Israel. I'm not saying that some of them aren't a great idea, just that Moses wasn't talking to me. I can eat pork and shellfish without offending God, and I don't have to kill anyone.

Belhar Confession

Our pastor has been preaching on the anti-Apartheid Belhar Confession, not because we have a problem with racial segregation (which we probably do in some sense but that's another story) but because of the ideal of unity and reconciliation in general. He pointed to Nelson Mandela as an example of what a spirit of reconciliation can accomplish and to the US federal defense budget of 741 billion dollars as an example of what it costs to live in a world without reconciliation.

We have heard a lot over the years from our pastor about how we shouldn't quarrel about nonessentials and that there are more nonessentials than we might think. So Catholics venerate saints? What does that matter as long as we agree that Jesus is lord and love one another? Sprinkling or dunking; wine or grape juice; transubstantiation or not. None of these are worth being divided over. Sins? Forgiven. Next objection! Political differences? Get real, they're not important from a cosmic perspective and they're not even that profound when you examine them closely with tenderness and humility.

The Belhar Confession goes even further and concludes that we ought as a church to struggle against injustice, that the credibility of our ambassadorship for Christ is impaired if we sit by while injustice is done and say nothing, risk nothing. With all the suffering and injustice in the world, shouldn't we be able to set aside our petty differences and doctrinal squabbles and do something? At least say something?

If the church is silent about the holocaust in eastern Congo, the most horrific example with seven million dead that I can think of, do we not signal our indifference or even our approval of what is going on there? Shouldn't we forget about our differences until this kind of injustice has been addressed? How can we waste ourselves in arguments about the liturgy with those kinds of nightmares going on? There is the work of the kingdom to be done.

E-mail Good; Phone Bad

If it were up to me, I'd do all my work communication via e-mail. E-mail is great because you can get the benefit of prior discussions in the string, relevant documents and materials as attachments, and a message that someone has thought about enough to put down in writing. I like to look at my e-mails first thing in the morning and prioritize them and work off of my in-box. If I can't get to something the same day, I at least acknowledge it with a projected return date.

Occasionally, I'll encounter a dinosaur who insists on using the phone when an e-mail would do. I hate that. I have come to regard non-emergency phone calls or non-privileged calls as the epitome of rudeness. It is like saying DROP EVERYTHING AND ATTEND TO ME NOW BECAUSE I AM MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING ELSE YOU COULD POSSIBLY BE DOING RIGHT NOW. I almost always answer my phone, so it's really a bother when it's something routine. I frequently give people the brush off and make then set up an appointment to call at a set time if they can't e-mail me. I have begun to treat phone calls the same as in person appointments. They are both drains on productivity.

Candlemas Showed Promise

Candlemas has come and gone, and for what it's worth the Crelleach laid in very little wood and the marmot saw his shadow not. That is to say it was overcast on the great day itself. I am going to pretend that this presages an early Spring.

Try Terror Suspects in Court Except When You Don't

At the gym the other day, I saw on the TV that Lindsey Graham was complaining about prosecution of terror suspects in civilian courts. I reckon it's up to the executive to decide whether to use the criminal justice system in particular cases rather than some questionably constitutional military tribunal or even more questionable detention without any kind of a hearing. In the absence of some really compelling reason to forego the criminal justice system, I reckon it would make no sense to do so other then to appease some yahoos in the GOP.

I have heard it argued that terror suspects don't "deserve" constitutional rights. This argument doesn't signify. It ain't about deservin'. We all get constitutional rights whether we deserve them or not. Hell, even imaginary people like corporations get them.

I have also heard it argued that affording terror suspects the rights of accused persons in the criminal justice system makes it harder to get them to cooperate in fighting terrorists. I'm not sure why this would be true as a blanket proposition. The potential terrors of the penal system are a pretty good inducement to cooperation. The government won't be able to torture them or to use the fruits of torture, but that doesn't usually turn up anything useful anyway. If you need a false confession, torture. If you want reliable information and leads, don't.

If Corporations Are People...

In my job, I have helped to dissolve or merge out of existence numerous corporations. Am I guilty of assisting suicide?

Can I marry a corporation (assuming Mrs Vache Folle is out of the picture)? Can I adopt one as my child?

If a corporation is under eighteen, shouldn't it be required to have a guardian?

More Youth as National Security Concerns

While we are training teens for military duty, we should also recognize that other aspects of their health are matters of national security. Accordingly, youngsters should be provided with regular physical examinations free of charge at military entrance and examination stations. Moreover, illnesses and injuries that do not disqualify a youngster for service should be treated at the expense of the DoD. We want potential soldiers to be both fit and healthy when they reach enlistment age.

Since the health and fitness of youth are matters of national security, football playing should be discouraged or even outlawed. The risk of injury is too great, and the benefits of football playing are negligible and can be derived from other less stupid sports. Football could be replaced with the military pentathlon to the benefit of the nation.

Driver training should also be handled by the DoD. Safe handling of vehicles is critical to preserving the health and safety of future soldiers. Also, youth could be trained to operate various military vehicles as a head start on BT.

School lunches could also be handled by DoD as part of the effort to build fitter youth for America's defense.

Train Teenagers as Soldiers

I have been reading and hearing about how new recruits for the armed services are, taken as a whole, in unusually poor physical condition. A lot of effort goes into getting them in sufficient shape to meet minimum fitness standards. I suppose seven hours a day in front of TVs and computers and texting leave little time for exercise.

Arguably, the need for physically fit bullet stoppers makes secondary school physical education a matter of national security. I propose that the DoD take over gym programs in American schools and design and operate them to get youngsters ready for military duty and to keep them that way. Gym teachers would come off school district budgets, and coaches could be used to teach academic courses or drivers ed instead of PE. Let's face it. PE programs have failed to make our youth fit for duty.

Gym teachers would be active duty drill instructors. Over the course of four years of high school, they should be able to get just about every youngster fit.

Everybody wins. Kids get fit whether they become bullet stoppers or not. The armed forces get a pool of recruits that are ready to learn soldiering from day one. Schools get PE programs off their plates.

It may even be possible at some point to include all the training that soldiers get in Basic Training in the program. What soldiers learn in a few weeks of BT could be drilled over and over during four years of high school. That would be good for the armed forces if those trained youth enlist. Moreover, those who do not enlist will be better equipped to serve as the unorganized militia in the event of a national emergency.

Some more advanced youngsters could even opt to take Advanced Individual Training and qualify for a Military Occupational Specialty during high school.

How to Keep the Poor from Breeding so Much

The complaint by South Carolina's less than gentlemanlike lieutenant governor that giveaways to poor people encourage them to breed like "stray animals" leads me to consider what one might do to lower the fertility of poor women if that were one's goal.

Poor women in the US appear to have a higher fertility rate than not so poor women, although this may be skewed by the fact that having children sometimes makes one poor at the same income level that would not qualify as poor for a childfree household. In fact, fertility decreases with affluence with total fertility at just below the replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman. Assuming that the policy goal is to reduce the fertility of the poor, leaving for the later the implications of negative population growth, how might the State of South Carolina go about this?

This could be accomplished by (a) reducing the value of children, and/or (b) increasing the cost of children. Child labor restrictions and other policies render the economic value of children negligible, and it is difficult to imagine how the State of South Carolina could make having children less entertaining and satisfying. Perhaps if the children of the poor were required to attend boarding school away from their parents they would be less fun to have, but the cost of such a solution and its questionable constitutionality argue against it. Accordingly, the State of South Carolina is left with the cost side of the ledger.

Pronatal subsidies such as free public schooling, tax credits and exemptions, AFDC, WIC, and the like reduce the cost of childrearing, albeit at levels that are unlikely to have a significant impact on fertility except at the margins. Poor people reproduced at even higher rates before these programs were in place and continue to do so in countries without such subsidies. It is probably not possible to limit free public schooling to persons of means, but it may be possible to have the same impact by charging school fees while keeping attendance mandatory. Enforcement of such a measure, eg by incarcerating recalcitrant parents, would be costly and interfere with other state goals.

The best way to increase the costs of childrearing would be to increase opportunity costs significantly by ensuring that women actually have meaningful opportunities to forego. Then again, this may well entail wholesale changes to the systems in place in South Carolina that lead to the existing poverty rate and permit the advancement of politicians of the sort who reckon that the reduction of the fertility of the poor is a legitimate goal.

Ways that Poor People are Like Stray Animals

1. Poor people and stray animals did not create the systems in which they find themselves poor and stray.

2. Poor people and stray animals both want our solicitude and mercy.

3. Poor people and stray animals are doubly unfortunate if they find themselves in South Carolina.

4. Poor people and stray animals are both easy targets for the cruel and thoughtless.

Support the Troops

Via Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/13/alexis-hutchinson-single-_n_421729.html comes this story of a US soldier and single mother who is being charged for refusing to deploy for want of care for her child.

I'm thinking that some generous troop-supporting Americans could come forward and help out servicemembers whose child care plans fall through. It would be a lot more supportive than a magnet on their cars. Foster care would not be appropriate since the circumstances do not warrant subjecting the children of deploying servicemembers to the horrors of the child welfare apparatus.

Politics on FaceBook

I've had some hilarious discussions in comment threads on FaceBook with friends of friends. One woman who reckons the Democrats are Marxists and called me crazy for pointing out that some Tea Party Patriots have dodgy connections, wrote that she didn't know enough about the Neo-nazis to decide whether they were too radical for her. Another woman insisted that Obama has never used the word terror or terrorist and, therefore, does not admit that there is a terror threat. A lot of them imagine that voters in Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown to the Senate because they are coming around to the thinking of the religious right!

Since I hate both parties (the Republicans slightly more), I have been able to point out to folks just how differently the other side seems to see things. If you get all your news from FOX, you don't know anything. Liberals don't seem to understand how conservatives (ordinary people, not pundits and politicians) view the world and, therefore, misread their motives. I have been surprised in dealling with folks how much they have in common when you get down to their actual views on issues notwithstanding their labels. I have not been surprised at what dupes people are and how they buy talking points hook, line and sinker.

Virginia Coddles Terrorist

Why has the Commonwealth of Virginia chosen to put Christopher Speight through the criminal justice system? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8471638.stm) The man is a suspected domestic terrorist and should be whisked away to a secret detention center and tortured until he gives up others in his cell.

Massachusetts Hates America, But That's OK

Massholes went and elected a Republican temp for the late Ted Kennedy's Senate seat. I don't reckon this did any harm other than to the reputation of Massachusetts. He'll have to pretend to be not crazy if he wants the seat for a full term, and that will put him in a bad way with the wingnuts.

As for the loss of the filibuster proof 60 vote supermajority, the Democrats never had it. Lieberman was never to be relied on, and there were enough Blue Dogs to do the GOP's job even with 60 votes in the caucus. Maybe this will allow the Democrats to kick Lieberman to the curb where he belongs.

What will come of health care reform? Maybe the House will go ahead and pass the Senate bill and work out the kinks in reconciliation. Maybe it will just die and the process will have to start over. For political fun, I'd like to see the Democrats take a mulligan and let the GOP look obstructionist.

I Know the Father of Jesus

On Saturday evening, Mrs Vache Folle and I went to a production of Jesus Christ Superstar at the Rhinebeck Center for the Performing Arts. It was quite excellent.

We were inspired to go because I am slightly acquainted with the father of the young man playing the role of Jesus Christ.

I mentioned during a conversation with the woman sitting beside me that I knew the father of Jesus. She looked perplexed for a moment and then said "You know God?"

One Spirit

Our church participates in aorganization in the area called Love INC. or Love In the Name of Christ. Love INC represents a pooling of resources from many churches of various denominations to do good works in the community. It is an example of unity, a living out of the exhortation of Paul to be one in the spirit. Our pastor's sermon yesterday had this as its theme. When people see Christians let them see gift givers who are a blessing to the world, not divisive judgmental scolds or the like. Let us be unified in being a blessing to the whole world and set aside our differences over doctrine and how we worship.

When I grew up in the Bible Belt, the call to unity and away from disunity was used to suppress dissent. If you didn't believe and do as you were told and as your spiritual betters did, you were being divisive. And it was only proper that the church should avoid divisive people and make it known that they had no truck with the likes of them.

What a perversion of the ideal of unity to use it to divide.

David Brooks Inspires Another Blog Post

There’s much to criticize in Friday’s OpEd by David Brooks in which her argues that Haitian “culture” is progress resistant and a cause of their poverty. He comes to this conclusion after remarking that Barbados, which was once a slave society, is not so poor. He does not acknowledge the significant differences in the histories and circumstances of Barbadians and Haitians. It can’t be the history of slavery, Brooks impliedly concludes, so it must be something else. It can’t be geography, he argues since the DR is on the same island and not nearly so poor. It must be something about the Haitians themselves. Brooks can’t really come out and say that the Haitians are stupid and shiftless, so he uses the concept of “culture” as cover. Haitians do what appear to Brooks to be stupid and counterproductive things because their “culture” makes them do so. I don’t suppose Haitians are reckoned to have any kind of agency in this analysis.

Brooks does allow that it is worth trying to instill in them bourgeois sensibilities. He praises programs that “are going to replace parts of the local culture with a highly demanding, highly intensive culture of achievement — involving everything from new child-rearing practices to stricter schools to better job performance”. Perhaps it would more efficient simply to send free motivational CDs and CD players to every Haitian to get them in an achieving mood. Does Brooks suppose that Haitians want to be poor and desperate? That they mistakenly cling to a fatalistic mentality and favor short term planning because some memetic virus prevents them from doing otherwise?

The fact is that for most Haitians clinging to hope of achievement would be delusional and would lead to even greater unhappiness. There must be realistic opportunities to achieve before a “culture of achievement” will do any good.

Brooks remarks that Haitians have a great deal of social mistrust. It seems to me that social mistrust is the most rational position under the circumstances. Before social trust will rise, there must be trustworthiness on the part of social institutions.

Haitian immigrants bear witness that Haitians are not so fettered by “culture” as to want re-education. Where opportunities exist, they pursue them. Where institutions are trustworthy, they come to trust them. All this they do without undertaking any fundamental “cultural” shift. They adapt to their circumstances and negotiate their way in the world as they find it.

It is undeniable that ideas and values, cultural facts if you will, may be resistant to progress. The Amish, for example, resist technology. Religious fundamentalists resist modernity. The Amish want to live simply. Fundamentalists want to live in a pre-modern social order. Poor people do not as a rule want to be poor, so it is a mistake to confuse their adaptations to the existential conditions of poverty as cultural constraints on achieving prosperity. They can my no means be said to have eschewed prosperity on the bare basis that they happen to be poor.

Pat Robertson Slanders God Again

I've been hearing how Pat Robertson has been blaspheming again. The earthquake in Haiti? Part of a curse brought down on the Haitians because they sold out to Satan over two hundred years ago. Or maybe it's Divine Wrath on account of gay folks again. Who can fathom the mind of Pat Robertson? Haiti is a place. Haiti, as a state, is an abstraction. Haiti can't sell its soul to the devil because Haiti doesn't have a soul to sell.

Perhaps everything happens for a reason, but it's the pinnacle of arrogance to pretend that you know what those reasons are. Unless you're a prophet. Pat Robertson is no prophet. His utterances are of no value.

Russian Women Want to Date Me

The latest spams that are coming in to my work inbox are purportedly from Russian women who want to date me. They are attracted to me notwithstanding my other spams that suggest that I need my penis enlarged and that I would look more successful with a replica watch.

My 2 Cents on Harry Reid

Folks who think Harry Reid's comments about the electability of Obama were racist don't know what racism is.

Reid spoke the truth. If Obama were darker skinned and talked like Kanye West, he would not have been electable. That's an observation about the electorate and the limits of their racial toleration.

Stream of Consciousness

I set up a Facebook account. It's a little overwhelming getting in touch with so many long lost schoolmates and finding out what became of them. It has set me to thinking how rare it is to make friends later in life like the ones you made in school. I should have kept them better. I should try to be a better friend, or any kind of friend for that matter, to my current acquaintances. I probably won't, though. I'll just continue to be socially phobic and then beat myself up about it from time to time.

I retained a personal trainer at my new gym, and I'm pleased with the help he has given me. I'm doing the Nautilus circuits and cardio on an elliptical machine. My new gym has trainers who set the machines for you, so that takes some time off the workout. I haven't been as often as I would like, but I have been dealing with a severe allergy attack that began when we went to Europe in November and has not let up since.

I consulted an allergist and am scheduled for testing so I can get shots. I am going crazy with the constant sneezing and snot production. It used to be seasonal, but now it's perpetual. People must think I'm a coke head what with all my sniffling and nose blowing. Allergies also trigger my COPD since snot gets in my lungs while I sleep, tiny invisible animals and plants set up housekeeping in the lung snot, and I end up with bronchitis. It's chronic bronchitis because I get it multiple times a year.

Looking back on the treatment I have received over the years for COPD, I am convinced that it was fruitless. It started with a pulmonologist who prescribed steroids and then had me come in at intervals for pulmonary function tests. Of course, when I have bronchitis, my lung capacity is reduced since I can't blow in the machhine without a coughing jag. When I don't have bronchitis or an allergy attack, I breathe much better. Later, my primary doctor put me on allergy pills since he perceived a connection between the allergies and the bronchitis. These were utterly ineffective. No amount of Claritin or Allegra stemmed the flow of snot and sneezing fits I would have from time to time and that I now have all the time. That my doctor never suggested getting allergy treatments is a mystery to me. Anyway, I am hopeful that this new initiative will avail.

I am trying to get up the nerve to get laser surgery for my eyesight. I am very sensitive about stuff touching my eyes so I know I would be terrified during the procedure. Mrs Vache Folle had it done fifteen years ago in Vancouver (it wasn't approved in the US then) and has been elated with the results. She went from near blindness to almost perfect vision overnight. I'm a chicken.

I had to get my eyeglass frame replaced, and I was a little put out to discover that the frames are from the ladies' section. They didn't seem particlularly feminine to me when I bought them, but now I'm just a wee bit self conscious about them. Silly? Yes.

I went to the Bass Outlet and stocked up on sweaters. They were hugely discounted.

Conservative Criticism of Avatar Says More About Conservatives

The LA Times explores conservative criticism of the movie Avatar: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2010/01/avatar-why-do-conservatives-hate-the-most-popular-movie-in-years.html Having just seen the movie, I have one question for its conservative critics: project much?

One of the main critiques seems to have been that it portrays the American military in a bad light and asks audiences to root for American forces to be killed by insurgents. The human forces in Avatar are security contractors retained by a corporation. They don't have the benefit of being deluded into believing or pretending to believe that they kill and destroy for a higher purpose. They are straight up hired guns who do what they do for money and nothing else. They will kill or destroy without a second thought because they are professional killers. Is that how conservatives see the American military? Shame on them if they equate the mercenaries in Avatar with American military forces. Presumably, our soldiers are a lot less like the hired killers than the Marine who takes them on because he knows what is right and fights for a higher cause. At least they have been led to believe that they fight for some higher cause.

Another critique is that the film is anti-human/antiAmerican. If conservatives equate America with the evil corporation in Avatar, then it is no surprise that they hate America. Moreover, the hero of the movie is a human played by an Australian actor pretending to be an American ex-Marine. Humans lead the aborigines to victory. Human conscience thwarts the dehumanized corporate interests and the dehumanized minions of the corporation.

The movie is seen as anti-corporation. It's certainly anti the evil corporation in the story. Do conservatives equate all corporations with the lawless juggernaut portrayed in the film? Do they admire evil?

The movie portrays the aborigines as being extremely in tune with nature. Well, in this story, as it turns out, the natives are in tune with nature. The planet Pandora is, in fact, a living entity with connections to every living thing. The plants and animals commune with one another through some strange organ and are, in point of fact, connected. So they have evolved in this imaginary world, and so it is perfectly sensible for them to acknowledge the connectedness. Far from being soft headed environmentalism, it is a necessity for survival.

Conservatives seem to be mystified that such a story resonates with the public. David Brooks http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_14164941 claims that the movie is a retelling of the "White Messiah" story akin to Dances With Woves, A Man Called Horse and such movies. I reckon he is off the mark. These stories aren't about the simple natives' wanting rescue by a superior white man but about the "civilized" stranger's wanting transformation and reconnection with his humanity. The white stranger is not a messiah but an archetypal hero who regains from the natives his lost soul. The tale resonates with us because many of us in the subaltern classes feel as if we are being steamrolled by impersonal dehumanizing forces, and we yearn for a missing sense of community, connection and a purpose greater than profit. We imagine a simpler, richer life and populate this imaginary realm with a romanticized ideal of premodern societies. That actual premodern societies fail to approach this romantic ideal is of no consequence since we are in the realm of myth. Also, I don't reckon the romantic notion of premoderns has done any more harm than the old way of thinking of them as subhuman savages. I don't doubt that conservatives miss referring to premoderns as subhuman.

Anyway, Avatar was a lot of fun, and if conservatives can't enjoy it, that's because they don't approve of enjoyment in any event.

Worst Anarchist Ever

Mrs Vache Folle reckons that I am the worst anarchist ever. This is because I always come to a full stop at every stop sign, even when it is clear that I can get away with a roll through without endangering anyone. Moreover, I observe the traffic laws scrupulously and can't stand even to park illegally or violate even the slightest regulation or ordinance. I'm also not a faithful anti-state ranter. I have been known to vote and to contribute to political campaigns.

And I haven't been posting much about how evil the state is and how we should work tirelessly to bring about a stateless society. I just don't have the heart for it. We live in a world of states, and states are likely going to be around for many generations to come. I'm not even sure that a stateless society would necessarily be as great as I used to think given the depraved state of mankind at present.

I have come to the point where I reckon that railing against the existence of the state or the concept of the state is fruitless. Rather, I have decided to be content with advocating the idea of dealing with the state, using the state, serving the state, and talking about the state mindfully. It would do some good I think to take the concept of the state, work to remove it from the existential substrate, and problematize it in the context of mainstream discourse about politics and policy. For the most part, the concept of the state and the the propriety of government action are givens which are rarely deconstructed and given any consideration in political discourse. I would like to see more instances of having the violent and coercive nature of the state exposed and discussed in discourse about current events and issues. If we are determined to resort in the first instance to violence and coercion, then by all means let us do so mindfully.

And if I live subject to a state and have some influence, however slight, over how it rules over me, I ought to be able to state opinions without being assumed to have abandoned my skepticism about whether state action was warranted, wise or moral in the first place. If we are determined to act through states, I am determined to opine about alternative courses of action.

If I must be ruled by a state, and it appears that I must, I am determined to raise the alarm whenever it appears that the authoritarian nutcase wing of the GOP gets any more control of that state. It may seem at times that I have become a partisan of the Democratic Party, and this is true to the extent that I believe that the Democratic Party is significantly less likely to get us all killed or to bring about an authoritarian shift than the GOP.

As....as a ....

I commented to a conspecific the other day that I felt as happy as a lark, to which he replied "What's a lark?" "It's a bird," said I. "Is it especially happy?" asked he. "It is supposed to be the epitome of happiness, but I don't know why."

It comes to me that I frequently use expressions of this sort without any idea as to whether they are in any wise apt. "Drunk as a lord" comes to mind. Are peers of the realm more apt to be drunk than other ranks? I have no experience to guide me.

"Naked as a jaybird" is another. Why a jay? Jays are no more naked than other birds, so why are they singled out as the standard of nakedness?

Other expressions make sense. "Dumb as a rock" is pretty dumb inasmuch as rocks are inanimate objects. I have also heard "hammer" used. I suppose that it would be fun to mix up the objects from time to time, as in "he's as dumb as a stapler" or a "spatula". Inanimate objects, particularly "doornails", also stand in for deadness. Would "dead as a rock" and "dumb as a doornail" work? They don't sound right for some reason.

"Hills" are evidently quite old, but I reckon there are older things, eg the moon, and things that are old enough to make a point without being as old as the hills, eg redwood trees. If the hills are old, the valleys are equally so.

"Pictures" are said to be pretty, but I reckon it depends on what is being pictured and the skill of the artist.

"Birds" are free. So are other wild animals. Why not "free as a squirrel"?

"Houses" are big. So are other buildings. So are tractor trailers.

Choosing to Believe

Yesterday in the sermon, our pastor mentioned that he had been reading some of the recent books by atheists in connection with some discussions he has been having with a skeptic. Since, I've read these books as well and have been following the discussion, I engaged the pastor after church and remarked that it seemed to me to be a mistake to defend faith via reason (not that he was doing this). I pointed out that the movie Religiosity had some good examples of how stupid religious people sound when they try to reason with nonbelievers about irrational religious beliefs. We agreed that religion was not about reason but about faith. I remarked that it was a matter of belief, and he said something about "choosing to believe" before he had to kibbitz with other coreligionists.

I was sorely perplexed by this, and I can't think for the life of me what the preacher meant. Belief, as far as I know, is involuntary. Either I believe something or I don't. I cannot choose what I believe or disbelieve, and if I just pretend to believe in something, that doesn't really count as belief, does it? For me, belief is a gift with which I have been blessed. I didn't just decide one day to believe in Jesus; rather, I discovered that I had come to believe in Him.

In the sermon, the pastor remarked on the hopelessness of the atheistic worldview as he has done before. I am reluctant to project this on atheists. Many of them seem quite hopeful and seem to have a pretty good moral foundation and outlook on the world. They seem reconciled to the universe as it is to them and resigned to it, and this is in many ways similar to the attitude of believers who have aligned their will with that of God and resigned themselves to whatever happens as a manifestation of that will.

Bad Day? No way.

Today has the makings of a bad day, but I aim to make the best of it. It's snowing like hell, and I have a massive sinus headache and excited snot production. Mrs Vache Folle took the 4 wheel drive to a facial, so I'm pretty much stuck and had to resechedule my gym orientation session.

My gym finally went belly up, this time for good it seems since there is a new outfit, a tennis club, in the facility, so I have had to join a new one. It's way better in terms of facilities but much busier (also less likely to go out of business).

Maybe I'll play in the snow and throw snowballs at the dogs for a while. That'll cheer me up.

I haven't broken any resolutions yet, but I haven't fulfilled any that want fulfilling.

Bush in League with AQ?

The Bush Regime, over the objections of the military, released certain detainees from Guantanamo. Some of them went on to leadership in the Al Qaeda franchise in Yemen, and they appear to have been behind the Underwear Bomber's attempt to bring down an airliner.

Is it wrong to jump to the conclusion that the Bush Regime was somehow in league with Al Qaeda? Or should we just chalk this up to monumental incompetence? Sadly, either explanation is plausible.

What David Brooks Wrote

I don't often agree with David Brooks, but his op-ed in the morning paper was partly right: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/01/opinion/01brooks.html?ref=todayspaper

Brooks opines that Americans have unrealistic expectations about the ability of the security apparatus to thwart terrorist attacks.

Brooks writes:

"Much of the criticism has been contemptuous and hysterical. Various experts have gathered bits of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s biography. Since they can string the facts together to accurately predict the past, they thunder, the intelligence services should have been able to connect the dots to predict the future."

It seems to me that crtics expect a level of omniscience on the part of the intelligence and security apparatus that is not attainable at a reasonable cost in either governmental resources or inconvenience to the public. There is, I contend, no perfect security. States should strive for an optimal level of security that has reasonable costs and thwarts or deters most terroristic endeavors. If the public cries out for more than this, states should try give them the appearance of security that the TSA has become famous for rather than trying to fill in the unfillable gaps.

Brooks goes on:

"In a mature nation, President Obama could go on TV and say, 'Listen, we’re doing the best we can, but some terrorists are bound to get through.'"

We are to Brooks seemingly a nation of bedwetters now of which our forebears would be ashamed. I disagree and suspect that this appearance is a function of the noise that comes from government and cable TeeVee as various self interested individuals and entities strive to exploit the recent failed terror attack for political or financial advantage. Individual Americans appear to me to be much more pragamatic and far less hysterical about the incident than their would be leaders. They are still flying on airliners and going about their business. Security is less of a concern to them than the economy at this point, and that is a rational prioritization of anxieties. I hope that the pundits and politicians fail to frighten us into a state of paranoia where we forget our own best interests.

After all, we have had eight years of this nonsense to become inoculated. The fearmongers may find, I hope, that they are one trick ponies and that the public is on to them. They may perhaps be described as the Norm Charltons of the noise machine.

The fearmongers appear to assume that the public does not remember the Shoe Bomber. How indeed could we forget since we memorialize the event by ritually removing our shoes before we pass through airport security? Any critique of the Underwear Bomber incident and its handling applies to the Shoe Bomber incident and its handling in equal measure. We are not so stupid as to fail to recognize this.

The fearmongers, in mongering fear (may they be confounded), aid and abet the terroristic enterprise in that they are working to inspire the very fear that the Underwear Bomber failed to incite. Shame on them. Shame on us doubly if we are fooled again.