Today's Quote

Something politicians might wanna consider.

Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving wordy evidence of the fact. -George Eliot

Fallout

We haven't heard much about it lately, but apparently there's still some effort to get back at the US for our high-handed approach to "fighting terrorism" during the Bush administration.

From Harper's Mag online.

I use the term "get back at" because I think these attempts are more about grandstanding for public consumption than they're about justice and substance.  That said tho', the Spanish seem to have a real bug up their butts about it.  And it wouldn't exactly hurt my feelings if somebody from Bush's team took a fall.

I think it's more than a little interesting that not one of the former Bush officials has ever gone out of the country to do any kind of victory lap anywhere but Saudi Arabia.

On Conspiracy Theories

There was a thread over at The Agonist today, trying to make some sense of the recent Flash Crash.  One of the commenters asked the author to "dumb it down a bit" because he didn't understand all of the jargon. The author then provided what I consider the best insight on conspiracy theories I've heard so far.

Paraphrasing:

You see why there is constant demand for alternative conspiracy theories. People at least have to understand the terminology. A conspiracy theory would be more credible to me if it contained concepts which a layman couldn't understand; but they never do; because the theory has to survive in a story telling market.

Brilliant.

Ten Years Of Hell

Whether or not you believe it, I'm not always looking for dark clouds that surround the silver linings.  There has been some decent economic news of late and I really do wanna be up and enthused, but I'm not going to be sucked in by the happy talk that managers and bureaucrats throw at us every other day.

The Credit/Debt Monster is still on the loose, and the bail out schemes for Wall Street and Greece (and the rest of the EU), plus the Stimulus Package (the 2nd half of which hasn't even started yet) are still way too recent for anybody with any sense or credibility to make a good assessment.  So we're operating on the assumption that "we're on the right track" and "things will be back to normal soon".  Where have we heard that before?

Here's a little ditty from Rupert Street Journal from last month that passes on to us exactly what the Gov't told the "reporter".  But there's a gimmick the lenders use when reporting  problems with these loans that actually helps them under-report the loans in default by a factor of up to 5.  Where most of the loans showing up in these statistics are the "traditional" ones held by 20- and 30-Somethings for loans they took out to go to "traditional" institutions, the real story in the last couple of years is that a huge amount of money has been borrowed by a much wider range of people to attend the non-traditional For-Profit schools like Univ of Phoenix and Capella Univ which have been enjoying a massive boom.  Any guesses on what those default rates are?  Take a look at this episode from Frontline. At about the 40 minute mark, the picture of our future servitude comes into very sharp focus.

And Jesus wept.

Wastefulness

Ya wanna know what Government Waste really looks like?

Here it is.

The wrangling over Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's investigation of a climate scientist continues...

After indicating last week that it would comply with a subpoena sent by the AG, demanding documents relating to the work of former University of Virginia climate scientist Michael Mann, the university is now equivocating. "Our intention is to comply but we are looking at some options," a UVA spokeswoman told theWashington Post yesterday.

AGW Denial Fallout

Climate Change resistance seems to be all about a political agenda that intends to create inaction.  "Conservatives" and Repubs (mostly) are always blocking movement toward anything they think disrupts the status quo (ie: threatens their positions of power).  There may be some legitimate reasons for it - eg: the economic disruptions of moving away from oil will likely be pretty major, and the trouble we can't predict is always what hurts the most.

While I can understand the reasoning, I dislike intensely the conflict that arises from the way people go about trying to put their policies into effect. The tactic is to paint the AGW proponents as being in service of a Leftist Political slant intent on destroying capitalism, which is of course always portrayed as being "the very essence of all things American".

"Lefties" often do the same kind of painting, but right now, I think the view from "The Left" is more accurate.  My assessment of the ebb and flow of political sensibility is that we're shifting to the left again.  It may well be that the way to "save capitalism" is to take it away from the assholes who claim to be its defenders.

In the case of AGW, the really odd thing for me is that what's driving the shift in sensibility is an adherence to the traditions of science, and that's forcing the opposition to attack the facts themselves, and to defend a position based on uninformed / misinformed / disinformed disbelief.

So we end up arguing about the process instead of debating solutions for the real problems.

Some interesting stuff over at Little Green Footballs.

Solution Of The Month part 1

Make Up Your Mind

Ten Years After

I'd Love To Change The World

Changes

So I was listening to Tony Blankley today on KCRW's Left Right and Center (via truthdig.com).  The topic swings around to BP's oil spill in the gulf and the other commentators are bitchin' about how awful it is, and Blankley says (I'm paraphrasing), "hey, it's bad, but if we don't drill for oil here, we'll have to ship it in, and there're more spills with shipping than with drilling, and we'll be sending more of our money to foreigners - so just think how much worse it'll be if we DON'T keep drilling..."  And I just flashed on something - these guys are always using that specious bullshit argument about some totally unprovable hypothetical that sounds really scary and all too often closes the debate.  We have to stop going along with that shit.

First, we can challenge these guys on the simple fact that they're often so totally assbackwards on their predictions.

Secondly, because our imagination is unlimited, we can conjure up all manner of horrible outcomes - every event COULD BE much worse.

But here's the point: Instead of accepting that kind of argument (which is so often delivered in a condescending and dismissive tone), we need to turn it around on itself.

THEY SAY: "...so it could've been a lot worse, and the next time it WILL be worse if we don't just go along with (insert crappy policy that produced shitty outcome here)"

I SAY: Stick it right back in your ditty bag, Sparky.  Maybe we should start thinking about how much BETTER it could all be if we had some real regulatory guidance; and if some of these asshole companies like BP and Goldman Sachs and Halliburton started following the fucking rules.

Calling Names

Some teabaggers are upset because they say the term "teabagger" is insensitive and insulting.  Cluster Fox ran a longish segment with Monica and Megyn rippin' Obama for using the term.

At first blush: tough shit, girls.  Get a helmet. Nobody likes it and nobody should do it, but y'know, if you're gonna bitch about being called names...fuck it. Never mind.

Moron Arizona

Meanwhile, get a load of some of these polling results:

                  Fer    Agin   Ain't Sure
All               53      36         11

Dems           12      79          9
Repubs        89       7           4
Indies          46      28         26

White          63      26         11
Hispanic       15      76          9
Black            8       80        12

Ever get the feeling that white people really shouldn't be in charge of this joint?
If we ever get a chance at reworking the school system, I think the first thing is to make Civics a part of the core curriculum.

Confluence

I love it when aspects of different and unrelated stories or events come together and link up to illustrate a point.

First, there's the problem with Arizona's (SB 1070) Papers Please law.  Opponents hate it for a variety of (I think) good reasons, but mainly because it turns Hispanics into 2nd Class citizens by reinforcing our silly notion that while profiling is kind of unpleasant; and we certainly wouldn't want it done to us; we need to make some exceptions because after all, we're practically under attack here, and really - if you look at all those illegals, the thing that stands out is that almost all of 'em are brown...

Second, months ago, an Afghani civilian who was supposed to be "on our side" attacked and killed a group of US Military and CIA, killing a bunch of them.  This was a big surprise because while the guy was suspected of being a double agent, they didn't expect him to go all Jihadi because he was in his 30's, he was married, he had a couple of kids...BECAUSE HE DIDN'T FIT THE FUCKING PROFILE!

The brilliance of the guys who put this country together is reaffirmed.  It's like they knew that whatever else happened, we weren't gonna make it unless we understood that we have to treat people like people.  We have to be willing to do the hard work of dealing with each other as individuals and as equals.

And The Horse You Rode In On

Homeopathy Sendup

More Bubbles

And the hits just keep rollin'. What level of disaster will it take to get us to understand some things?

Ten Years Of Hell

Plutocracy: government by the wealthy

Plutonomy: a term that combines plutocracy and economy, refers to an economy in which growth is confined to people at the very top of the wealth pyramid. The term was coined by investment and marketing advisers to characterize the U.S. economy, as an ostensible guide to framing profitable investment and marketing strategies. Critics assert that this usage is one of the many indicators of the moral corruption of the system.

Plutonomy stands at the opposite end of the continuum from economic democracy, a system in which every person has an ownership stake in the means of production on which their livelihood depends. Economic democracy is an essential foundation of political democracy. Plutonomy and political democracy are mutually exclusive, as the current U.S. experience demonstrates so clearly.

This sounds a little "too left" for me, but it also seems there's a pretty strong sentiment in favor of it right now. 

Economic Justice is something we're used to hearing about from guys like Al Sharpton or Spike Lee - and of course, we've generally dismissed it as some coded message about Race-based Politics, but maybe now we're seeing a move toward the rhetorical framing that makes the concept of greater economic equality sound more acceptable emotionally - which in turn will make that equality more achievable politically.

The pendulum swings.

Another Day, Another Spill

From Reddit by way of HuffPo:

Breaking News: Large air spill at wind farm!  No threats reported.  Some claim to enjoy the breeze.

Wouldn't it be nice.

Today In Pictures

Lacrosse Backstop

As usual, the project looks pretty easy and cheap, and then costs a lot more and takes a lot longer than I figured.  At least we get to do something together.