The Cylons Look Like Us Now.

Lucite hardening … must end life in classic Lorne Greene pose from "Battlestar Galactica."  Best … death … ever! (Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons, "Treehouse of Horror X: Desperately Xeeking Xena") Perhaps chalk it up to nostalgia, but the Sci-Fi channel’s new Battlestar Galactica series has got me hooked.  Seriously hooked.  It ain’t Citizen … Read more

On Torture (to be cont.) …

I’m currently preparing for a hearing and have no time, but I did want to note that they’ll be a further post to my torture debate challenge.  So, if you’ve written an e-mail on this subject to ObWi:  Work, not lack of desire, is preventing me from responding to you.

This just in!

Whaaaaaa???? WEDNESDAY, Jan. 12 (HealthDayNews) — Americans need to consume fewer calories and exercise more to maintain a healthy weight, according to new dietary guidelines released Wednesday by the federal government. Damn.  Well, if "the federal government" says you can lose weight by consuming fewer calories and exercising more, I guess it must be true. … Read more

On Anti-Semitism

A quick thought on Vox Day’s "The Merits of Anti-Semitism," which set off a wave of let’s-point-at-the-bad-man in the usual quarters.  (As well as a witty and insightful post from the Young Yglesias.) 

I’m not going to leap on Vox with the rest.  Vox is merely doing what he sometimes does, which is to find the most offensive and silly way to argue a point that, in other’s hands, could be made easily defensible.*  His comment was foolish, but I don’t read it as anti-Semitic (or, at least, not intentionally so).

Update ———–

A lot of commentators view the foregoing as a defense of Vox, and want to prove that Vox is, indeed, anti-semitic.  In fact, it’s not a defense of Vox (re-read it if you don’t get why) and I’m wholly disinterested in defending Vox’s statements (again, re-read it if you don’t get why).  For more regarding why I’m not defending Vox, see CMDicely’s and my comments on the Yglesias post noted above.

End Update ———–

Now, stretching things a bit:  the jump-on-Vox moment reminded me of a point that I meant to make a little while ago but, due to work and other constraints, never got around to.

We (meaning "people," myself included) can have a very childish view of racism, anti-Semitism, and the like.  We always like to reduce things to bad words and unutterable thoughts — rather than look at context or intent.  Worse, there a dangerous tendency to game charges of racism or sexism or anti-Semitism for maximum political effect.  After all, a person with a childish concept of bigotry has a limited concept of bigotry, and it’s easy to whip such folks up into a frenzy because they don’t want to accidentally fall into the wrong camp.   

I’m not merely talking about race-baiting, and I’m not doing a very untimely riff on the O.J. Simpson trial.  I’m also not saying that it’s all intentional — childish notions can be both abused and self-abused.  [That’s an unfortunate turn of phrase …]  Nor am I suggesting that the left or liberals bear the most of the blame (as one might wrongly assume).  Indeed, the most recent examples of gaming bigotry seem have occurred with folks who are to the right, or, at the least, among those who identify as non-lefties. 

For instance, take the charge by some that the term "neoconservative" is crypto-code for "Jew," and that railing against neoconservatives in the Bush Administration is thinly disguised anti-Semitism.   Clearly, some on the far Left seem to hate both neoconservatives and Jews.  But this is hardly an excuse to conflate neoconservatism with Judaism — which, so far as I know, don’t share a theology.  No, the excuse to conflate neoconservatism with Judaism is to shut up administration critics with counter-charges of anti-Semitism.

Now, sometimes the Bush Administration needs to be defended.  And some terms deserve to be criticized.  For instance, David Bernstein eventually made a good point as to why "Likudnik" is an unhelpful term (Bernstein’s first shotgun post on "Likudnik" committed the sin of which I here complain).  We should take care to confront hidden bigotries and evils. 

Still, a clear charge of bigotry should be reserved for a response to a clear expression of bigotry.  Giving the benefit of the doubt should still most tongues.  It’s the only way to keep the system honest — and make sure that our power is not diluted when actual evil comes calling.

Indeed, all this huffing and puffing by people eager to be at the front of the condemning line reminds me of, well, myself.  Back in the days when my white ass was growing up in Indiana without Black people.  (A gross overstatement, but you get my point.)  When I felt that I had to impart to every person of color than I that I did, indeed, feel their pain and was on their side.  Do you have any idea how much it demeans the Civil Rights movement to feel that I shouldn’t ask that no black beans be put on my burrito because it might be taken as some racist slur?   Do you have any idea how much of an annoying, unaware f_ck I was?

Don’t be that f_ck.

(This may help to explain, incidentally, why I know the lyrics to virtually every Public Enemy song published prior to 1989.)

(For the record, I eventually came to love black beans.)

Read more

Just a note ….

… That ObWi’s posters run the gamut along the political scale, and just because you’re seeing a demeaning and evil post from the Latter-Day Fascist Enemy does not mean that you won’t soon see a friendlier post from Those Who Defend The Pure (In Birkenstocks).  Or vice versa.  And, on that note, best not to … Read more

Still Waiting ….

As of yet, I’m aware of no response to my challenge to the blogosphere over torture.  Maybe it got lost in the mix?  Maybe the thought of debating someone other than the usual straw man made the challenge too onerous?  Perhaps I smell? Anyway, here it is again.  If you feel comfortable taking the following … Read more

A Challenge to the Blogosphere

Conjuring what spirit of the original den Beste challenge as I can, the challenge issues …. Resolved:  As a matter of U.S. policy, torture should be used by the U.S. and its allies in fighting the war on terror. UPDATE:  Our smarty-pants commentators have pointed out that this formulation gives me too much in light … Read more

Wiki THIS

Glenn Reynolds laments that he’s been wiki’ed with a truly bizarre Wikipedia entry on Instapundit.  "WIKIPEDIA, and its trustworthiness, has become a topic of considerable discussion," he writes.  Indeed, it should be — this whole Wiki-thang has been a bit Arthur 2 (i.e., "on the rocks") for a while.  Eugene Volokh and Orin Kerr have … Read more

10. Print “WTF?” 20. Goto 10.

Glenn Reynold has now updated his post on the so-called "torture memo" associated with AG Gonzales multiple times, and I’m at an utter loss.   (Original ObWi discussion here.)  The issue is whether Gonzales should be questioned at today’s hearings regarding a 2002 memorandum that he authored which took a, well, novel position on the law … Read more

Tortured Reasoning

Responding to this post by Andrew Sulliven, Glenn Reynolds offers what I suspect he believes is pragmatic advice on the so-called torture memos associated with AG-nominee Gonzales:

I’ve been against torture since Alan Dershowitz was pushing it back in the fall of 2001. (Okay, actually I was against torture even before Dershowitz was pushing it). But I think the effort to turn this into an anti-Bush political issue is a serious mistake, and the most likely outcome will be, in essence, the ratification of torture (with today’s hype becoming tomorrow’s reality) and a political defeat for the Democrats. And the highly politicized way in which the issue is raised is likely to ensure that there’s no useful discussion of exactly how, in terms of incarceration, etc., we should treat potentially very dangerous people who do not fall readily within the laws of war.

Sure, politicizing the "torture debate" (such as it is) will be a bad idea.  I’m sympathetic to Glenn’s "just wait a-while for the right day" concerns.  I’m been known to espouse such concerns myself, and I’m not in a mood to weaken Bush much before the no-holds-barred debate over Social Security reform.  And better to have the present bad than the future worse, and all that crap. 

But, if we cannot have the torture debate now because it’d be too political, exactly when should we have it?  If your beliefs are as you say they are, when do you plan to stand up for them? 

When will addressing the torture memos cease being an "anti-Bush" activity?  And why, if we think the memos poorly reasoned or morally bankrupt (or both), should we care about the political fallout?  If Glenn — and others who find the Bush administration’s and the ultraLeft’s positions equally untenable — stand up, maybe we’ll actually have the nuanced discussion that we want. 

Indeed, when would be a good time for this debate?  Should its timing really depend on whether it might be cast as anti-Bush?  Bush is hardly a victim or naif in this.  He knew what the memos contain, he knows what they likely contributed to, and he tacitly endorsed it all by promoting Gonzales.   He can hardly be surprised to find the torture memos among the feathering in his nest — resting next to the "buck," which stops with him.   

So, Glenn, should we wait until Gonzales is nominated to the Supreme Court for this particular fight?  Will that make it less "anti-Bush"?  Should we wait until Bush is out of office?  Silence ourselves in a bargain for political gain?  (Weren’t dodgy bargains supposed to end with the election?  Do they now continue, ad infinitum?)  Maybe we should wait for the fifty-year retrospective.  Until Godot drops by?  Maybe then it’ll be "safe" to raise our concerns and not damage Bush.

If your standard is the lowest common denominator, that is where you will find yourself.

(Sullivan has an excellent follow-up post along similar lines here.)

Read more

On Justice and Other things

A few days ago, Reihan of The American Scene commented on the sometime injustice of the U.S. justice system:

What angers me, and I realize that I haven’t been very coherent, is that a middle-class person can mess up again and again, falling through safety net after safety net, and still thrive, given time and a bit of gumption and stick-to-it-iveness. If you’re not middle class, and you’re not from a stable, intact, literate, ambitious family, you will have a very, very hard time. Your likelihood of death is vastly higher, as is the likelihood that you’ll live at the mercy of a criminal justice system you scarcely understand. (That I, in my infinite idiocy, scarcely understand.)

Jonah Goldberg responded, "I can certainly understand where Reihan is coming from. But I just can’t quite get where he’s going with this. Is it a shock that the Middle Class have more resources than the lower class? Is it news? Is it unique to the issue of drug addiction? The answer is no on all fronts."  (Reihan responds to Goldberg here.)

There’s not really a dispute here; rather, a debate over a dressed-up cliche. (Shorter Goldberg:  Life ain’t fair.)  Still, it can be a bit shocking when the essential unfairness of life suddenly presents itself, unhidden and without euphemism, in your full view.  Knowing that life ain’t fair in some esoteric sense isn’t the same as seeing that life ain’t fair in the human being before you.

Now, I don’t have much experience with the criminal justice system as an attorney (or a citizen, I hasten to add).  A stint as a law student working at 26th and California in Chicago for Judge, now Justice, Fitzgerald; a little pro bono time donated to the Federal Defender program while an associate at my old firm.  But I suspect that I have more experience than either Reihen or Goldberg in this area.  So let me tell you a story. 

This is a story about the day I met the Smooth Criminal

(The story of the possibly insane but clearly innocent alleged arsonist and the ATF agent who decided that Javert was, in fact, the hero of Les Miserables will have to wait for another day.)

Read more

Bob Matsui Dead at 63

We all take what we want from a man’s or woman’s passing.  Some cherish the old agreements (thank you for your brave stand for NAFTA); others respectfully note the disagreements (but I could’ve done without the pre-emptive opposition to Social Security reform).  Still others take the simplier route — that the person was a good … Read more

A Sontag in Full.

I’ll join Judith Weiss of Kesher Talk:  "Josh Trevino [nee’ Tacitus] has written the blogosphere’s only graceful and sensible reflections on Susan Sontag."  Give it a read.

Strange Bedfellows.

Kim du Toit has a point (or, to complete the rhyme, perhaps it’s a "poit"): Longtime Readers of this website will be familiar with the queasiness with which I greeted passage of the various anti-terrorist laws, and most especially the Patriot Act. My reasoning then, as now, was that laws meant to squash Islamist assholes … Read more

Strategy and Tactics

Reuel Gerecht, writing in the Weekly Standard, is a puzzle.  First, he offers sound advice in Iraq: [W]e are losing the "war of the roads" in Iraq. If the Sunni insurgency controls the principal arteries in and out of Baghdad and can kill with ease on major thoroughfares elsewhere, there is no way the United … Read more

Big Doings? Here?

It’s not yet official, but be warned:  Slarti, Sebastian and I may soon be outflanked by someone less sinister.  Will dearly-missed Katherine be called back from her self-imposed retirement to restrain (or lead) the mob?  We can only hope. Comments are closed; your speculation belongs to the deep silence of cyberspace. p.s.  We really need … Read more

My Point, But Better!

DeLong makes part of my point (see below, including comments) regarding the benefits of Social Security reform, and makes it better that I did (or could).  Discussing Martin Feldstein’s perceived views on Social Security privatization, DeLong writes:

These days [Feldstein] is more likely to stress not the reduction in personal savings that may be generated by expectations of the continuation of the pay-as-you-go Social Security system, but the gap between stock and bond returns. Marty’s argument these days is much more likely to be the claim (with which I have a lot of sympathy) that the stock market does a lousy job of mobilizing society’s risk-bearing resources. Stocks appear to be priced as though the marginal investor is a rich 62-year old with some clogged arteries and a fifteen-year life expectancy who is not expecting to leave a fortune to his descendants. But if the stock market were working well, the marginal investor would be a 40-year old in his or her peak earning years looking out to retirement spending 40 years in the future–an investor much less averse to risk than the 62-year old.

Turning Social Security into a forced-equity-savings program would, Marty believes, not only produce huge profits for the system but also materially improve the efficiency of U.S. financial markets.

(Emphasis mine.)

Kevin Drum wonders if this means that the stock market is underperforming (his phase is a "massive, persistent, and inexplicable market failure").  The short answer is, probably.  For whatever reason, folks tend to be more conservative in their investments than they should be.  That is, most folks should be holding riskier investments than they currently are because, over time, they are likely to be rewarded by their risk taking.  (Or, to bastardize DeLong, forty-year olds are holding the portfolios of sixty-two year olds when they should be holding the portfolios of forty-year olds.)   

Thus, one argument in favor of privatizing part of Social Security is that it will force more money into the market and capture the "equity premium" — the money that is being lost because folks ain’t investing the way that they should.  I say "one argument" because, as Tyler Cowen has noted, this is not the only or best argument in favor of Social Security.  A better argument is that Social Security privatization will increase the national savings rate and make investors and owners out of a whole buncha folks who don’t have the opportunity under the present system.  To create an ownership society, wherein everyone has a stake in the corporate world.

By the bye, DeLong is absolutely right to call privatized social security accounts "forced equity savings."  The goal of privatizing Social Security is to replace the current generational transfer system with a national savings and investment system.

Now DeLong and I part company with respect to who should control the investment portfolio.  DeLong "would rather see this forced equity savings done not through private accounts but through allowing the Secretary of the Treasury to invest the Trust Fund in equities."  I’d prefer that the investors themselves control their own retirement portfolios, choosing from among a series of (no load) index and other funds.  But I hope to take up this debate a bit later.

Read more

Self Esteem

Professors Bainbridge and Reynolds each remark on the recent "discovery" that boosting one’s self-esteem rarely boosts one’s abilities: SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN has an article on exploding the self-esteem myth. Bottom line: "Boosting people’s sense of self-worth has become a national preoccupation. Yet surprisingly, research shows that such efforts are of little value in fostering academic progress … Read more

God Knows I Shouldn’t do this ….

…. since he’s on my side and all, but Will Wilkinson is a bit over-wrought in his proclamations of coming fiscal doom.  While arguing in support of reforming Social Security, Wilkinson writes: A sustainable fiscal policy has an FI of zero. The estimated FI is about $47 trillion. That’s real money. To get the gravity … Read more

Once More, on Merry Christmas.

Jack comments on my post below, which argues that James Lileks’ oh-isn’t-that-odd-but-I-don’t-mean-anything-by-the-observations regarding the purported controversy over "Merry Christmas" are a but thin.  Jack writes: In Lileks response to Wolcott’s idiocy he illustrates the slow, steady abatement of the term ‘Merry Christmas’ in Christmas ads–and they are Christmas ads, there’s no ‘holiday’ other than Christmas … Read more

Detainee Abuse

New records released yesterday indicate widespread torture and abuse by military officials over the last three years.  Some U.S. government officials reportedly objected to the abuse, and suggested that war crime prosecutions be considered for some offenders.  Read it.  With more documents trickling out, and the Abu Ghraib RICO case continuing, there will be more. 

I Have Provided The Definitive, Unabridged Guide To Why You Don’t Matter At All To Me.

Regarding wishing one another a "Merry Christmas," which clearly is the pressing issue this year: Pity James Lileks, who claims to have been (partially) misread by James Wolcott. (Misreading one another in the Blogosphere?  Why, I never!).  Mr. Lileks had to write several thousand words proving to the world that he was not, really, at … Read more

Security, social and otherwise

What boots it at one gate to make defence,And at another to let in the foe? John Milton, Samson Agonistes, Lines 559-60. My grandfather on my mother’s side worked in small-town New England factories for more than forty years after he returned from World War II.  It was precise machine work, carefully done, and it … Read more

Social Security Meanderings

I intend (someday) to do a detailed critique of the current fight over Social Security.  As many of you may suspect, I’m not aligned with the Drummian* "Three Little Birds" view (for those who don’t know their Marley, that’s the song with the refrain "don’t worry about a thing / ’cause every little thing gonna be all right!"), for my deep-seated suspicion of the government’s ability to adapt, revise, and actually pay for itself is too great for such lightheartedness.  Moreover, as Sebastian has pointed out in these pages, Drum’s numbers are a little goofy.  This does not mean, however, that I’m much the fan of George Bush’s approach, which seems loosely based upon Pink Floyd’s "Wish You Were Here."    

But all that’s for another day.  Today, I’ve just got an anecdote.  I received a letter from the government the other day,** which stated that my Social Security benefits had vested and put a pretty surprising number on the monthly payment that I can expect to receive during my golden years.  The amount wasn’t as sneeze-worthy as I had expected.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m still in favor of some form of privitization.  But I admit to feeling a little, well, good about having that benefit guaranteed.  A little, secure, you know?

And then I had the offending bit of humanity removed and replaced with version 2.1 of MicroSoft’s(r) Windows Human Replicator, Center-Right. 

von

*It’s to Drum’s great credit, incidentally, that he’s been writing about this subject for quite some time with such urgency and clarity — establishing the meme, as they say.  Y’all know that he’s one of the smartest liberal voices out there, doncha?

**Keeping to the musical theme, I admit recalling the opening lines — though, clearly, not the intent — of Public Enemy’s "Black Steel in the Hour of Chaos" as I wrote this passage. 

Read more

Random Notes

1.  The Foreign Exchange’s Connected continues to impress.  The sole disappointment is that Nicolay’s Bomb-Squad-level productions wholly overshadow Phonte’s above-average raps — giving life to the cliche’ that the perfect is indeed the enemy of the good. 2.  Kinda committed to attempting the Chicago mini-triathalon.  I’ll be the guy in the thong with the John … Read more

Fulfilling the Liberal Stereotype

Come now, Mr. Drum.  You can’t be serious: The American people need to be reminded of the source of their rights and persuaded that limited government is good; that the principles of the Constitution — which are the natural-law principles of the Declaration of Independence — are timeless, not time-bound; that without those principles, the … Read more

What I did today.

1.  Learned that my job is, apparently, outsourceable to India.  I knew my free-trade marketeering would somehow come back to haunt me — and it has, in economic Thunderdome-style (two men enter, one man leaves).  Bring it on, baby! 2.  Defended Lincoln on Vox Day’s blog.  The comments are especially fun; I had no idea … Read more

Thank you!

Professor Bainbridge has compiled his very helpful wine reviews into one Excel file, which is available at Professor Bainbridge on Wine.  I have a few disputes with his grades — at least to my inferior palate, he occasionally undervalues the pota-goodness of certain red Zinfandel’s, and is far to Franco-philian in his vibe (or, based … Read more

Developing …

Three meandering points that I had hoped to make over the weekend, but, due to a burgeoning addiction to Halo 2 (as well as some "real" work), I didn’t. 1.  First, a tautology:  wrong is wrong.  The so-called Groningen protocol, which permits doctors to euthanize children (up to age twelve) who, among other things are … Read more

Please post something of interest.

I’m a fan of the Volokh Conspiracy, and generally agree with Volokh contributor David Bernstein in the broad strokes, but this post protests a bit too much.  Indeed, the original Bernstein post that touched this whole thing off broadly accused "the Left" of promoting "Likudnik" as an anti-Semitic slur; is it any surprise, then, that … Read more

False Choices, And Those Who Love Them

James Baker gets it right in his opinion piece in today’s Washington Post: Stability in Iraq and peace between Palestinians and Israelis can be pursued at the same time. In fact, working toward the latter improves the chances of attaining the former. The road to peace does not run through just Jerusalem or just Baghdad. … Read more

On whiting out . . . .

Critical action issue! Little Rock has renamed part of a street named "Confederate Blvd." as "Springer Blvd." in order to honor "black community leader Horace Springer and his family…."  Michelle Malkin is righteously pissed.  Why is she pissed?  Well, it has something to do with Little Rock’s decision to "white out" history.  It also has … Read more

It goes almost without saying ….

…. That, whatever standard you wish to apply, the Palestinians have been among the worst-led people on the planet.  What blame for this should fall upon the Palestinian people — and I’d say quite a lot — is perhaps open to question.  Parsing guilt, after all, is for distant God; we merely dabble in approximations, … Read more