To prevent even the appearance of impediments to the free flow of anger, anxiety, and anticipation of better times ahead, an early evening late night open thread, for your posting pleasure.
Remember, Xmas is just around the corner. Time to start warming up: "Good King Winklehof looks out, on his feets uneven...."
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Things fall apart....
Reading the newest Harper's (December issue; not on-line yet, more's the pity). A review by Greg Grandin of Niall Ferguson's Colossus: The Price of America's Empire. According to Grandin, there's quite a price to be paid.
Ferguson's argument is that we (Americans) just aren't ruthless enough, yet. Which means, yes, we could have won in Vietnam, if we'd just had the belly for it. Now America faces "the growing power of liberalism" (don't you all feel better now?), which prevents us from exercising our true authority as the benevolent Empire the Romans...oh, sorry, the British, once were.
How to overcome this and other obstacles to the Pax Americana? Apparently by reining in the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare spending. The "less privileged" (Grandin's words, now) would be made: "leaner and meaner, more willing to shoulder the burdens of empire. Just as poverty drove the Irish and Scots into Britain's colonial army, 'illegal immigrants, the jobless,' and 'convicts' could help fill the ranks of Washington's imperial legion." (Apparently Jonathan Swift and Jeremiah were both wrong: poverty is good for sovereigns!). "Ferguson is especially enthusiastic that African Americans might become 'the Celts of the American Empire.' And once he dispense with what here passes for social democracy, he sets his sights on political democracy. Successful empires, Ferguson writes, require 'the resolve of the masters and the consent of the subjects.'"
According to Grandin, Ferguson is the "darling of the American media." Great. Wolf Blitzer's late night reading, I suppose. Makes one glad Bush isn't much of a reader; but he's surrounded by people who are, and who would take this half-baked crock of "thought" seriously. Which is what worries me. The "fringe" is moving more and more toward the center; which means, indeed, that the center cannot hold.
Ferguson's argument is that we (Americans) just aren't ruthless enough, yet. Which means, yes, we could have won in Vietnam, if we'd just had the belly for it. Now America faces "the growing power of liberalism" (don't you all feel better now?), which prevents us from exercising our true authority as the benevolent Empire the Romans...oh, sorry, the British, once were.
How to overcome this and other obstacles to the Pax Americana? Apparently by reining in the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare spending. The "less privileged" (Grandin's words, now) would be made: "leaner and meaner, more willing to shoulder the burdens of empire. Just as poverty drove the Irish and Scots into Britain's colonial army, 'illegal immigrants, the jobless,' and 'convicts' could help fill the ranks of Washington's imperial legion." (Apparently Jonathan Swift and Jeremiah were both wrong: poverty is good for sovereigns!). "Ferguson is especially enthusiastic that African Americans might become 'the Celts of the American Empire.' And once he dispense with what here passes for social democracy, he sets his sights on political democracy. Successful empires, Ferguson writes, require 'the resolve of the masters and the consent of the subjects.'"
According to Grandin, Ferguson is the "darling of the American media." Great. Wolf Blitzer's late night reading, I suppose. Makes one glad Bush isn't much of a reader; but he's surrounded by people who are, and who would take this half-baked crock of "thought" seriously. Which is what worries me. The "fringe" is moving more and more toward the center; which means, indeed, that the center cannot hold.
Loving Life in an Oil Dependent Country
Atrios, You might want to bring home some drinking water from Spain. Of course, more regulation would be anti-business. And allowing suits from those harmed would be anti-business. What we probably need, in fact, are more tax cuts. For oil tankers. And for SUVs. Heard on the radio while driving home that the captain says this is the first time this ship has had a leak. So, ok, no problems.
A Disgusting Way to Make Money -- Part The Ten Millionth
David E.’s Fablog has a good post about the recent 20/20 program that gave Matthew Shepard's killers a chance to tell "their side" of the story. ABC has clearly decided that there’s money to be made in revisionist history -- at least as long as the victim is gay.
****
THE ART OF HATE
It would be ever so nice to pass over the whole wretched thing in silence. But when a major television network makes as much noise as ABC -- currently in full crow over its twin dramatic hits Desperate Housewives and Lost -- it's pretty hard to avoid the latest puff pastry from its news division, inedible though it may be. The 20/20 "investigation" of the murder of Matthew Shepard, claiming that it's characterization as "Hate Crime" was off-the mark, while offering up all manner of hearsay and obfuscation of the historical record is easily exposed as the piece of shoddy homophobic tripe that it is by the most cursory of Google searches of the original story, not to mention more contemporary reports, and statements of the Shepard family in response to this attack on their brutally murdered son.
Not that ABC cares. It got what it wanted -- a tabloid TV "golden oldie" to fill in the "sensation slot" now that Scott Peterson is no longer news, and the Michael Jackson trial has yet to get underway.
"Ms. Vargas, the striking brunette who replaced Barbara Walters as co-host of the show in September, has wasted no time before taking on a risky story: the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard," notes the New York Times. But it's hard to see the "risk" the presumably intrepid Ms. Vargas ( the new replacement for Roy Cohn's beard) incurred in scrupulously supervised jailhouse interviews with the killers.
*****
Send 20/20 a piece of your mind. If that link gives you an error message, Reader Anthony suggest trying: 2020@abc.com.
****
THE ART OF HATE
It would be ever so nice to pass over the whole wretched thing in silence. But when a major television network makes as much noise as ABC -- currently in full crow over its twin dramatic hits Desperate Housewives and Lost -- it's pretty hard to avoid the latest puff pastry from its news division, inedible though it may be. The 20/20 "investigation" of the murder of Matthew Shepard, claiming that it's characterization as "Hate Crime" was off-the mark, while offering up all manner of hearsay and obfuscation of the historical record is easily exposed as the piece of shoddy homophobic tripe that it is by the most cursory of Google searches of the original story, not to mention more contemporary reports, and statements of the Shepard family in response to this attack on their brutally murdered son.
Not that ABC cares. It got what it wanted -- a tabloid TV "golden oldie" to fill in the "sensation slot" now that Scott Peterson is no longer news, and the Michael Jackson trial has yet to get underway.
"Ms. Vargas, the striking brunette who replaced Barbara Walters as co-host of the show in September, has wasted no time before taking on a risky story: the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard," notes the New York Times. But it's hard to see the "risk" the presumably intrepid Ms. Vargas ( the new replacement for Roy Cohn's beard) incurred in scrupulously supervised jailhouse interviews with the killers.
*****
Send 20/20 a piece of your mind. If that link gives you an error message, Reader Anthony suggest trying: 2020@abc.com.
"Bang bang! You're dead." Feel the rush!
Is it just me or has it become difficult to distinguish between commercials for kids' video games and those for military recruitment?
[Update: 10:45pm Central time. Just returned from a long day away from the computer and read the comments for the first time.]
Well this post certainly turned into a Rorschach test. In retrospect I should have dropped the word "kids'" from my query. I know adults are a significant segment of the gaming audience and I think its inclusion side tracked too much from my central observation, which I was careful to write as a circular thought so as not to automatically suggest causation over correlation. I've just always had a thing for marketing and advertising and so normally when I see commercials out of habit I always try and guess what type of product is being advertised before it's obvious in the commercial. I've just been noticing lately that it's become more difficult to know if I'm watching the latest ad for the Army or Tom Clancy.
For the record I'm not making a statement that I think kids are being primed to kill by militaristic games any more now than when GI Joe ruled the day. I have no doubt that for the better part of human existence boys have played militaristic games. That mankind has also been in pretty much an ongoing militaristic state of affairs this whole time is probably just a wild coincidence.
Toy soldiers. War. Chicken. Egg.
[Update: 10:45pm Central time. Just returned from a long day away from the computer and read the comments for the first time.]
Well this post certainly turned into a Rorschach test. In retrospect I should have dropped the word "kids'" from my query. I know adults are a significant segment of the gaming audience and I think its inclusion side tracked too much from my central observation, which I was careful to write as a circular thought so as not to automatically suggest causation over correlation. I've just always had a thing for marketing and advertising and so normally when I see commercials out of habit I always try and guess what type of product is being advertised before it's obvious in the commercial. I've just been noticing lately that it's become more difficult to know if I'm watching the latest ad for the Army or Tom Clancy.
For the record I'm not making a statement that I think kids are being primed to kill by militaristic games any more now than when GI Joe ruled the day. I have no doubt that for the better part of human existence boys have played militaristic games. That mankind has also been in pretty much an ongoing militaristic state of affairs this whole time is probably just a wild coincidence.
Toy soldiers. War. Chicken. Egg.
Nonsense
So, it's okay to borrow a bunch of money and raise taxes to "save" social security by demolishing it but not okay to borrow not so much money or raise taxes a wee bit to save it for real.
I think we're seeing how this is going to unfold - a combination of putting it off budget and raising taxes on people earning not too much money. The tax increase will be offset by what will be called a "tax cut" - your shiny new personal social security account. So, they'll add a few percentage points onto your income taxes and "cut" your payroll tax, but force you to save the money.
Sane people will try to point out what they're doing, Ted Koppel will declare it oh so complicated, pundits will pontificate that no one really understands all these numbers...
I think we're seeing how this is going to unfold - a combination of putting it off budget and raising taxes on people earning not too much money. The tax increase will be offset by what will be called a "tax cut" - your shiny new personal social security account. So, they'll add a few percentage points onto your income taxes and "cut" your payroll tax, but force you to save the money.
Sane people will try to point out what they're doing, Ted Koppel will declare it oh so complicated, pundits will pontificate that no one really understands all these numbers...
Moral Man and Immoral Society
It appears our host is enjoying Barcelona now, and Hecate is in the house! So an ancillary post to keep us going through the morning (hopefully).
Trying to formulate some thoughts on the subject of the thought of Reinhold Niebuhr. Probably most famous for being the "anonymous" author of the "Serenity Prayer" ("God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other." Yes, Viriginia, that prayer does have an author; and that's the "authorized" version), Niebuhr was on the cutting edge of politics and religion his entire adult life.
He wrote an interesting book on the intersection of the two, Moral Man and Immoral Society. His argument, basically, was that while individuals could be expected to make moral decisions that might affect them adversely ("If someone strikes you, turn and offer him the other cheek also."), societies could not do so because the society cannot make the decision for individuals as to who lives, and who dies. It can only ask for sacrifices that protect the society at large, not sacrifices that preserve a moral ideal.
The duty of a society, in other words, is to insure the survival of its constituency. Niebuhr was arguing against the "Social Gospel," which taught that society itself had to be transformed, not the individual. Niebuhr's argument was that society cannot be expected to fundamentally transform (especially into the "kingdom of God, " where the first are last and the last first), because society cannot violate the fundamental tenet: protect the constituency.
Which brings us to the political question: can we change the world? Or only ourselves? And which one do we start with?
Trying to formulate some thoughts on the subject of the thought of Reinhold Niebuhr. Probably most famous for being the "anonymous" author of the "Serenity Prayer" ("God, give us grace to accept with serenity the things that cannot be changed, courage to change the things that should be changed, and the wisdom to distinguish the one from the other." Yes, Viriginia, that prayer does have an author; and that's the "authorized" version), Niebuhr was on the cutting edge of politics and religion his entire adult life.
He wrote an interesting book on the intersection of the two, Moral Man and Immoral Society. His argument, basically, was that while individuals could be expected to make moral decisions that might affect them adversely ("If someone strikes you, turn and offer him the other cheek also."), societies could not do so because the society cannot make the decision for individuals as to who lives, and who dies. It can only ask for sacrifices that protect the society at large, not sacrifices that preserve a moral ideal.
The duty of a society, in other words, is to insure the survival of its constituency. Niebuhr was arguing against the "Social Gospel," which taught that society itself had to be transformed, not the individual. Niebuhr's argument was that society cannot be expected to fundamentally transform (especially into the "kingdom of God, " where the first are last and the last first), because society cannot violate the fundamental tenet: protect the constituency.
Which brings us to the political question: can we change the world? Or only ourselves? And which one do we start with?
Now, Are the Fundies the Walrus, and the Corporatists the Oysters? Or Is It the Other Way Around?
'The time has come,' the Walrus said,
'To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.'
'But wait a bit,' the Oysters cried,
'Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!'
'No hurry,' said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.
'A loaf of bread,' the Walrus said,
'Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed -
Now if you're ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed.'
'But not on us!' the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
'After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!'
'The night is fine,' the Walrus said.
'Do you admire the view?
It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf -
I've had to ask you twice!'
'It seems a shame,' the Walrus said,
'To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'The butter's spread too thick!'
'I weep for you,' the Walrus said:
'I deeply sympathize.'
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
'O Oysters,' said the Carpenter,
'You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none -
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.
-L. Carroll
In other words, which group will prevail within the Republican Party? I think that for years the corporatists have believed that they could use the fundies, throw them a bone or two by pretending to want to criminalize abortion or gay sex, and then rape them (and the rest of us) financially. Now, thanks largely to the fact that our lazy media have seized upon the not-exactly-correct meme that the fundies "gave" Lame Duckie this election, the fundies are feeling empowered and are demaning their "due." Will the corporatists continue to play them like the cheap violin that they are? Or will the fundies now play the corporatists? What happens when it becomes clear that the fundie agenda will harm corporate profits? Chat away!
'To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing-wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.'
'But wait a bit,' the Oysters cried,
'Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!'
'No hurry,' said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.
'A loaf of bread,' the Walrus said,
'Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed -
Now if you're ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed.'
'But not on us!' the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
'After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!'
'The night is fine,' the Walrus said.
'Do you admire the view?
It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf -
I've had to ask you twice!'
'It seems a shame,' the Walrus said,
'To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!'
The Carpenter said nothing but
'The butter's spread too thick!'
'I weep for you,' the Walrus said:
'I deeply sympathize.'
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
'O Oysters,' said the Carpenter,
'You've had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?'
But answer came there none -
And this was scarcely odd, because
They'd eaten every one.
-L. Carroll
In other words, which group will prevail within the Republican Party? I think that for years the corporatists have believed that they could use the fundies, throw them a bone or two by pretending to want to criminalize abortion or gay sex, and then rape them (and the rest of us) financially. Now, thanks largely to the fact that our lazy media have seized upon the not-exactly-correct meme that the fundies "gave" Lame Duckie this election, the fundies are feeling empowered and are demaning their "due." Will the corporatists continue to play them like the cheap violin that they are? Or will the fundies now play the corporatists? What happens when it becomes clear that the fundie agenda will harm corporate profits? Chat away!
Very Slowly
Just because I may believe that there exist some potential abuses of our legal system does not mean I believe that, say, a $250,000 cap on non-economic damages in malpractice suits is a particular good idea.
"This lawsuit threat is stupid" does not equal "I hate our current tort system" any more than "I hate General Motors automobiles" equals "I believe driving should be outlawed."
"This lawsuit threat is stupid" does not equal "I hate our current tort system" any more than "I hate General Motors automobiles" equals "I believe driving should be outlawed."
Bubble Boy
Poor Kristof. There are always these well-meaning liberals doing and saying things he doesn't like. Frequently they're unnamed. Now, it is true of course that there are perhaps some well-meaning liberals who are calling for a troop withdrawal. There are also probably some well-meaning conservatives calling for the same. And, there are also some batshit crazy conservatives who got us into this mess in the first place who still actually have some power and influence over our foreign policy who are... calling for a troop withdrawal.
Now, if you had a column in the Times which would you write about? Unnamed, unspecified "well-meaning liberals" who, as always seems to be the case, are causing serious death and suffering according to Kristof. Or, you know, the people actually responsible.
Now, if you had a column in the Times which would you write about? Unnamed, unspecified "well-meaning liberals" who, as always seems to be the case, are causing serious death and suffering according to Kristof. Or, you know, the people actually responsible.
Friday, November 26, 2004
So this is how it's done....
Posting to a blog for the first time is rather like standing behind the props on a stage or movie set. The first thing you want to do is to pay attention to all the stuff going on that you never see....
But this is not the time for such reflections. Perhaps I should start again (once the agog sensation has passed)
And now for something completely different....
John Dewey (per John Updike, whom I've been reading recently; his "Early Stories" collection, which is really quite good), said God is the marriage of the actual and the ideal. We've had a surfeit of the actual lately, and consequently we're despairing lately of the ideal. Leaving out the religious issues (is this truly the nature of God? Could such a God exist?), can we consider that our "god" (the political/social vision that "calls" us here together) can be seen again, in a marriage of the actual and the ideal? And what actual? and which ideal?'
One more word, from Updike, that might either set the tone or blur the distinctions beyond recognition; a general and genial observation on the American scene: "We have explored, on behalf of all mankind, this paradox: the more matter is outwardly mastered, the more it overwhelms us in our hearts." Are these things right, or wrong?
But this is not the time for such reflections. Perhaps I should start again (once the agog sensation has passed)
And now for something completely different....
John Dewey (per John Updike, whom I've been reading recently; his "Early Stories" collection, which is really quite good), said God is the marriage of the actual and the ideal. We've had a surfeit of the actual lately, and consequently we're despairing lately of the ideal. Leaving out the religious issues (is this truly the nature of God? Could such a God exist?), can we consider that our "god" (the political/social vision that "calls" us here together) can be seen again, in a marriage of the actual and the ideal? And what actual? and which ideal?'
One more word, from Updike, that might either set the tone or blur the distinctions beyond recognition; a general and genial observation on the American scene: "We have explored, on behalf of all mankind, this paradox: the more matter is outwardly mastered, the more it overwhelms us in our hearts." Are these things right, or wrong?
The Red-Blue Trap
This rant is late, but the issue isn’t going away so here goes anyway.
I am really sick of the “blue staters” hostility towards “red staters” thing. It has become the dominant way to frame almost any sociopolitical discussion since the election but it annoys me to no end. I suppose I asked for it, my last post on this site could be construed as a criticism of Texas rather than a criticism of what certain politicians are doing in Texas. And so, I watched as some anti-”morons living in the red state” remarks showed up in the comments. I urge you not to fall into the blue-red trap for the following reasons:
(1) It isn’t true. A county-by-county breakdown of election results reveals there are only 3 red states and 2 blue states (3 if you count DC as a state). The other 45 have some counties that went for Bush and some that went for Kerry. The state-by-state maps are necessary for determining the winner of an election given our screwed-up electoral vote system, but not an accurate reflection of the mood of the country. Even the county-by-county breakdown is misleading. There were Kerry voters in each red county, just as people voted for Bush in the bluest of the blue locales.
(2) It isn’t smart. If liberals want to win in national elections, we should stop gratuitously insulting potential allies simply on the basis of where they live. Put another way, if you thought you felt isolated and alienated from the rest of the country sitting in your blue state on November 3rd, how do you think liberals in Alabama felt? Even in Oklahoma, one of the few “all red” states where Bush won every county, has Alex still fighting the good fight. He should be supported, not insulted. We frankly need more like him. There are liberals all over the country, even in "authentic" places sitting in the middle of the country. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
(3) It’s falling into their trap. The red state-blue state divide "discovered" after the 2004 elections is nothing more than a rebranding of David Brooks’ Bobos in Paradise argument that there are two competing and incompatible cultures in America today. But when a reporter tried to verify the facts underlying Brooks’ thesis they didn’t check out. The post-2004 election version of the "Bobo" theory is on just as flimsy grounds.
The modern conservative movement sells itself as “a revolt of the little people against a high and mighty liberal elite.”. It feeds on a feeling of victimization and resentment that many "red staters" feel right now. And the ability of the right to play into that feeling of victimization rests on the premise of a divided america: us versus them, red versus blue. There is no reason we have to adopt their framework. It only works to the conservatives' advantage anyway.
Besides, as a yeti named Matthew” wisely counseled just after the election:
P.S. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
I am really sick of the “blue staters” hostility towards “red staters” thing. It has become the dominant way to frame almost any sociopolitical discussion since the election but it annoys me to no end. I suppose I asked for it, my last post on this site could be construed as a criticism of Texas rather than a criticism of what certain politicians are doing in Texas. And so, I watched as some anti-”morons living in the red state” remarks showed up in the comments. I urge you not to fall into the blue-red trap for the following reasons:
(1) It isn’t true. A county-by-county breakdown of election results reveals there are only 3 red states and 2 blue states (3 if you count DC as a state). The other 45 have some counties that went for Bush and some that went for Kerry. The state-by-state maps are necessary for determining the winner of an election given our screwed-up electoral vote system, but not an accurate reflection of the mood of the country. Even the county-by-county breakdown is misleading. There were Kerry voters in each red county, just as people voted for Bush in the bluest of the blue locales.
(2) It isn’t smart. If liberals want to win in national elections, we should stop gratuitously insulting potential allies simply on the basis of where they live. Put another way, if you thought you felt isolated and alienated from the rest of the country sitting in your blue state on November 3rd, how do you think liberals in Alabama felt? Even in Oklahoma, one of the few “all red” states where Bush won every county, has Alex still fighting the good fight. He should be supported, not insulted. We frankly need more like him. There are liberals all over the country, even in "authentic" places sitting in the middle of the country. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
(3) It’s falling into their trap. The red state-blue state divide "discovered" after the 2004 elections is nothing more than a rebranding of David Brooks’ Bobos in Paradise argument that there are two competing and incompatible cultures in America today. But when a reporter tried to verify the facts underlying Brooks’ thesis they didn’t check out. The post-2004 election version of the "Bobo" theory is on just as flimsy grounds.
The modern conservative movement sells itself as “a revolt of the little people against a high and mighty liberal elite.”. It feeds on a feeling of victimization and resentment that many "red staters" feel right now. And the ability of the right to play into that feeling of victimization rests on the premise of a divided america: us versus them, red versus blue. There is no reason we have to adopt their framework. It only works to the conservatives' advantage anyway.
Besides, as a yeti named Matthew” wisely counseled just after the election:
A lot of progressives are joking about "moving to Canada" -- myself included . But if you're one of those folks who insists that they are really, really considering it, please: do us all a favor and go. The Republicans will be happy to see you leave, and the rest of us don't really need you hanging around and reinforcing the stereotype that liberals (a) are so unpatriotic that they will ditch their nation in a time of need, and (b) feel entitled to the benefits of a government (like, Canada's) without having to work for it. If you're "totally serious" about moving this time, then pack up and head for the border, compadre. Otherwise, dig in your heels, roll up your sleeves, gird your loins and get ready to fight, like the rest of us intend to do.
P.S. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!
Let the holiday shopping season begin!
[Note: I had already outlined most of this post last night, well before Hecate’s post before this. I believe Hecate’s comments on the election to be spot on. Anything else I say to contradict Hecate is merely incidental]
Start here. (Props to my man Willis)
When I first noticed Willis begin this Brand Democrat campaign and that tremendous “since 1794” donkey logo I was so excited I almost, well, we won’t go there. Having been self-employed for most of the last twenty years following a career arc that, with the exception of not being in the music industry, makes the movie Spinal Tap a painfully accurate biography (though fortunately we’ve been entering the coveted and profitable “casino tour“ stage of our Spinal Tap existence) I hold the concepts and power of brand identity close to my heart. As Democrats we suffer too often as intellectuals in a world defined by simple images, and as a brand the Democrats have done little to push a simple, defining distinction between them and the emerging aristocracy/theocracy movement that is the modern GOP. This is a great place to start the re-imaging process. Got Liberty? Got Rights? Gotta love it.
Now as to Hecate’s call to boycott the materialism of the holidays, I’d just like to say I would prefer not to cut off my nose, my face deals with enough spite already thank you very much. One of my biggest peeves with many Democrats and the Democratic Party in general has been how overlooked small businesses have been. I’ve often felt like the ugly stepchild of both parties. Too often I have to correct well-meaning people who disparage all business people (and call for general boycotts, grrr) as being a part of “Them,” while on the other side Republicans pay us lip service (and we get tons of that from them) while ignoring our real needs as they rig the system for the largest 10% of any given industry. Ironically most of all the business owners I deal with (the exceptions seem to be those who inherited their families business – go figure) are Democratic supporters. One of the new economic realities is that more and more people are responding to unemployment and underemployment by starting micro-businesses (I say micro because by definition a “small” business can have as many as 50 employees and generate many millions of dollars a year). These are the independent service people (from plumbers to lawn care to web design), the small restaurants, the retail stores not owned by Wal-mart or Target and small manufacturers [like me] that make up a growing and important segment of our economy. Boycotting all businesses is counter intuitive – though I still won’t patronize any business with a NFIB [National Federation of Independent Businesses] sign because of their campaign tactics against Paul Wellstone. Spend only what you can afford but be creative and useful with those gift ideas. And please focus on non-chain stores. Independent retail stores are considerably more likely to be getting their inventory from domestic sources than the big box retailers. And it doesn’t even have to be a product to be a gift. We get my honey’s parents prepaid lawn care. We’ve given out certificates for favorite local restaurants and small bookstores. Give someone golf or yoga lessons, maybe a certificate for a massage (I can guarantee you those will be micro-business people).
For better or worse we’re a consumer-based economy and much of that is based on how strong the holiday shopping season runs. The best impact we can have is not through starving the beast (because it will cannibalize us first); it’s through determining on whom we spend our money.
Small businesses are our friends.
Start here. (Props to my man Willis)
When I first noticed Willis begin this Brand Democrat campaign and that tremendous “since 1794” donkey logo I was so excited I almost, well, we won’t go there. Having been self-employed for most of the last twenty years following a career arc that, with the exception of not being in the music industry, makes the movie Spinal Tap a painfully accurate biography (though fortunately we’ve been entering the coveted and profitable “casino tour“ stage of our Spinal Tap existence) I hold the concepts and power of brand identity close to my heart. As Democrats we suffer too often as intellectuals in a world defined by simple images, and as a brand the Democrats have done little to push a simple, defining distinction between them and the emerging aristocracy/theocracy movement that is the modern GOP. This is a great place to start the re-imaging process. Got Liberty? Got Rights? Gotta love it.
Now as to Hecate’s call to boycott the materialism of the holidays, I’d just like to say I would prefer not to cut off my nose, my face deals with enough spite already thank you very much. One of my biggest peeves with many Democrats and the Democratic Party in general has been how overlooked small businesses have been. I’ve often felt like the ugly stepchild of both parties. Too often I have to correct well-meaning people who disparage all business people (and call for general boycotts, grrr) as being a part of “Them,” while on the other side Republicans pay us lip service (and we get tons of that from them) while ignoring our real needs as they rig the system for the largest 10% of any given industry. Ironically most of all the business owners I deal with (the exceptions seem to be those who inherited their families business – go figure) are Democratic supporters. One of the new economic realities is that more and more people are responding to unemployment and underemployment by starting micro-businesses (I say micro because by definition a “small” business can have as many as 50 employees and generate many millions of dollars a year). These are the independent service people (from plumbers to lawn care to web design), the small restaurants, the retail stores not owned by Wal-mart or Target and small manufacturers [like me] that make up a growing and important segment of our economy. Boycotting all businesses is counter intuitive – though I still won’t patronize any business with a NFIB [National Federation of Independent Businesses] sign because of their campaign tactics against Paul Wellstone. Spend only what you can afford but be creative and useful with those gift ideas. And please focus on non-chain stores. Independent retail stores are considerably more likely to be getting their inventory from domestic sources than the big box retailers. And it doesn’t even have to be a product to be a gift. We get my honey’s parents prepaid lawn care. We’ve given out certificates for favorite local restaurants and small bookstores. Give someone golf or yoga lessons, maybe a certificate for a massage (I can guarantee you those will be micro-business people).
For better or worse we’re a consumer-based economy and much of that is based on how strong the holiday shopping season runs. The best impact we can have is not through starving the beast (because it will cannibalize us first); it’s through determining on whom we spend our money.
Small businesses are our friends.
Stupid AP Reporter
I am really not optimistic that our media is going to get any better. When someone gives you a quote which actually has nothing to do with the issue at hand, you should either leave it out or point out that the quote is irrelevant, rather than positioning it high up in the article to give it any credibility.
Example:
The issue is not of course whether actual abstinence will reduce STD and pregnancy for those who follow that path, but whether abstinence programs generally or any particular abstinence education program will lead to... actual abstinence.
If, on the other hand, abstinence education has little impact on teen sex rates, it will likely lead to increases in STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
arrrrgh
(via americablog)
He commits another sin by concluding the article this way:
Is that true? Is abstinence-only education something parents and children (!!) have been clamoring for in great numbers? Do a majority of parents and children want abstinence-only education? I have no idea, but I doubt Horn does and I know the AP reporter who wrote the article doesn't.
Don't let people just make stuff up because they're "administration officials."
Example:
-
Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence programs in a $388 billion spending bill, an increase of $30 million but about $100 million less than Bush requested. Meanwhile, a national evaluation of abstinence programs has been delayed, with a final report not expected until 2006.
Ten state evaluations, compiled by a group that opposes abstinence-only education, showed little change in teens' behavior since the start of abstinence programs in 1997.
The president has been a strong proponent of school-based sexual education that focuses on abstinence, but does not include instruction on safe sex.
"We don't need a study, if I remember my biology correctly, to show us that those people who are sexually abstinent have a zero chance of becoming pregnant or getting someone pregnant or contracting a sexually transmitted disease," said Wade Horn, the assistant secretary of Health and Human Services (news - web sites) in charge of federal abstinence funding.
The issue is not of course whether actual abstinence will reduce STD and pregnancy for those who follow that path, but whether abstinence programs generally or any particular abstinence education program will lead to... actual abstinence.
If, on the other hand, abstinence education has little impact on teen sex rates, it will likely lead to increases in STDs and unwanted pregnancies.
arrrrgh
(via americablog)
He commits another sin by concluding the article this way:
-
Horn and Unruh acknowledged a paucity of data. "So many of our programs are in their infancy. The jury is still out," Unruh said.
Horn said, "The research is not as adequate as it needs to be."
Still, he is not willing to wait for more evaluations, calling abstinence education "something that parents and children want."
Is that true? Is abstinence-only education something parents and children (!!) have been clamoring for in great numbers? Do a majority of parents and children want abstinence-only education? I have no idea, but I doubt Horn does and I know the AP reporter who wrote the article doesn't.
Don't let people just make stuff up because they're "administration officials."
Congratulations!
You have been apointed Lord High Overseer of American Iraq policy. You have the military and a decent chunk of money from the Treasury at your disposal. You are of course saddled with a boss who has spent all of his diplomatic capital and then some.
What do you do?
What do you do?
All I Want for Xmas Is Fair and Verifiable Elections
So it’s black Friday, the day when retailers plan on making really big bucks selling people Xmas presents. Lately, I’ve been thinking quite a bit about our consumerist society and wondering to what extent the pervasive nature of consumerism may have influenced the recent election. Clearly, the fact that the news is now simply a way to sell product has harmed our society and, as Jon Stewart so eloquently explained to Tucker Carlson, the pitch to the lowest common denominator, where even political discourse is sold as a form of TV wrestling, has hurt America. Even war is sold to Americans as a product and, if the ad campaign constantly changes with new and different rationales for why we should buy this product, well, we’re all used to that from frequently-changing commercials for everything from heartburn medicine to SUVs. Do Americans really need or even want all the crap that they’ll buy over the next few weeks?
I’ve also been thinking about the role of protests in a situation such as the current one in America. I grew up on protest marches; my dad took me to some of the great Viet Nam war protests and just this past April I marched with friends and family in the March for Women’s Lives. Watching what’s been happening in Ukraine, I wonder why Americans haven’t taken to the streets, as well. And yet, I wonder if large protests are still effective in America. The March for Women’s Lives was huge -- over a million people. The protests at the Republican convention in NYC this summer were huge, too. Both got a fair amount of news coverage. Neither seemed to help -- Roe’s dead within the next year and Lame Duckie has proclaimed himself the winner of the election. Finally, I doubt Lame Duckie will allow much of any protest at his coronation -- protestors will be kept out for "security" reasons. If he didn’t need to allow protestors in when he was ostensibly running for re-election, he sure doesn’t need to allow them now.
So, if there’s a big protest march, I’ll be there, just because I like to put my body where it may do some good and be counted. But I also think we need to consider other ways to make our displeasure known. And that’s where economics come in.
I don’t know for sure if this last election was stolen, although I know what my gut tells me. This study certainly gives me pause. However, the point of this thread isn’t to restart the why-did-Kerry-concede-why-isn’t-Atrios-screaming-about-Diebold debate. Here’s what I do know for sure and think everyone can agree upon: it’s important for all Americans, including those whose candidate didn’t prevail, to be able to have faith that our elections are carried out fairly and honestly. And the current situation doesn’t allow us to have that faith. Instead, what we have is a patchwork of fallible systems that appears designed more for the purpose of allowing skullduggery than for the purpose of ensuring fair elections. And that, I believe, is worth an economic protest.
This year, I’m urging everyone I know to refuse to spend money for Xmas as a protest. Stay out of the stores. For Goddess sake, don’t run up credit card debt. Give your family and friends the gift of your time and attention rather than a new sweater that they won’t wear or some object to clutter-up an already over-cluttered life. But just not buying isn’t enough. You’ve got to contact the retailers and credit card companies and tell them: I’m not going to be buying Xmas stuff and I’m not going to be charging Xmas stuff until this country has a system in place that ensures fair and verifiable elections. Reader Kate has done the research and discovered that The National Retail Federation “is the world’s largest retail trade association . . . .” Write to Their Vice President for Legislative and Political Affairs, Katherine Lugar. Here’s her contact info:
National Retail Federation
325 7th Street, N.W.
Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: 1-800-NRF-HOW2
Fax (202) 727-2849
Write to your credit card companies and tell them the same thing. You can find the address on the back of your latest bill. And, heck if you’re really angry about this last election, write to the large department stores that you patronize, or at least cc them on your letter to the National Retail Federation. CC your Senators and Congressman or Congresswoman as well.
Do it for my friend Arlo, who reminded us that there’s strength in numbers:
You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is, the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
And pass the idea on to everyone you know. Merry Xmas.
Thanks, Kate!
I’ve also been thinking about the role of protests in a situation such as the current one in America. I grew up on protest marches; my dad took me to some of the great Viet Nam war protests and just this past April I marched with friends and family in the March for Women’s Lives. Watching what’s been happening in Ukraine, I wonder why Americans haven’t taken to the streets, as well. And yet, I wonder if large protests are still effective in America. The March for Women’s Lives was huge -- over a million people. The protests at the Republican convention in NYC this summer were huge, too. Both got a fair amount of news coverage. Neither seemed to help -- Roe’s dead within the next year and Lame Duckie has proclaimed himself the winner of the election. Finally, I doubt Lame Duckie will allow much of any protest at his coronation -- protestors will be kept out for "security" reasons. If he didn’t need to allow protestors in when he was ostensibly running for re-election, he sure doesn’t need to allow them now.
So, if there’s a big protest march, I’ll be there, just because I like to put my body where it may do some good and be counted. But I also think we need to consider other ways to make our displeasure known. And that’s where economics come in.
I don’t know for sure if this last election was stolen, although I know what my gut tells me. This study certainly gives me pause. However, the point of this thread isn’t to restart the why-did-Kerry-concede-why-isn’t-Atrios-screaming-about-Diebold debate. Here’s what I do know for sure and think everyone can agree upon: it’s important for all Americans, including those whose candidate didn’t prevail, to be able to have faith that our elections are carried out fairly and honestly. And the current situation doesn’t allow us to have that faith. Instead, what we have is a patchwork of fallible systems that appears designed more for the purpose of allowing skullduggery than for the purpose of ensuring fair elections. And that, I believe, is worth an economic protest.
This year, I’m urging everyone I know to refuse to spend money for Xmas as a protest. Stay out of the stores. For Goddess sake, don’t run up credit card debt. Give your family and friends the gift of your time and attention rather than a new sweater that they won’t wear or some object to clutter-up an already over-cluttered life. But just not buying isn’t enough. You’ve got to contact the retailers and credit card companies and tell them: I’m not going to be buying Xmas stuff and I’m not going to be charging Xmas stuff until this country has a system in place that ensures fair and verifiable elections. Reader Kate has done the research and discovered that The National Retail Federation “is the world’s largest retail trade association . . . .” Write to Their Vice President for Legislative and Political Affairs, Katherine Lugar. Here’s her contact info:
National Retail Federation
325 7th Street, N.W.
Suite 1100
Washington, D.C. 20004
Phone: 1-800-NRF-HOW2
Fax (202) 727-2849
Write to your credit card companies and tell them the same thing. You can find the address on the back of your latest bill. And, heck if you’re really angry about this last election, write to the large department stores that you patronize, or at least cc them on your letter to the National Retail Federation. CC your Senators and Congressman or Congresswoman as well.
Do it for my friend Arlo, who reminded us that there’s strength in numbers:
You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may think it's a movement. And that's what it is, the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
And pass the idea on to everyone you know. Merry Xmas.
Thanks, Kate!
Thursday, November 25, 2004
First Annual Eschatonian Recipe Exhange
Pour some vermouth in a glass. Swish it around to coat the inside of the glass. Pour out the vermouth. Put two olives and two cocktail onions in the glass. Pour in a lot of Stoli.
OK, now you share your favorite recipe.
OK, now you share your favorite recipe.
Commuhealth
Mrs. Atrios and I spent two months in Barcelona in summer 2003. You may remember the good old days when the corrente crowd was posting. While we were there Mrs. Atrios had a wee stomach bug, enough to necessitate a trip to the doctor. After a bit of hunting we found a local health clinic. After a bit of discussion they took her passport number at reception, sat us down, and a half hour or so later she saw a doctor. The doctor inquired about her insurance. My wife explained that we had travel insurance, and the way it worked was that we'd just cover any costs and then submit them upon our return. This troubled the doctor greatly, not because of the cost of the exam, which turned out to be free, but because of concern about the cost of the drugs which were to be prescribed.
We took the prescription, went to our local pharmacy, and had it filled.
Cost?
About 3 bucks.
Spain spends about 7.5% of its GDP on health care. We spend about 13.9%. About 4% of our GDP is spent on a subset of health care called... "health care administration."
This raises the obvious question -- why do they hate freedom?
We took the prescription, went to our local pharmacy, and had it filled.
Cost?
About 3 bucks.
Spain spends about 7.5% of its GDP on health care. We spend about 13.9%. About 4% of our GDP is spent on a subset of health care called... "health care administration."
This raises the obvious question -- why do they hate freedom?
So, you're dealing with your Fundie relatives today
Shorter Thumb:
Eat some bird, watch some game, ignore them.
Less shorter Thumb:
If you're like me you no doubt have a few Family Fundies that you can't get around dealing with this time of year. Generally in these situations I take the lead of my apolitical father and plant myself in front of the Big Game and grunt and hoop on cue like a good little entertainment consumer. Maybe my better nature will prevail and I won't start trouble [50/50], but if one of them starts any partisan skewing of what we have to be thankful for, I'm going off. I fully intend to remind people that the reason the first pilgrims came over here was to escape the Catholic and Protestant absolutist monarchies and King Henry?s union of Church and State. Then I?ll probably ask [I always mask an attack as an innocent question], ?What?s the deal with consolidated wealth and organized religion anyway? Why does it always seem that through out history they find a way to team up and say, ?You can have all their money if we can have all their souls??? I?ll probably close with, ?Doesn?t it bother you that the money changers have taken over the Temple??
Such a line of question will only go one of two directions; either Your Favorite Fundie will dismiss you as the wiseass nephew you really are or they?ll fall back on some Scripture that proves how unaware you are. Caution: Do not enter this debate lightly. You cannot, will not, make any ground trying to toss out a few memorized embarrassing Leviticus quotes. For those of you with the time and/or motivation there was an excellent essay last week by pasterdan in the Kos diaries titled How to Use the Bible in Your Political Arguments.
Considering that we?re now into the season when many of us are going to be forced to deal with Family Fundies this might be a good primer.
(Additional note: If the issue of abortion comes up I'm at the ready with a line of question I've had some recent successes with: Ask them to guess where the US ranks in infant mortality rate. Tell them Sweden, with the lowest infant mortality rate, ranks #1. Press them to guess where the US falls after that. Really, get their best guess. The correct and highly embarrassing answer for these self-righteous, Holier Than Thou, save the babies at all costs crusaders is . . . 41st. Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate. Let them chew on that.)
[Update 8:22pm] I'm back, fat and happy. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that for most of the last year mom would send me the GOP chain emails she got from these same relatives spouting off the latest Rush Limbaugh or Paul Harvey nonsense and in return send them my pointed responses that made them think twice about going political, but it was a happy family gathering free of any partisan tones [whew!]. The closest we came to a political/religious topic was when I started talking about how much I enjoyed the movie You Don't Know *Bleep* and the other was my latest response to the "When are you two going to get married" question that comes up every year (I told them we're a heterosexual couple in a gay marriage). Now it's time to sleep off some bird.
Eat some bird, watch some game, ignore them.
Less shorter Thumb:
If you're like me you no doubt have a few Family Fundies that you can't get around dealing with this time of year. Generally in these situations I take the lead of my apolitical father and plant myself in front of the Big Game and grunt and hoop on cue like a good little entertainment consumer. Maybe my better nature will prevail and I won't start trouble [50/50], but if one of them starts any partisan skewing of what we have to be thankful for, I'm going off. I fully intend to remind people that the reason the first pilgrims came over here was to escape the Catholic and Protestant absolutist monarchies and King Henry?s union of Church and State. Then I?ll probably ask [I always mask an attack as an innocent question], ?What?s the deal with consolidated wealth and organized religion anyway? Why does it always seem that through out history they find a way to team up and say, ?You can have all their money if we can have all their souls??? I?ll probably close with, ?Doesn?t it bother you that the money changers have taken over the Temple??
Such a line of question will only go one of two directions; either Your Favorite Fundie will dismiss you as the wiseass nephew you really are or they?ll fall back on some Scripture that proves how unaware you are. Caution: Do not enter this debate lightly. You cannot, will not, make any ground trying to toss out a few memorized embarrassing Leviticus quotes. For those of you with the time and/or motivation there was an excellent essay last week by pasterdan in the Kos diaries titled How to Use the Bible in Your Political Arguments.
Considering that we?re now into the season when many of us are going to be forced to deal with Family Fundies this might be a good primer.
(Additional note: If the issue of abortion comes up I'm at the ready with a line of question I've had some recent successes with: Ask them to guess where the US ranks in infant mortality rate. Tell them Sweden, with the lowest infant mortality rate, ranks #1. Press them to guess where the US falls after that. Really, get their best guess. The correct and highly embarrassing answer for these self-righteous, Holier Than Thou, save the babies at all costs crusaders is . . . 41st. Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate. Let them chew on that.)
[Update 8:22pm] I'm back, fat and happy. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that for most of the last year mom would send me the GOP chain emails she got from these same relatives spouting off the latest Rush Limbaugh or Paul Harvey nonsense and in return send them my pointed responses that made them think twice about going political, but it was a happy family gathering free of any partisan tones [whew!]. The closest we came to a political/religious topic was when I started talking about how much I enjoyed the movie You Don't Know *Bleep* and the other was my latest response to the "When are you two going to get married" question that comes up every year (I told them we're a heterosexual couple in a gay marriage). Now it's time to sleep off some bird.
My Family Didn't Get Here Until the Turn of the Century -- Honest!
Thanksgiving has traditionally been the one holiday when Americans acknowledge that there were thriving societies here when the Europeans arrived. (OK, the Native Americans have forced us to remember this fact on Columbus Day, as well, but Thanksgiving has historically been the only time when we bothered to acknowledge Native Americans). It’s gotten trite, but no less true, to begin any discussion of Native Americans with an acknowledgement of the fact that it took the European settlers very little time to decimate the Native American cultures in both North and South America. Often in the name of brining xianity to “godless heathens” the European Americans were pretty shitty to the Native Americans -- sending them smallpox-infested blankets, stealing their land and forcing them onto “reservations” in strange and undesirable locations, taking their children away from them and sending them to church schools where the children were forbidden to speak their own language or learn about their own rich spirituality. Just recently, Lame Duckie found himself completely unable to articulate the relationship between America and the sovereign nations within our shores.
When I was in school, I was fascinated by the Native Americans (whom we called Indians -- I know I’m dating myself), their culture, history, art, languages, religions. It’s not surprising that I wound up in an Earth-centered religion, albeit one based upon a European pantheon. One of the women in my coven is part Native American, and we’ve had some fascinating discussions concerning Native American spirituality and religion. America went through a period in the late 80s and early 90s where it was fashionable to adopt certain aspects of Native American spirituality. Most Native Americans consider this appropriation and don't appreciate it; so unless it's actually a part of your religion, stop already with the "sweat lodges" and "vision quests" -- and don't ask us to call you White Eagle, either.
One of the most interesting books I’ve read recently concerning, inter alia, how Native Americans came to North and South America was The Seven Daughters of Eve by Brian Sykes. Definitely worth a read if you get a chance. Here in Washington, D.C., we’ve just opened the National Museum of the American Indian. It’s amazing, gorgeous, beautiful -- none of those words really do it justice. In a city of beautiful fountains, this museum has the most incredible fountain that I’ve ever seen. If you're coming to D.C., contact them and get tickets ahead of time; it’s still impossible to just walk up and get in. And, as my friend Sarah pointed out when we walked around this endlessly fascinating building, if you have a picnic there, show some respect and don’t eat it in the garden area where Native Americans have taken to leaving offerings. Sheesh!
Anyway, for Thanksgiving 2004, I thought I’d check out some Native American blogs. Here are a few you might want to check out on a day when we remember a brief moment in American history when the Native Americans and the European settlers sat down together to express their gratitude for the abundance of the land.
News and Views by Native American Students can be found at Rez Net
Bad Eagle is a conservative blog by an “American Indian patriot.”
Brown Chick is a more personal blog by a Native American student who writes: “Plea to liberal/cool white people: Please do not flee the country. I am Native American and do not have the option of moving to another country to escape Bush and his neonazi Republican minions. This, in the deepest sense possible, is my country. And so we need cool white people here more than ever. Please don't leave, please don't give up. Fight!!!!!!
Plea to Bush's neonazi Republican minions: Go back to where you came from. And if you're Native American, you need to have some sense bitchslapped into you. I will gladly oblige.”
Reflections of an Outlaw Indian Lawyer has an interesting story about Ronald Reagan who is, let us give thanks on this day of thanks, still dead.
Finally, check out Blue Corn Comic Books for some interesting art work and story lines.
Happy Thanksgiving!
When I was in school, I was fascinated by the Native Americans (whom we called Indians -- I know I’m dating myself), their culture, history, art, languages, religions. It’s not surprising that I wound up in an Earth-centered religion, albeit one based upon a European pantheon. One of the women in my coven is part Native American, and we’ve had some fascinating discussions concerning Native American spirituality and religion. America went through a period in the late 80s and early 90s where it was fashionable to adopt certain aspects of Native American spirituality. Most Native Americans consider this appropriation and don't appreciate it; so unless it's actually a part of your religion, stop already with the "sweat lodges" and "vision quests" -- and don't ask us to call you White Eagle, either.
One of the most interesting books I’ve read recently concerning, inter alia, how Native Americans came to North and South America was The Seven Daughters of Eve by Brian Sykes. Definitely worth a read if you get a chance. Here in Washington, D.C., we’ve just opened the National Museum of the American Indian. It’s amazing, gorgeous, beautiful -- none of those words really do it justice. In a city of beautiful fountains, this museum has the most incredible fountain that I’ve ever seen. If you're coming to D.C., contact them and get tickets ahead of time; it’s still impossible to just walk up and get in. And, as my friend Sarah pointed out when we walked around this endlessly fascinating building, if you have a picnic there, show some respect and don’t eat it in the garden area where Native Americans have taken to leaving offerings. Sheesh!
Anyway, for Thanksgiving 2004, I thought I’d check out some Native American blogs. Here are a few you might want to check out on a day when we remember a brief moment in American history when the Native Americans and the European settlers sat down together to express their gratitude for the abundance of the land.
News and Views by Native American Students can be found at Rez Net
Bad Eagle is a conservative blog by an “American Indian patriot.”
Brown Chick is a more personal blog by a Native American student who writes: “Plea to liberal/cool white people: Please do not flee the country. I am Native American and do not have the option of moving to another country to escape Bush and his neonazi Republican minions. This, in the deepest sense possible, is my country. And so we need cool white people here more than ever. Please don't leave, please don't give up. Fight!!!!!!
Plea to Bush's neonazi Republican minions: Go back to where you came from. And if you're Native American, you need to have some sense bitchslapped into you. I will gladly oblige.”
Reflections of an Outlaw Indian Lawyer has an interesting story about Ronald Reagan who is, let us give thanks on this day of thanks, still dead.
Finally, check out Blue Corn Comic Books for some interesting art work and story lines.
Happy Thanksgiving!
"Right to Rule"
Hey, ever wonder what happens when a democrat narrowly wins an election over the republican incumbent in a local Texas race?
It's not pretty.
It's not pretty.
Thanks, George
My vacation gets more expensive every second. We even attempted to prepay our hotel, with no luck. Bummer.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Mmmm...
So far, the jackbooted thug of socialism has been fairly benign. Good food and eats. The Celtic fans had invaded the city en masse. They were a bit disappointed in their tie, but so far have failed to blame it on the writings of Karl Marx. Apparently jackbooted islamofascist socialism manages to provide great food and great wine at good prices, even with the sadly declining dollar. Weird.
border control
There are two sides to every border. If U.S. forces can't stop the infiltration of foreign fighters crossing between Syria and Iraq, why does the Bush Administration think that Syria can?
When Red State Values Collide
CBS MarketWatch reports:
Bosses Fret Okla. Law Allows Guns in Cars
11/24/2004 7:16:00 PM
OKLAHOMA CITY, Nov 24, 2004 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- A new state law allowing employees to keep guns in their locked cars on company property has alarmed some of Oklahoma's biggest corporations and pitted them against gun enthusiasts.
The law was passed by the Legislature earlier this year and was scheduled to go into effect Nov. 1, but a federal judge blocked its enforcement while he considers a challenge brought by companies fearful that guns at work could lead to bloodshed.
Employers say the law interferes with their right to restrict what happens on company property.
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy company, and oil giant ConocoPhillips Inc., with offices in Bartlesville and a refinery in Ponca City, are suing to stop the law from taking effect. The State Chamber, which represents some 2,000 businesses in Oklahoma and 26 other states, has also filed briefs against the law.
"We have cases all the time where there are fights on the property. That's where we're coming from," said David Strecker, attorney for the State Chamber. He added: "If somebody got mad they wouldn't have far to go."
The measure was adopted after a paper company in Oklahoma fired several employees when guns were found in their vehicles during a drug sweep. Workplaces can still prohibit people from entering businesses with guns.
Democratic state Sen. Frank Shurden, a co-author the law, said Oklahomans need guns for protection. "You get out in the dark in rural Oklahoma, you better be armed and ready for action," he said. "There's no telling what's going to happen."
As for the potential for workplace shootings, he said: "These are decent and responsible people. "We aren't going to have any shoot-outs like the Old West every time someone gets mad."
Whirlpool Corp., which employs 1,500 at a Tulsa plant, was the original plaintiff in the case. The appliance maker said it asked to withdraw this week after being assured by the state attorney general that the new law would not override an Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation or Whirlpool's existing ban on weapons on company property.
U.S. District Judge Sven Erik Holmes has heard arguments in the case, but said Tuesday said a higher court must first decide whether the penalty for violating the law is criminal or civil.
******************
Bwhahahhaha!
Bosses Fret Okla. Law Allows Guns in Cars
11/24/2004 7:16:00 PM
OKLAHOMA CITY, Nov 24, 2004 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- A new state law allowing employees to keep guns in their locked cars on company property has alarmed some of Oklahoma's biggest corporations and pitted them against gun enthusiasts.
The law was passed by the Legislature earlier this year and was scheduled to go into effect Nov. 1, but a federal judge blocked its enforcement while he considers a challenge brought by companies fearful that guns at work could lead to bloodshed.
Employers say the law interferes with their right to restrict what happens on company property.
Williams Cos., the Tulsa-based energy company, and oil giant ConocoPhillips Inc., with offices in Bartlesville and a refinery in Ponca City, are suing to stop the law from taking effect. The State Chamber, which represents some 2,000 businesses in Oklahoma and 26 other states, has also filed briefs against the law.
"We have cases all the time where there are fights on the property. That's where we're coming from," said David Strecker, attorney for the State Chamber. He added: "If somebody got mad they wouldn't have far to go."
The measure was adopted after a paper company in Oklahoma fired several employees when guns were found in their vehicles during a drug sweep. Workplaces can still prohibit people from entering businesses with guns.
Democratic state Sen. Frank Shurden, a co-author the law, said Oklahomans need guns for protection. "You get out in the dark in rural Oklahoma, you better be armed and ready for action," he said. "There's no telling what's going to happen."
As for the potential for workplace shootings, he said: "These are decent and responsible people. "We aren't going to have any shoot-outs like the Old West every time someone gets mad."
Whirlpool Corp., which employs 1,500 at a Tulsa plant, was the original plaintiff in the case. The appliance maker said it asked to withdraw this week after being assured by the state attorney general that the new law would not override an Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulation or Whirlpool's existing ban on weapons on company property.
U.S. District Judge Sven Erik Holmes has heard arguments in the case, but said Tuesday said a higher court must first decide whether the penalty for violating the law is criminal or civil.
******************
Bwhahahhaha!
At the Movies
So at my house on Thanksgiving, after we eat ourselves silly, we go to the movies. This year, I'm thinking about going to see Finding Neverland or National Treasure . Any recommendations?
No Liberal Media
While the WaPo may be able to find justifications for printing it's anti-gay supplement (which was filled with things which were explicitly untrue, and any time false propaganda is served up in support of bigotry, red lights should go off), but the degree of cluelessness they show in defending their decision should put to rest the notion that any of these liberal media titans have given more than 3 seconds of thought to the issue of gay rights.
Continue writing. Calling. Screaming. It's sadly the only they listen to obviously. Well, other than money.
Continue writing. Calling. Screaming. It's sadly the only they listen to obviously. Well, other than money.
Sorry to Report
But the death of Irony has now been officially confirmed. Please bow your heads for a moment of silence .
Third Day of Protests
Sounds as if they take election fraud seriously in Ukraine
Interesting discussion concerning whether any position of power is worth a single human life. Too bad Lame Duckie made exactly the wrong decision on this issue. In fact, his seizure of power has been based on the expenditure of human lives, both American and foreign. I believe we call people like that sociopaths.
"Shortly after his rival's offer, Yanukovich also hinted at compromise by saying that he was not interested in a "fictitious" victory and that "no position of authority, no matter how important, is worth a single human life." "
Interesting discussion concerning whether any position of power is worth a single human life. Too bad Lame Duckie made exactly the wrong decision on this issue. In fact, his seizure of power has been based on the expenditure of human lives, both American and foreign. I believe we call people like that sociopaths.
"Shortly after his rival's offer, Yanukovich also hinted at compromise by saying that he was not interested in a "fictitious" victory and that "no position of authority, no matter how important, is worth a single human life." "
Haters of Freedom
Well, I've arrived here in Barcelona. Free WiFi in the hotel room, so I won't be entirely absent. I plan to spend my time here learning about what it's like to live under the jackboot of socialism in a country which hates freedom, loves islamofascism, and embraces gay rights.
Or something like that.
Or something like that.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
MEMRI SLAPPS Cole
MEMRI, an organization I am mostly familiar with because of its inaccurate arabic translations, sent a SLAPP letter to Juan Cole.
Professor Cole reprinted the letter on his site. Go read the letter and Professor Cole's response to the letter. If you are so moved, send a polite letter protesting their threats to memri@memri.org.
Hell, if Duncan gives me a big megaphone, I might as well use it.
Professor Cole reprinted the letter on his site. Go read the letter and Professor Cole's response to the letter. If you are so moved, send a polite letter protesting their threats to memri@memri.org.
Hell, if Duncan gives me a big megaphone, I might as well use it.
Chat Away My Sweet Bitches
Sometimes things don’t go, after all,
from bad to worse. Some years, muscadel
faces down frost; green thrives; the crops don’t fail,
sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.
A people sometimes will step back from war;
elect an honest man; decide they care
enough, that they can’t leave some stranger poor.
Some men become what they were born for.
Sometimes our best efforts do not go
amiss; sometimes we do as we meant to.
The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.
-- Sheenagh Pugh, “Sometimes”
from bad to worse. Some years, muscadel
faces down frost; green thrives; the crops don’t fail,
sometimes a man aims high, and all goes well.
A people sometimes will step back from war;
elect an honest man; decide they care
enough, that they can’t leave some stranger poor.
Some men become what they were born for.
Sometimes our best efforts do not go
amiss; sometimes we do as we meant to.
The sun will sometimes melt a field of sorrow
that seemed hard frozen: may it happen for you.
-- Sheenagh Pugh, “Sometimes”
CSIS report
The Center for Strategic and International Studies has issued an updated report on progress in Iraq (the original report is here).
The CSIS evaluated the progress of the U.S. and the Iraqi provision government in six different areas and sounded a dismal note for every single one: security ("far from the tipping point"), governance ("not reached the tipping point"), economic opportunity ("overall, the U.S. efforts to improve the economic situation in Iraq have made little positive impact"), services (noting improvement in transportation, "a downward trend" for communications, fuel supplies and water services, and no noticeable change for electrical power. Sanitation also registered no change, remaining in "dire condition"), education ("not yet passed the tipping point"), and health care ("regressed considerably"). The problems mostly are attributed to the insurgency against the U.S. occupation of the country.
At some point we will have to address whether our presence in Iraq is really helping or hindering the country.
(study and graphic found via ntodd)
Fins Aviat
Off to Barcelona for a bit. I've recruited a couple of new guest bloggers who will be popping in and out, holiday time and other conflicts permitting, and I'll be dropping by now and then as well. For all of my former guest bloggers who still have access, feel free to chime in if you have something to say...
National Organization of Witches
Since no one in the media pays much attention to the kind of values that the good Reverend Falwell preaches week after week, Media Matters has decided to do the Lord's work and pay attention.
Bye Bye Dan Rather
Maybe some day someone will explain how the "liberal media" thought Rather's guard doc screwup was more important than the deliberate fabrications of Gerth, Vlasto, Myers, Greenfield...
Free Market Follies
This is funny. Though not actually "ha ha" funny.
-
Homeowners say a Brevard County homebuilding company is bullying, threatening and even suing homeowners for complaining about inferior construction.
A NewsChannel 2 investigation -- part of our Building Homes: Building Problems series -- found Mercedes Homes actually filed a lawsuit against a woman for telling her neighbors about severe leaks in her home.
Jay Ann Contardi couldn't imagine a problem any worse than the deluge of rainwater pouring into her leaking home. That is, until she ran afoul of the aggressive lawyers representing her builder, Mercedes Homes.
"It has changed my life. I'm afraid to talk to my neighbors. I'm afraid to walk my daughter to the bus stop. I'm afraid to talk to you right now," she told NewsChannel 2 reporter Dan Billow.
She's not the only one. Other Mercedes homeowners asked us to protect their identities.
"I feel like I'm in a police state. I can't do anything. I have no avenues. I have nowhere to turn," one homeowner said.
That's what it feels like when you're sued for talking to your neighbor.
In the company's plush corporate offices, executives hatched a plan to make buyers sign away their First Amendment rights.
"It's there in black and white. The customer should read his or her contract thoroughly before they enter into it," said Patrick Roche, Mercedes Attorney.
Max Speak
Max has more on crazy Republican budgeting plans. He makes important points:
-
For academics, this will be a grand experiment in neo-classical fiscal policy, founded on the premise that anything that doesn't change inter-temporal budget constraints has no effect on behavior. Yuk yuk. By this logic, if the Gov borrows to pay me a billion dollars today and simultaneouly passes the Revenue 3000 tax act, which levies a wealth tax on the inhabitants of Jupiter in the year 3000 to offset the accumulated debt, everything is hunky-dory. Don't laugh. These people are running the country!
There is verbiage -- don't call it argument -- that this is acceptable because the borrowing is an investment that pays for itself. I recall similar arguments made for the Reagan tax cuts, defense spending, and the savings and loan bailout. There were allusions to the business-like logic of capital budgeting.
EPI recently published a study on the benefits of early childhood health and education. Similarly there is literature on the merits of public investment in infrastructure, and in research and development. The only problem with the capital budgeting talk, aside from the fact that it is idiotic, is that it is not applied to actual investment in public capital.
A Cunning Plan
I do believe Baldrick is running things:
It's "good" so we don't have to count it. These people are crazy. We are truly fucked. The scary thing is that in order for this to work in the short term they're going to have to do double-secret-stupid accounting. Money borrowed from the trust fund will be used to reduce the deficit, as it is now, but then reductions in money borrowed from the trust fund to fund their fantasy plan will not be counted as increases in the deficit.
-
Republican budget writers say they may have found a way to cut the federal deficit even if they borrow hundreds of billions more to overhaul the Social Security system: Don't count all that new borrowing.
As they lay the groundwork for what will probably be a controversial fight over Social Security, Republican lawmakers and the Bush administration are examining a number of accounting strategies that would allow the expensive transition to a partially privatized Social Security system without -- at least on paper -- expanding the country's record annual budget deficits. The strategies include, for example, moving the costs of Social Security reform "off-budget" so they are not counted against the government's yearly shortfall.
It's "good" so we don't have to count it. These people are crazy. We are truly fucked. The scary thing is that in order for this to work in the short term they're going to have to do double-secret-stupid accounting. Money borrowed from the trust fund will be used to reduce the deficit, as it is now, but then reductions in money borrowed from the trust fund to fund their fantasy plan will not be counted as increases in the deficit.
Armageddon
Morgan Stanley chief economist Stephen Roach is a wee bit bearish.
It would be rather entertaining if the mighty inflation slayer ended his career by reviving the beast. Hard to know what Uncle Alan has in mind, but some of you may remember when he was bizarrely encouraging people to sign up for adjustable rate mortgages...
...and, there goes the dollar...
-
Stephen Roach, the chief economist at investment banking giant Morgan Stanley, has a public reputation for being bearish.
But you should hear what he's saying in private.
Roach met select groups of fund managers downtown last week, including a group at Fidelity.
His prediction: America has no better than a 10 percent chance of avoiding economic ``armageddon.''
Press were not allowed into the meetings. But the Herald has obtained a copy of Roach's presentation. A stunned source who was at one meeting said, ``it struck me how extreme he was - much more, it seemed to me, than in public.''
Roach sees a 30 percent chance of a slump soon and a 60 percent chance that ``we'll muddle through for a while and delay the eventual armageddon.''
The chance we'll get through OK: one in 10. Maybe.
...
But they argue there may be an alternative scenario to Roach's. Greenspan might instead deliberately allow the dollar to slump and inflation to rise, whittling away at the value of today's consumer debts in real terms.
It would be rather entertaining if the mighty inflation slayer ended his career by reviving the beast. Hard to know what Uncle Alan has in mind, but some of you may remember when he was bizarrely encouraging people to sign up for adjustable rate mortgages...
...and, there goes the dollar...
Monday, November 22, 2004
Vlasto
ABC's Chris Vlasto has more egregious sins, but Eric Boehlert reminds us of a few of the transgressions of this pillar of the "liberal" media.
Fight the good fight
Come on, America.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
NEW YORK (AP) - Saying the city had created its ``own little Guantanamo on the Hudson'' during the Republican National Convention, a lawyer Monday filed a lawsuit on behalf of nearly 2,000 people arrested at demonstrations.
The federal lawsuit claims protesters and bystanders alike were rounded up in mass arrests without cause; were kept without access to their lawyers or families at an old bus depot used as a temporary detention center; and were exposed for days to cruel and inhuman conditions.
The lawsuit asks for unspecified damages.
``All that was missing were the orange jumpsuits,'' lawyer Jonathan C. Moore said. ``Under the guise of terrorism and the fear of terrorism, we are all losing our
rights.''
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
In Defense of Michelle Malkin
Well, only barely. I'm glad to see her ignorant bile have been removed from another newspaper, but I do take issue with this description of her:
I think that someone's race or ethnicity is relevant to the discussion in many cases, though here it's just gratuitous and irrelevant. If Malkin regularly used her race in her writing to whatever extent, or directed her writing to an Asian-American audience, it might have relevance. But, since we're unlikely to hear about "Ann Coulter, the white Michelle Malkin..."
-
Lake explained that "readers often took issue with her seemingly mean-spirited rantings and suggested that she be dropped. Well, she’s outta here, silenced for being 'too stridently anti-liberal,' the assessment of the editorial board."
Editorial writer Don Luzzatto told Lake: “I was really put off by her penchant for name-calling and ad hominem attack. I think we can do much better.”
Another editorial writer, Bronwyn Lance Chester, said: “I think she habitually mistakes shrill for thought-provoking and substitutes screaming for discussion. She’s an Asian Ann Coulter. I also think that, like Coulter, she says outrageous things just to get TV appearances and book deals. She’s the worst of what’s wrong with punditry today. She adds absolutely nothing to genuine political discourse.”
I think that someone's race or ethnicity is relevant to the discussion in many cases, though here it's just gratuitous and irrelevant. If Malkin regularly used her race in her writing to whatever extent, or directed her writing to an Asian-American audience, it might have relevance. But, since we're unlikely to hear about "Ann Coulter, the white Michelle Malkin..."
Vilsack's Out
Now this is some good news. Vilsack says he doesn't want to be head of the DNC. He would have been a bad choice because a) it would have been a part time job for him and b) he would have perpetuated the existing power balance.
...Jerome has more gossip here and here, though it obviously came before this announcement. If you're a Dean-for-DNC-chief fan you can sign up here. Contact info is also available.
...Jerome has more gossip here and here, though it obviously came before this announcement. If you're a Dean-for-DNC-chief fan you can sign up here. Contact info is also available.
Marriage Rights Re-run
I've noticed that with many issues, during the peak of discussion/debate, people get a bit smarter about them but then as the issue fades away the stupids begin to take hold of the issue again and discussion of it gets dumber and dumber.
Two big myths about the rights (and responsibilities) conferred by marriage are that they a) can mostly be duplicated by private contract between two parties or b) are almost purely financial. These are both false, as a great number of rights given to people once they have a state-sanctioned marriage are specific rights granted by the state which could not possibly be duplicated by contract and which are not simply financial issues such as tax treatment. In addition, many of the falsely named anti-marriage amendments will make illegal plenty of arrangements would be possible simply through private contracting...
So, to remind us, I'll rerun a post I did awhile back:
In 1999, the GAO prepared a report listing all of the rights and benefits of civil marriage. They came up with 1,049 of them. You can read their list here.
Here's a shorter list. Obviously, if gay people had these rights civilization would end.
I've bolded a few of the ones which aren't explicitly financial and which would be difficult or impossible to establish by private contract.
Two big myths about the rights (and responsibilities) conferred by marriage are that they a) can mostly be duplicated by private contract between two parties or b) are almost purely financial. These are both false, as a great number of rights given to people once they have a state-sanctioned marriage are specific rights granted by the state which could not possibly be duplicated by contract and which are not simply financial issues such as tax treatment. In addition, many of the falsely named anti-marriage amendments will make illegal plenty of arrangements would be possible simply through private contracting...
So, to remind us, I'll rerun a post I did awhile back:
In 1999, the GAO prepared a report listing all of the rights and benefits of civil marriage. They came up with 1,049 of them. You can read their list here.
Here's a shorter list. Obviously, if gay people had these rights civilization would end.
I've bolded a few of the ones which aren't explicitly financial and which would be difficult or impossible to establish by private contract.
-
Marriage Rights and Benefits
Learn some of the legal and practical ways that getting married changes your life.
Whether or not you favor marriage as a social institution, there's no denying that it confers many rights, protections, and benefits -- both legal and practical. Some of these vary from state to state, but the list typically includes:
Tax Benefits
Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.
Creating a "family partnership" under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.
Estate Planning Benefits
Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate.
Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse -- that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse’s behalf.
Government Benefits
Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
Receiving public assistance benefits.
Employment Benefits
Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse’s close relatives dies.
Medical Benefits
Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.
Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.
Death Benefits
Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.
Making burial or other final arrangements.
Family Benefits
Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.
Applying for joint foster care rights.
Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.
Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.
Housing Benefits
Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.
Consumer Benefits
Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.
Other Legal Benefits and Protections
Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).
Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can’t force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.
Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
Obtaining domestic violence protection orders.
Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.
More Insurance
It's always difficult to post about health insurance, because to a great degree health insurance has ceased to be "insurance." But, anyway, I still want to think about it as an insurance problem to consider the many reasons why there's a serious market failure problem.
So, continuing where I left off a few days ago. Imagine that we all enter adulthood as identically healthy adults at age 18. We purchase an insurance contract annually, and with a perfectly competitive insurance market the premium is roughly "actuarially fair," that is, roughly equal to the expected loss (probability of illness times cost of illness). In the last thought experiment illness probability (or more generally expected annual health costs) was simply an increasing function of age. That is, your annual premium rises with age.
The problem with this example is that it implicitly assumed total average annual medical costs were independent draws from some distribution which were uncorrelated across time. That is, getting sick this year has no impact on whether (and how) sick you'll get next year. That of course isn't realistic. The big medical costs - and expected future medical costs - arise when you're diagnosed with a chronic condition (AIDS, diabetes, hypertension, muscular/nerve degenerative diseases, etc...) which both require expensive ongoing care and increase the probability of additional conditions/associated costs later in life. As Jim Henley says, this is less about health risks and more about "health certainties" - at least, ex post, after the diagnosis. Ex ante it's about risk of course.*
So, what you'd like to be able to do is, at 18 when you're still young and healthy, buy a lifetime "no fault" health insurance policy. If you develop a chronic condition of some sort, your premium doesn't change, and premiums are just based on the expected loss for the entire risk pool of the insurance company, rather than your own personal expected lifetime medical costs. But, contracts which operate under such a long time horizon are always problematic -- the firm can go bankrupt, etc (something quite possible even for a responsible insurance firm for a variety of reasons). And, if you wake up at age 47 with a chronic condition and a contract with a bankrupt company, you're basically screwed.
Employer/group policies in some sense act this way. With some wrinkles around the edges, you can't be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, and at least for large employers this works well enough. But, this of course makes insurance dependent on steady employment with a benefit-providing company, which can be problematic especially if you, you know, get seriously sick.
*First to respond to Jim's point about how in my rough word model revenues precisely=insurance payouts, leaving no room for overhead, reasonable rate of return on capital, etc... Just a standard simplification, and doesn't impact the basic analysis in any simple way.
**And, yes, even the "certainties" have an uncertainty associated with them - time of death.
So, continuing where I left off a few days ago. Imagine that we all enter adulthood as identically healthy adults at age 18. We purchase an insurance contract annually, and with a perfectly competitive insurance market the premium is roughly "actuarially fair," that is, roughly equal to the expected loss (probability of illness times cost of illness). In the last thought experiment illness probability (or more generally expected annual health costs) was simply an increasing function of age. That is, your annual premium rises with age.
The problem with this example is that it implicitly assumed total average annual medical costs were independent draws from some distribution which were uncorrelated across time. That is, getting sick this year has no impact on whether (and how) sick you'll get next year. That of course isn't realistic. The big medical costs - and expected future medical costs - arise when you're diagnosed with a chronic condition (AIDS, diabetes, hypertension, muscular/nerve degenerative diseases, etc...) which both require expensive ongoing care and increase the probability of additional conditions/associated costs later in life. As Jim Henley says, this is less about health risks and more about "health certainties" - at least, ex post, after the diagnosis. Ex ante it's about risk of course.*
So, what you'd like to be able to do is, at 18 when you're still young and healthy, buy a lifetime "no fault" health insurance policy. If you develop a chronic condition of some sort, your premium doesn't change, and premiums are just based on the expected loss for the entire risk pool of the insurance company, rather than your own personal expected lifetime medical costs. But, contracts which operate under such a long time horizon are always problematic -- the firm can go bankrupt, etc (something quite possible even for a responsible insurance firm for a variety of reasons). And, if you wake up at age 47 with a chronic condition and a contract with a bankrupt company, you're basically screwed.
Employer/group policies in some sense act this way. With some wrinkles around the edges, you can't be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, and at least for large employers this works well enough. But, this of course makes insurance dependent on steady employment with a benefit-providing company, which can be problematic especially if you, you know, get seriously sick.
*First to respond to Jim's point about how in my rough word model revenues precisely=insurance payouts, leaving no room for overhead, reasonable rate of return on capital, etc... Just a standard simplification, and doesn't impact the basic analysis in any simple way.
**And, yes, even the "certainties" have an uncertainty associated with them - time of death.
Miracles Happen
The WSJ actually has a mostly sensible editorial about the growing pension crisis. Subscription required. But, short version is that Congress is letting companies continue to underfund their pensions, which they just unload onto the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. Since that's running a deficit, it ends up being a taxpayer bailout...
Defending the Homeland
So, we're going to take the 82nd Airborne off of emergency standby in this country, send them in to do police work without sufficient armor in unfamiliar areas...
what was this war about, again?
-
To boost the current level, military commanders have considered extending the stay of more troops due to rotate out shortly, or accelerating the deployment of the 3rd Infantry Division, which is scheduled to start in January. But a third option -- drawing all or part of a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division on emergency standby in the United States -- has emerged as increasingly likely.
Hinting at this possibility at a Pentagon news conference on Friday, Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, the deputy chief of U.S. Central Command, recalled that airborne forces were deployed to Afghanistan on a short-term basis to bolster military operations. Smith noted, however, that the Afghan case was "a little bit different" because "we had a very small number of forces to begin with" there.
If airborne units were rushed to Iraq, commanders here said, they likely would not be used in the offensive actions being planned, given their lack of heavy armor and their unfamiliarity with the targeted neighborhoods. Rather, their purpose would be to take over policing and other functions in Baghdad's International Zone, where American and top Iraqi government officials work. That would free locally seasoned units of the 1st Cavalry Division for such actions.
what was this war about, again?
Sunday, November 21, 2004
No Reason for Optimism
Over at Big Media Matt's place I catch John "zizka" Emerson being uncharacteristically optimistic about the next four years. He writes:
No, I don't think so. What we will see is a long a parade of these "conservatarian" Bush supporters, as they have the last 4 years, cheerleading their every move and only being "shocked" that anyone would dare criticize. As Jesse says:
That's about right.
-
This was entirely to be expected during the second Bush-Rove-DeLay term, but a lot of people were SHOCKED. (Paging the unjustly-respected Jane Galt!)
The institutional power of officeholders gives them a large degree of immunity from public opinion (including their supporters' opinions), especially at the beginnings of their terms, especially if all branches of Government are controlled by one small group.
I expect that over the next four years we'll see a long parade of Bush supporters who call themselves conservatives and libertarians explaining that they just had no way of knowing that these things were going to happen.
No, I don't think so. What we will see is a long a parade of these "conservatarian" Bush supporters, as they have the last 4 years, cheerleading their every move and only being "shocked" that anyone would dare criticize. As Jesse says:
-
[I]t leaves one to wonder if Republicanism is a dead ideology powered by its sycophancy to itself.
That's about right.
Presidential Yacht
Um, Democrats? Families are taking donations to send body armor to their kids and Bush gets himself a presidential yacht? If you can't figure out how to play this one...
...I'm serious. If the DNC isn't on the ground tomorrow running ads saying Bush took your kid's Pell grant away so he could spend the money on a yacht they're fools...
- The Senate voted 65-30 for the legislation late on Saturday that sets aside funds for a range of priorities including a presidential yacht, foreign aid and energy. It is one of the final pieces of work for the 108th Congress and they may return to finish a spy agency overhaul before the end of the year.
...I'm serious. If the DNC isn't on the ground tomorrow running ads saying Bush took your kid's Pell grant away so he could spend the money on a yacht they're fools...
Crotch Sniffers
I've received a couple of emails about this but I can't really verify. But, it seems over at Kos there's the definitive diary. Apparently the Republican crotch sniffers tried to slip in a provision to make all your tax returns public property, or something similar. Not entirely clear on the details here, but... wow.
...Josh Marshall has more. This is almost comical. Methinks we'll have a fun time this week. Get your dialing finger ready, come Monday...
(yes, I'm a bit behind... was out seeing Gogol Bordello...)
...Josh Marshall has more. This is almost comical. Methinks we'll have a fun time this week. Get your dialing finger ready, come Monday...
(yes, I'm a bit behind... was out seeing Gogol Bordello...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)