118 Comments

1. Squirrel:

False Apology Syndrome:
http://www.incharacter.org/article.php?article=119

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:55 am 2. Bob Murphy:

Moral panic.
It’s all in your head, dear.:)

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:09 am 3. Dick Gonzalez:

Wretchard is generalizing from exceptional examples.

If you’re gonna pull that, at least make it for something other than naive nostaligia…

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:10 am 4. ridgerunner:

The demand for reparations is hardly an exceptional example. Such a demand could not be made but in a severely warped public psychology. If my neighbor’s backhoe strays onto my land and in the process unearths a cache of Dahlonega Mint gold coins, and if I take possession of the treasure, I have no grounds on which to sue for damages, even though a scar remains in my dirt. African-Americans are so much better off than their 12th cousins in Gabon that they have no grounds on which to seek reparations. The only thing they could legitimately ask for would be a one-way ticket to Africa, if they regret being American. Reparations for slavery are as illogical as me suing the descendants of rack-renting landlords in Ulster who impelled my ancestors to ship out for the Carolina backcountry.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:25 am 5. wretchard:

Wretchard is generalizing from exceptional examples.

If they were so exceptional they would not resonate. The reason these examples are so inflammatory is that they remind us, each in their own way, of things we ourselves have personally experienced.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:33 am 6. RWE:

This goes back to the concept of Design Margin.

Western civilization has been so successful that the success is now assumed as a natural state, a right, a condition of man. The pursuit of happiness was a incredible concept; achieving it is now an inalienable right.

Winston Churchill used to look at all the competing requirements in WWII and say “Not enough tits on the old boar hog.” Now the idea is an unallowable, racist, sexist, homophobic concept.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:40 am 7. Bob Murphy:

@Squirrel
That’s a wonderful article by Dalrymple, and an elegant close.
I’ve kept that.
Thanks.
We’ll all need it if Obama gets in.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:41 am 8. Mike Sylwester:

The UK Telegraph article does not explain what happened to the father or why the family emigrated from Afghanistan or what the family’s current immigration status is.

It probably would be politically incorrect to assume that any readers would be interested in any such questions.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:47 am 9. ridgerunner:

Explications of Zen in English sometimes use the phrase “Just so” in exactly the opposite sense: the appreciation of the concrete aspects of reality without any emotional filtering; their thusness.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:58 am 10. Bill Hocter:

It would be easy to get upset about this. Seven of my nine are still at home and I have to work for a living. But with the Treasury handing out hundreds of billions, I think I’ll just take a pass.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:22 am 11. ridgerunner:

RWE, Western Civilization has been particularly “successful” over the past 100 years because of the petroleum energy subsidy. The Churchill quote fits our current situation much better than Design Margin does. Until we have 10,000 sq. miles of sagebrush desert (a 100 mile square) filled with solar thermal generators, there will not be the tits to suckle special interests. As for Design Margin, Western Civilization does not really have any because it was not designed rationally. A new Continental Congress to develop financial incentives for converting USA into a Switzerland could provide a design with some margin.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:29 am 12. RWE:

Sure puts a new spin on the phrase “White Man’s Burden” doesn’t it?

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:32 am 13. wretchard:

A new Continental Congress to develop financial incentives for converting USA into a Switzerland could provide a design with some margin.

What we have to liberate, above all, from the tyranny of political correctness is our imaginations. They’re such old biddies.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:33 am 14. Weary G:

“Wretchard is generalizing from exceptional examples.”

Sorry, but you read about insanity like this almost everyday. Thus, these ‘exceptional examples’ are becoming non-exceptional, which I believe is Wretchard’s point.

One has to expect a certain amount of craziness in an imperfect world occupied by imperfect humans. However, when the logic and common sense and the accumulated wisdom of the ages is tossed overboard, sheer chaos must follow.

Reason with a capital ‘R’ used to be revered as the way to temper the irrationality of mankind, to improve his natural state, which Hobbes described as ‘nasty, brutish and short’.

Now Reason is just one more artificial construct of our society used to oppress the masses, or, you know, something like that…

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:38 am 15. RWE:

Switzerland. Ah yes, we are so short of Cuckoo Clocks…

We have Design Margin not because our civilization was designed rationally but because it was once made up of rational people, for whom some truths were self-evident. And it was not necessary to say that people had to work for a living or would be responsible for themselves in the Declaration of Independence because no one who did not do so could have lived in Colonial America.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:40 am 16. Mark:

Ah, socialism!

Calling Barack . . . is anybody home?

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:44 am 17. ridgerunner:

It is foolish to denigrate a small country that has maintained strength and independence as long and as well as Switzerland has.

Even in Colonial America, there was an energy subsidy: photons raining down on arable land that could be occupied. In our current situation, the alternatives are either socialism/chaos or a rational reordering of societal incentives.

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:16 am 18. Paul:

Too many lawyers in too many places, it upsets the social ecology.

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:42 am 19. marymcl:

This story doesn’t surprise me. We’re not there yet, but every day at work (an outpatient clinic in the county hospital) I see growing young Somali families living on public assistance. Sometimes a mother and 5 or 6 kids turns up penniless after crossing the US on a Greyhound bus (who bought the tickets, I always wonder.) And whoever surmised above about it being PC not to ask is correct. Actually it’s beyond that – it would be “unprofessional” for anyone but the social worker arranging things for them here to make any such inquiry. If a manager were to see this post, for instance, I’d surely be written up for it.

I’m in Seattle, where liberal prejudice is so deeply entrenched people who think otherwise are actually afraid to let their colleagues know in some quarters. I was recently shocked to discover that the only conservative I know at work is pretty much in the closet as far as the physicians we work for are concerned. I’t’s OK for them to know he’s gay, but not that he wanted Romney to be president

I’ve never kept my own views a secret, but I’m considered an outsider for various reasons anyway. The other day I was sincerely assured by one of the physicians – a woman I admire – that she still liked me, even though I like Sarah Palin!?!

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:54 am 20. Teresita:

RWE:Sure puts a new spin on the phrase “White Man’s Burden” doesn’t it?

Obama initially supported reparations, but he backed off on that when he started to get serious about running for President. After he wins he can say, “What the hell, we’re printing up a trillion dollars to give away to Wall Street, what’s another trillion in slavery reparations?”

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:57 am 21. Mark:

Many months ago, Wrichard asked–perhaps reporting a conversation he read elsewhere, perhaps coming up with the question on his own–”Who sent him (i.e. Barack Obama into politics)?

Increasingly we see the “who sent him” dots and have opportunities to connect those dots. As Wrichard presciently implied, someone sent Barack Obama at every crucial juncture, but who?

The New Party infomation helps connect a few dots from comparatively late in the game. We know who was sending Barack Obama into the election contests.

But, still, who sent Barack to Columbia (”there was a program,” he says in his book)? To Chicago? To Harvard? Back to Chicago?

Inquiring minds want to know. Even if we already suspect the answers.

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:16 am 22. Charles:

OT:
2 minute version:
“Barack Obama and Raila Odinga — Did the Illinois senator violate the Logan Act in campaigning for his cousin’s bid for the Kenyan presidency?”
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1P_P8lBCsE

8 minute version:
“Barack Obama & Raila Odinga”
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=S8QcpdUtxNQ&feature=related

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:22 am 23. vb:

Will the search for utopia never end. Switzerland is a country inhabited by fallible people just like the rest of the world. Its independence has been preserved partially by its mountains and, shall we say, a certain moral flexibility. The later is true of every country on earth. The former is the luck of the draw.

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:36 am 24. Lifeofthemind:

Never complain. Never explain.
- Henry Ford

Never apologize. It’s a sign of weakness.
- Capt. Nathan Brittles (Frank Nugent for John Wayne)

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:46 am 25. David M:

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 10/09/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:56 am 26. slade:

T-H-I-N-K

IBM motto.

Short, sweet, and to the point.

Oct 9, 2008 - 8:12 am 27. Pascal:

Another Republican senator who failed to win the presidency was mocked mercilessly for asking “Where’s the outrage?” Now a dozen years later it appears the question has morphed to “Outrage?”

This would be funny were it not a sign of how you who have been born in free lands have become inured to your liberty and its traditions.

These litany of anecdotes could grow only where those who pay for them take it for granted there is nothing they can do to fight the seeming insanity.

Which brings me to Wretchard’s last paragraph of this thread-starter.

The clever thing about double-entendres is that the reader can really never be sure the writer intended the second or third meaning. That I may infer additional meanings is no proof that you implied them. However, those who wish to divert attention to the first meaning will always SEE the wider implication (choosing to be offended is a common ploy). An example of this last was when I Bill O’Reilly told Barney Frank to “be a man” about his role in the subprime disaster. Yes, speaking of which. How we got to the subprime mess and how it’s been handled since the failures began all have a tinge of insanity. Just so.

Wretchard I think even were you to have made a direct link between the title of this thread and your final sentence, the majority of your readers — no matter how smart many of them are — would not want to accept it.

This litany of things are not a sign of insanity in those we find in control of our various agencies, but rather indicative of how far the tables have been turned so that free peoples are now ruled by the whim of their former “public servants.”

“But if they knew they [the rulings] were crazy, they [the rulers] wouldn’t be, would they?”

Just so.

Oct 9, 2008 - 8:23 am 28. Andrew X:

I have called this the ‘Seat-Warmer Theory’ or maybe syndrome, an idea devolped in the blink of an eye when my brother proudly showed off the seat-warmers (now becoming standard) in his new Beamer.

Namely that, in an advanced Western society, both our politics and our markets, thus our whole culture really, is RELENTLESSY driven to PURGE ANY FORM OF “DISCOMFORT” FROM YOUR LIFE, NO MATTER WHAT IT IS!

Your widdle tushy is cold on your car seat? That other model has seat warmers! Buy it instead! A mouth thermometer is uncomfortable to take your temperature? Now here’s one for your ear! Wait, THAT one is too uncomfortable now? Now you can just swipe your forehead.

That person’s views over there disturb you? That’s a “hostile environment”! Consider him purged. Feel better now?

Don’t like the pictures of car bombs in Iraq? Listen to us talk about “America’s most bitter war ever”, that has killed as many Americans as were killed in one day of the Battle of the Bulge, or one hour at Cold Harbor (where??) We’ll end it that uncomfortable reality for you (no matter the ultimate result). Then you won’t be tormented by those awful pictures anymore.

Can’t get a loan? How painful. Now you CAN, regardless of you ability to repay it. GOT that loan, and are now struggling? Well, damn those “predatory lenders”. Feel better now?

Every single thing we do is driven to make us just one tick more warm and snuggly than before, including the warmth from being told no matter what you do or did, your discomfort is some else’s fault, by what they did or failed to do, and someone else’s responsibility to make better for you. “That’s the truth, now vote for me! (Or buy my products, or hire my firm.)

How this affects our ability to deal with both the pain and the harsh truths that are both fundamental to the essence of being human is obvious.

The ‘Seat-Warmer Theory’. Now destroying a civilization near you.

Oct 9, 2008 - 8:26 am 29. Pascal:

What I just wrote can be condensed to:

A rational person will not argue with a mad one. Thus rulers would prefer you think their rulings are insane so you won’t bother arguing. It is just so.

Oct 9, 2008 - 8:33 am 30. slade:

“Where’s the outrage?”

Habu’s point perhaps underneath the sturm und drang of it all.

Oct 9, 2008 - 8:47 am 31. Vivictius:

Perfect is the enemy of good.

I see more and more of this every day and the more I see it, the more I feel we should just let these fools “win”. Let the system collapse and burn. It was built once, get rid of these parasites and we can do it again.

Switzerland? The have lasted because they really don’t matter. Geographically it is easy to go around then through, even if no one was there. They project nothing; their banking system caters to hiding the ill gotten gains of criminals and corrupt politicians. No, we do not need to be more like Switzerland; even head in the sand isolationism is superior to being an accomplice to thugs and tyrants.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:05 am 32. Michael Hoskins:

Rrunner
After your first post, I had the thought to explain your error. Being slow, I didn’t get there till your second. Then I thought, maybe he doesn’t understand entropy. Still slow on the trigger, I got to Pascal’s 08:33.

What Pascal said.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:08 am 33. Konyok:

ridgerunner,

The success of Western Civilization is directly attributable to its non-linear development. The funky, contradictory products of economic, social and political freedom are an intangible Design Margin that allow adaptation to change.

China was stable for centuries under the mandarin system, but fell quickly before European innovation. The recent material gains have happened because of a pragmatic decision to let a little chaos in.

A Constitutional Convention would be a disaster. The right would squabble over nuances and the left would focus like a laser beam and enact socialism – the ultimate modern *rationality.*

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:16 am 34. mika2k1:

“Reuters” faked images of Georgian victims allegedly killed by Russian attacks

.
.
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m46819&hd=&size=1&l=e
.
.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:33 am 35. peterike:

I’m suing the Romans because they no doubt killed some of my distant ancestors amongst the Germanic hordes. I mean, c’mon. They should have just let them in to take over the place right off the bat. Resistance? How bigoted.

Where do I sign up by the way?

This talk of silliness reminds me of something from a grad school class I took many moons ago in Modern Drama. We were discussing Strindberg. And somehow or other the question came up about why there were no blacks in his drama. So the professor (a rare sensible man in the NYU Lit Department) said “well in the 1800s in Sweden there weren’t any blacks.” And the student posing the question sneered back angrily, “Well that seems pretty racist!”

What can you do with such ignorance?

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:37 am 36. Langley:

“As for Design Margin, Western Civilization does not really have any because it was not designed rationally. A new Continental Congress to develop financial incentives for converting USA into a Switzerland could provide a design with some margin.”

With the coming economic collapse we will see many more of these calls for central planning. They will be just as successful as the first New Deal and the Soviet’s 5 year plans.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:41 am 37. NahnCee:

I’m on the whale’s side when it comes to submarines and sonar. After all, that’s what we’re supposed to be good at, is coming up with new doo-dads that won’t affect the sea-life. And I especially want to protect the whales, dolphins and porpoises.

Unlike, I might add, the Japanese (and the Russians) who are still into barbaric whale slaughter as well as the use of huge nets thereby depleting the whole undersea eco-system.

Why is it OK to over-fish the oceans, but America is consistently harassed over our less-than-China’s emissions into the air?

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:45 am 38. Joe Buzz:

Oh Nahn you know the answer. America is an easy target ripe with so many of those lost souls who FEEL so terribly bad about who they are and what they may have or have not done….or imagined.
Dear leaders. Please save us from ourselves!

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:03 am 39. JMH:

Andrew X’s seat-warmer theory is on the right track, this is all about comfort. Or rather, about the lack of any serious recent discomfort. A cold tush in the morning only counts as discomfort if you didn’t spend the night in an unheated shack with an empty belly. Belgians sniffing distainfully at you only counts as a foreign policy problem if no serious military threats have been shooting at you lately. Global Warming only counts as an ecological disaster if the river hasn’t caught fire recently. Memories are short and imagination weak.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:16 am 40. Pascal:

Vivictius;

By obscuring that the “perfect is the enemy of the good” is how those who promise utopia always gain. Exploiting guilt at the top and envy at the bottom gains the power to steal from the middle.

But mind you, the Perfect has not always been the enemy of the good.

There is a narrow (and nearly archaic) stream of thought where the Perfect created the good in such a way that the good might choose to seek an excellence that understood the dangers of overreaching.

Historically the perfect has most noticeably become the enemy of the good where there are those who believe they can do assume the role of the Perfect.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:23 am 41. Cannoneer No. 4:

Secret Service visits Lufkin woman after ‘death threat’ allegation from an Obama campaign volunteer

Jessica and Micah Hughes say two Secret Service agents showed up on their doorstep Thursday after a campaign volunteer for Sen. Barack Obama accused her of making a ‘death threat’ during a phone conversation a day earlier.

Two federal agents arrived at Jessica Hughes’ home Thursday to ask her if she said, “I will never support Obama and he will wind up dead on a hospital floor.”

Hughes said her words were deliberately twisted by a volunteer who was apparently unhappy Hughes was rude during a phone conversation the two had. The Lufkin mother, a Republican, said she received a call on her cell phone Wednesday from a woman with the Obama Volunteers of Texarkana.

“She asked if I was an Obama supporter, to which I replied, ‘No, I don’t support him. Your guy is a socialist who voted four times in the state Senate to let little babies die in hospital closets; I think you should find something better to do with your time.’ (And then) I hung up.”

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:35 am 42. ridgerunner:

At the risk of harvesting more off-target replies, I will clarify. The current governance by Congress is so corrupt that it will go on making conditions worse. My proposal was for a citizen’s Continental Congress (not Constitutional Convention, Konyok) which would define goals and non-coercive ways to reach them. The intent would be to pressure Congress by doing the job they apparently cannot. The First C.C. was convened to pressure George III.

Konyok, no evolutionary biologist would confuse Design Margin with the capacity to evolve. They are different concepts.

Those who believe that the socialists make crazy proposals to avoid rebuttal by appearing crazy have been reading too much pop psychology.

Those who don’t believe that we are on the edge of an energy crisis haven’t been reading enough Howard Odum.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:46 am 43. Michael Hoskins:

Rrunner,
Some of us have spent a lifetime in the energy business, thus the previous comment about entropy. Your solutions…oh well…

The Citizens Congress is called the US House of Representatives and the corrective action is called an election.

Surely another body…where activist and community organizers…..

Sorry all…I shouldn’t go on about it.

Entropy Lives!
mike

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:57 am 44. goesh:

Hilarious! What do the Brits need roads and schools and hospitals and bridges and the military for anyway? A bedroom for every child in the land and be proud we can afford it – sounds like a US Liberal campaign slogan.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:59 am 45. Leo Linbeck III:

Design Margin is the acknowledgement of two things:

1. Bounded rationality. We don’t know everything, or much of anything about the future.
2. Asymmetric payoffs. If we overdesign by 20%, there is additional cost. If we underdesign by 20%, there is catastrophic failure.

The question is: How much DM is optimal?

The lower bound of DM is generally maintained through a competitive market by failure. Schumpeter’s Creative Destruction. In the absence of competition, underdesign occurs when executive incentives are to maximize monopoly rents. This incentive causes DM to be cut until failure, which becomes systemic because the failure of one organization is the failure of an entire industry.

The upper bound of DM is generally maintained through a competitive market by the profit motive. This is Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand. In the absence of competition, overdesign occurs when executive incentives are to minimize failure. This incentive causes DM to be increased until the point of economic unsustainability, leading to a systemic failure because of bad resource allocation.

Because the world is a non-linear place, DM cannot be optimized ex ante, but only through a trial-and-error process, the real-world equivalent to Newton’s Method or Runge-Kutta. There is no closed-form solution to the equations of the real world, so there is no way to optimize DM in a planned economy (or any monopoly). There is no feedback loop, and any incentive scheme is likely to make matters worse, not better.

A Constitutional Convention is a good idea but not to set a DM, but instead to limit the size and scope of the Federal Government so as to increase the amount of trial-and-error experimentation. According to the Constitution, such a convention can be called by 2/3rds of the states to consider specific amendments. The amendments I would propose are to eliminate the gerrymander (decreases the power of incumbents, who wield the most power in Washington) and cap Federal outlays to some percentage (20%?) of the three-year trailing average of GDP.

We need a Constitutional Convention, but not to turn the US into Switzerland. We need a Constitutional Convention to turn the US back into the US.

L3

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:08 am 46. KennyB:

Ridgerunner, you are correct in saying that America could strive to be a lot more like Switzerland. The angry negative responses merely illustrate the ignorance of their authors. In the early 20th century America wanted to be neutral like Switzerland, unfortunately America’s size and Anglocentricity made that impossible.

Switzerland has managed to keep the federal government small and keep large amounts of sovereignty (and most tax revenue) in the cantons. Switzerland has a very strong citizen army. Switzerland has a very active “grassroots” democracy through the federal and kantonal referedums. Switzerland has superb infrastructure. And Switzerland has managed to accomplish this without any oil or other major resources starting from a position as the poorest country in europe at the beginning of the 20th century. Sure, the country had to compromise moral purity in WWI and WWII due to being completely dependent on the goodwill of its facist neighbors. Americans refuse to even attempt to understand what this means. Perhaps the simple fact that starving mobs are completely unpredictable might provide some perspective.

Yes, America could benefit from a shot of “swissness”. And most people don’t realize that she already has in the last 2 centuries (my ancestors emigrated to the US from Thurgau in 1860).

And in conclusion, I found this article on the benefits of being small to be right on the money:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122351041598817387.html

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:10 am 47. Konyok:

Benj,

Would I annoy you if I chattered endlessly about the relative merits of hydrous pyrolysis vs standard rockeval kinetics? Granted, that particular argument is vitally important to understanding the generation of petroleum charge in closed or open systems, thence reliable petroleum reserve estimates, opening a secondary dilemma of adequately defining reserves, resources and endowments. Also granted, robust estimates of undiscovered reserves extrapolated from the “known knowns” and consistent with empirical production data constitute strategically important information used by decision makers and analysts across the political, economic and environmental policy spectrum. Nevertheless, that would be boorish, wouldn’t it?

The kernel of your argument is “Obama is kewl.” That’s your perogative, but when you accept me to honor your solipsism as an argument you stray into the Gish Gallop. Especially when you use the opportunity to belabor what I consider to be non sequitur. In a discussion, you say your piece, then I respond or, if if I think it important, bring in additional information, then you respond, or bring in additional information. Your insistent focus on Pegler is like a little boy demanding to go to the bathroom. I signaled to you, twice, that I wasn’t interested in that branch of the converesation. I really don’t give a rat’s ass if that’s your thesis topic or a sexual obsession. I’m in this forum for my own reasons. If you interest me, I will engage with you. If you bore me, I will blow you off. You have bored me. You need to show that you aren’t just another one trick pony. You need to say something interesting or insightful, not just facile or condescending.

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:10 am 48. Konyok:

Whoops, sorry folks.
I posted to the wrong thread …

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:11 am 49. Mad Fiddler:

Thanks, Konyok, but it worked anyway.

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:32 am 50. ridgerunner:

RWE 4:40 am was more correct re Design Margin than I perceived at the time. L3’s discussion of the concept (with examples like the Nork army having a massively excessive design margin and the US border control a terribly thin margin) suggests that the concept would be relevant even to an amendment-writing Constitutional Convention. It could help explain to the public why the current waste of resources, public and private, is dangerous. For the last three years, I have been trying to rid a two acre field on my property of persimmons. I cut the trees down and they resprouted from stumps. I recut the stumps and applied herbicide, and the persimmons resprouted from the roots. I dig out roots and there are resprouts from the smaller roots. The point is that woody plants (not annuals) have massive investment in the roots to be able to resprout when the top is damaged, persimmons apparently ad infinitum. That is a real Design Margin, and I when I put out a big persimmon root I often think of some of my neighbors who chose to live large the last decade and have no financial Design Margin now. The country as a whole is in a position to envy persimmons.

L3 I’m all in favor of your Convention, but I think a citizens’ Continental Congress is more likely to happen because it would not depend upon elected officials to start it.

KennyB, thanks for the support. I assumed, wrongly, that BC readers were as well-informed as you.

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:54 am 51. ridgerunner:

“put out” = “pull out”

Oct 9, 2008 - 11:57 am 52. Michael Hoskins:

RR
Informed does not equal:
accurate
complete
well reasoned
correct
Informed can equal:
Regurgitate error

Re: KennyB. Priceline has good pricing for one way to Geneva. Less sarcastically, the comparisons you offer are so completely out of context as to be inane. History, Geography, Culture all inform the development of a nation. Swiss culture has some nice points, and some not so nice.

A more mature approach to our condition would allow for a deeper look at who and why we are. I suggest W.S. Churchill (Since you and RR like tossing references to and fro) “History of English Speaking Peoples”. Hell of a good yarn and well written if nothing else.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:06 pm 53. Orphaned Son of Liberty:

ridgerunner: “put out” = “pull out”

Is that what she told you?

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:13 pm 54. Pascal:

Those who believe that the socialists make crazy proposals to avoid rebuttal by appearing crazy have been reading too much pop psychology.

I stated in my first post that there would be many readers who would not accept this.

When it comes to understanding and confronting those who seek power, it is foolish to dismiss any paths that lead them there.

Let me urge anyone, but especially someone like ridgerunner who says he wants reform, to review the exposé penned by my mentor in absentia, Blaise Pascal. The most egregious form of probabilism engaged in by those in authority was the obvious affront to reason (the seemingly crazy).

Though there are some crazy and some stupid people in positions of authority, those who helped place them there are neither.

Building on what L3 (Trip?) pointed out, we are dealing with people who broadcast daily justifications of unconscionable means to achieve “glorious” ends (i.e., their personal gain).

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:15 pm 55. Coyotl:

Thematically, we tend to get two main narratives from Wretchard:

1. The Left is so ideologically dissonant and wrong and brash that they’ve pushed their crazy schemes too far and now their heads are exploding while people finally see them for the Marxist simps they truly are. A new day dawns . . .

2. The Left has insidiously corrupted all aspects of modern life and Western civilization is now doomed.

Maybe he could split the blog into two warring ones to better argue, because under the present single one, this kind of schizophrenia gets tiresome. It seems like we’re forever on the edge of either total victory or the apocalypse, and expected to be suitably elated or hysterical. I worry about the man’s nerves.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:18 pm 56. programmer:

Coyotl,

The two themes are not mutually exclusive.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:21 pm 57. Michael Hoskins:

coyotl. I hate it when you’re right. I was afraid of being sucked (suckered?) in and OT.

Apologies.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:24 pm 58. Pascal:

[Arrrgh!!! Sorry clubbers. I made the mistake (again) of including TWO links in the first attempt at this comment, and got "Your comment is awaiting moderation" as my punishment.

In the service of timeliness I'm removing the first link and keeping the second. When the 12:15PM comment posts, this comment will be redundant.]

Those who believe that the socialists make crazy proposals to avoid rebuttal by appearing crazy have been reading too much pop psychology. –RidgeRunner

I stated in my first comment today that there would be many readers who would not accept this. I didn’t state nor imply this was the only arrow in their quiver.

When it comes to understanding and confronting those who seek power, it is foolish to dismiss any paths that lead them there.

Let me urge anyone, but especially someone like ridgerunner who says he wants reform, to review The Provincial Letters, the exposé penned by my mentor in absentia, Blaise Pascal.

The most egregious form of probabilism engaged in by those in authority due the French counter-reformation was outlandish affronts to reason (the seemingly crazy).

Though there are some crazy and some stupid people in positions of authority, those who helped place them there are neither.

Building on what L3 (Trip?) pointed out, we are dealing with people who broadcast daily justifications of unconscionable means to achieve “glorious” ends (i.e., their personal gain).

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:25 pm 59. Konyok:

Ridgerunner,

If by “Continental Congress” you mean an informal, self-selected debating society, it would have no more significance than the Million Man March, without favorable media coverage.
If you mean something more substantive, the historical body was superceded by our present bicameral legislature empowered by the U.S. Constitution created by the Constitutional Convention and ratified by the states. Therefore, a Constitutional Convention would be needed to create a “Continental Congress.”

A Constitutional Convention would probably mirror today’s Congress. Can you imagine Pelosi, Frank, Dodd and little Dennis Kucinich in a deliberative body with unlimited powers of legislation?

No, I’m not an evolutionary biologist, but I do know that any given genome is composed of more extraneous sequences than operative ones. Most mutations are random errors in the redundant sequences. That sure looks like an analog to DM to me.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:27 pm 60. ridgerunner:

Orphaned Son,
The two themes are not mutually exclusive.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:28 pm 61. whiskey:

It’s not design margin, or anything else. It’s the rise of single mothers and single women, marrying not at all.

Married women with children are conservative, they want security, look ahead, are willing to spend money and blood now to avoid disaster later. They look to their sons, and their daughters, and want better for them. They want better for their husbands, who bring in significant income. They are invested in the future, want it better, and will save and sacrifice to achieve it.

They oppose wasting public money on welfare, and particularly extravagant welfare, for foreigners, preferring money spent on their husbands, children, and themselves. Money to buy mansions and upkeep for a Somali family of nine, could be spent on continuing education for themselves, child-care leave, tax rebates, and the like.

UNMARRIED single women, on the other hand, jockey endlessly for status, “correct” political thoughts and behaviors, conformity, approval by the Queen Bees of the female cliques, and attracting the most powerful, desirable, and testosterone driven men. Single mothers DO have an interest in their children, but on average much less than married mothers because they still pursue men and rely extensively on a female-clique network.

Political Correctness, the “old biddies” of Wretchard’s phrase, the desire for “just so” life, and so on is best explained by dominance of single women, with children or not, in the electorate. With much shorter time frames, dislike of logic and math (women generally dislike both), assumption of the eternal nature of Western Civilization, and hatred of the Joe Average White Male, their natural enemy.

Men of course collect sports stats endlessly, women find it boring. Male comics form the only critique of PC, women comics parrot it endlessly. A UK Judge has ordered a British gardener to remove a barbed wire fence because it might injure thieves stealing his plants. Married women would not stand for that — stealing from their husband is stealing from THEM. Single women approve — they don’t own the garden and must deal constantly with Average men hitting on them instead of the desired Alpha male. Gender differences are profound, and the decline of marriage pretty much equals the decline of Western Confidence.

Of course, men often support and protect PC, because it’s advantageous. Dr. Phil and the rest, including Obama, Mr. PC himself. But the core base is always single women in one form or another.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:29 pm 62. Andrew X:

I think the idea of a Constituitonal Convention is insane.

RE: holding such “to limit the size and scope of the Federal Government so as to increase the amount of trial-and-error experimentation”. Absolutely. Woo Hoo.

And you think for a moment that is what will be decided? Are you under some illusion that for each person there advocating such, there will not be AT LEAST one matching person there advocating a constitutional “right” to a job, “right” to health care, “right” to education, and “right” to abortion? “But we should, of course, have SOME limitations reagarding firearms”, etc.

Imagine the ideological bloodbath going on inside the hall. Now imagine the media, and the caliber of the people we know will reporting on these events. “Right to a job… education…? How could any sane person with a heart be against such things? Meet Mary Smith, who HAS no right to a job…” boo hoo hoo, blah blah blah.

The fact that all this would invariably enslave us all will somehow just not make it out of the editing room. The “we just want to make everything better for everyone” brigades would triumph. And it would be constitutionally enshrined.

God, the whole idea scares the crap out of me. There are millions of Americans, products of our educational system, who THINK they respect the constitution as written, and accept it now as is, but just give them one chance to scrap the whole thing and replace it with their own “obvious wisdom” and “superior compassion” to the forefathers, and they’ll jump on it with both feet, without any idea of what the hell they are really doing at all.

The changes you propose regarding gerrymandering or line-item veto COULD be done by amendment, hard slogging work that may be.

But a convention to literally re-write the constitution? Madness all around, certainly in this 60’s / post-60’s cultural evironment.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:30 pm 63. NahnCee:

*sigh*

Would someone PUH-LEEEZE introduce Whiskey to a single woman? It would probably be good if she isn’t too bright and is extremely adaptable.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:40 pm 64. Pascal:

Andrew X, ridgerunner;

Let me add to Andrew’s warning, by way of literary example, Henrik Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People.

In short, the madness of crowds leads all to accept poison when the cure cost each mob members anything as small as an eyelash.

Those of Ridgerunner’s frame of mind would be overwhelmed if not turned against that frame of mind midway in the process due to personal losses the opposition (the statists) would highlight or threaten.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:43 pm 65. Al_Batross:

The UK is being dragged down by the weight of myriad schemes designed to give tax money to people who will vote Labour, in an effort to ensure that they will continue to vote Labour.(I used to think it was too cynical to say that, but now it seems to be the only explanation which really fits the shoe).
Labour are in a race to the bottom of a long and slippery slope. Can they create a big enough tax dependency-culture powerbase before the next General Election to be able to ensure victory, or will the tax money run out first ?
In pursuing this course, Labour is so tarnishing and cheapening the democratic process that it is becoming ever more risky that the process will actually die, and be unmourned.
The alienation of the native population has now reached the point where the Conservatives should have no fear of losing the next General Election, but that party chose the weak and ineffectual Cameron, who only woke up to the unpopularity of his pledge to continue tax spending (at the same rate as Labour) just a few days before the current financial crisis unleashed itself. Had he dreamed on for a little longer, he would have seemed as foolish as Brown, who was busy promising more “free” stuff just days before, see:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/3042932/Gordon-Brown-attacked-over-unfunded-nursery-care-promise.html

I can only hope that the coming recession will jab a dose of hard, cold reality into British politics.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:49 pm 66. ridgerunner:

Deus me livre. What a negative bunch of folks. I’ll just go the Swiss route then, and hole up on my 100 acres with my I-Bonds and .357’s.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:50 pm 67. Michael Hoskins:

OK let’s try something closer to the topic.
The original story relates five bedrooms to 8 people. 1 adult to one room, 1 child to one room and 3 rooms with a pair each. The decision is based on a single housing parameter, bedrooms. No thought, it seems, is given to the balance of the building. At 12k pounds I’ll wager dining rooms, bathrooms, sitting rooms, libraries etc abound.
So…is the analysis performed by the well educated elite too simple or, as is usually the case, based on their own Freudian sexual disfunction? (How can children share rooms…this must explain why my brother and I are conservative, growing up in a shared bedroom in a house that my parents could afford and eventually pay for)

SIX CHILDREN REMAIN AT RISK!!!
PREPARE THE SOCIAL WELFARE POSSE…THERE IS A PROBLEM AFOOT.

Oct 9, 2008 - 12:54 pm 68. whiskey:

Nancee — How ELSE do you explain the extraordinary changes in: Western Europe, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea? ALL seeing the rise of single mothers and lots of divorce?

I’ll note you can’t rebut the ARGUMENT. Women, demographically, form the balance of power, about 51% of the population. The coalition of non-Whites, elites, various hard-left interest groups such as gays, feminists plus single women has been the winning one for Left groups. The coalition of White Men plus married White women has carried conservative groups EVERY time. Married women went for Bush. Went for John Howard. Went for Berlusconi.

Do you honestly think that Married women would stand for a moment, money spent on an Immigrant family instead of THEIRS? Married women are innately conservative, because they have to be. Single women are innately Left, because they have to be.

I did not hold this opinion at first, but the DATA convinced me. South Park makes it’s living on ridiculing PC, it’s a male show. The View makes it’s living on upholding PC, it’s a single women show.

If you open your eyes, you can see what is in front of your nose. It’s hard, but worth it.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:05 pm 69. buckets:

I have to agree with programmer RE: the not-mutually-exclusive themes. I get the sense in the U.S. of a great, desperate effort to get Obama elected. Like the Germans in the Ardennes, the Left is using up every asset they have in order to achieve that critical breakout. In their efforts, however, they have unmasked themselves to the world: no one trusts the press anymore to be objective, “voter registration” organizations like ACORN are exposed as criminal conspiracies, and the Democrats in Congress are trying to obscure their criminal conduct in the midst of the meltdown.

It’s all out there, in the open, but there is so little time for the American public to take it all in. And make no mistake, once the Left takes power they will keep it. Heads will roll. They are angry, they are vicious, and they have no qualms about using the legal system to punish political enemies.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:19 pm 70. ridgerunner:

Whiskey,
Female suffrage came late to Switzerland (1959-1990). According to your believable (to me) thesis, that would partly explain Switzerland’s continued conservative tendency. If you want to look into the biological basis of the female behavioral dichotomy you note, there is Randy Thornhill’s recent book.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:20 pm 71. Lifeofthemind:

NahnCee:
If you are starting an introductions service I’ll remember to wear shoes while blogging.

Have you all been watching The Market? The Dow is down another 7.3%

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:23 pm 72. Konyok:

Ridgerunner,

Forgive me for being snarky. Your idea would be great good fun if we could confine membership to denizens of BC. Sadly, we must contend with the “real” world.

One thing that strikes me is a cognitive question. Wretchard posts a question, a diagnostic problem. What is happening? So often, we respond with prescriptions. We must do THIS! (Personally, I’m finding that I respond more to the prescriptions than to the musings, even though I enjoy the speculative most of all.)

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:25 pm 73. Orphaned Son of Liberty:

Have to agree with whiskey here (again). Don’t always concur with the drivers he ascribes to group behaviors but they are plausible, and the behaviors uncontestable. Nahncee, you do yourself discredit by going ad homenim rather than discussing the merits of the argument. Or of course, you could ignore it.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:27 pm 74. Tony:

Whiskey, the girls in this video look single:
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=191923

This video might demolish my old saying that Arguing with liberals is like playing football against girls.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:30 pm 75. Michael Hoskins:

Seems the social workers who rented the 5 bdrm house have been fired.
What still amazes me is the brutal (firing hurts) reaction to following the rules, by those who wrote the rules…
I believe this reinforces Albatross above.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:34 pm 76. Pascal:

I regret having passed on this up earlier.

Konyok @9:16 am The right would squabble over nuances and the left would focus like a laser beam and enact socialism….

That happens now. Rewriting what I’ve noted before, the GOP’s old snakes reserve their venom for conservative upstarts within the party and play statesmen when faced with the Left.

Mika, RR, and you all agree with me that the system is gamed towards statism one way or the other.

In keeping with your most recent Konyok and acknowledging RR’s frustration, what CAN we do about it? How do will build blocs that can be trusted to stay on theme and not be turned to pod people as were the good doctor’s allies in Ibsen’s play.

What’s your prescriptive plan of attack Doc?

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:35 pm 77. slade:

Whiskey has half a point based on empirical cultural evidence. The sustained popularity of shows like Oprah and The View – and the operative word is “sustained” – is puzzling in a benign world and alarming in the post-September 2008 world; the argument being stripped down to mainstream to eliminate the Jerry Springer phenomenon.

The largely female audience supporting the daytime “Rollerball” spectacles are not primarily single. No solid database, but from the audience participation one gets the impression of the full cross-section of single, married, divorced, and everything else in between. (Internationally, said phenomenon must be evaluated in context, which means extrapolations become intellectually dishonest.)

What I am taking away from Whiskey’s database is an increasing gender divide – or one with a louder voice. In the not too distant past, differences were subsumed by physical necessity of food, shelter, and safety. It is not unreasonable, nor even particularly objectionable, in my view that the absence of physical necessity should engender an alternative suite of male-female alliances. We are seeing that now, not in terms of alpha males, but in terms of increased opportunity for personal choice – and experimentation.

I am not convinced that pressure on the traditional family structure will prove fully destructive to the fabric of society, as currently argued. What will lead down that road is the permanent destruction of human relationships, which is the psychological precursor to lack of empathy.

One of the cross-currents that has bedeviled this election. The Republicans lost that important connection with empathy. The Democrats will attempt a resurrection using the hated remnants of a defeated ideology. One way or another, it must come back into public life. Much more important than any perceived ideological divide among the new emerging demographics.

Oct 9, 2008 - 1:39 pm 78. mika2k1:

What’s your prescriptive plan of attack Doc?
==

“Man will become better when you show him what he is like.”

Oct 9, 2008 - 2:16 pm 79. sigintel:

In 1967, When I was 19, I “thumbed” into Northern Greece from Yugoslavia along with a an Italian “road buddy” who I’d met thumbing out of Belgrade. Somewhere on the road to Istanbul, while waiting for my next ride, I caught a piece of dirt in my eye, and it became infected while I travelled. My buddy Palo and I “side tracked” along the Yugo border with Albania(my god was it ever primitive…12th century country side and villages)and parted company “somewhere in Northern Greece”. By that time my eye was infected and my vision cloudy …I needed to find a doctor. I cant recall how I got to the northern capital city of Thesolonike (sp) but I remember walking up to a greek cop and asking him “hospital”(the only greek word that I knew). He looked in my road dirty face with one green eye and said “OK”…and led me over to a Greek Army hospital( remember the movie “Z”?). An army orderly, “accepted me” into the hospital and then took me into see a doctor. In minutes “The Doc” showed up…he was in uniform, grey haired and robust,..he said a few words in Greek to me, then sat me down and exaimed my eye. He told the orderly (who spoke some English), “Operation”. A short time later, I’m laid out on an operating table and in comes the Doc. Within minutes he had removed the foreign matter from my eye, given me a manly “light slap on the cheek” and within an hour I was back out on the street, with a “cool” black eye patch. Man, was I ever thankful for the Greeks being so hospitible. To this day I thank the Geek army doctor who saved my sight and the fact that I was treated without any consideration about if I could pay or not. That day in Greece, there was free help… altruisim at its best.

Oct 9, 2008 - 2:20 pm 80. programmer:

MAJOR OT CONSPIRACY THEORY ALERT (Do not, I repeat, do not think about this pink Rhinoceros):

I expanded the Nasdaq chart out to five years. In every year, except last year, there has been a significant nose dive in the Nasdaq. Last year, it seemed like the chart was inverted. This year, well we are watching in real time. What is it about October? So, is there some strong economic function that exists and only shows up in October as a heterodyne effect where the beat frequency period is a year? If so, is what we are observing in the market the result of this yearly occurence coupled with another signal to present the “really big dip” in the market, and if so will the recovery start in about 2 to 3 weeks as it usually does? And if so, was the financial sector turmoil finely tuned to anticipate this yearly occurence, and if so who did the tuning?

NOW, BACK TO YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PROGRAMMING….

Oct 9, 2008 - 2:57 pm 81. ridgerunner:

Ignoring the conspiracy aspect, the market finished today in a technical condition from which it would normally rally sharply. If it does not at least hold here, then it will in totally anomalous technical territory, with whatever that portends for the real economy. If there is a steep rally over the next few weeks and I wanted out longer term, I would exit below SPX 1115.

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:22 pm 82. ridgerunner:

“will” = “will be”

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:23 pm 83. sgi:

It’s a battle between the realists and the idealists. Realists accept human nature and idealists can not stop trying to improve it. Idealists can find all sorts of axes to grind against the living and the dead.

Idealists must have justice in this life. They believe that man can be just, if only…. But one man’s justice is another man’s injustice, so there is no resolution, and never will be.

The West is no more guilty than the East, South, or North. We’re just better at everything, including feeling guilty. But if we don’t stand up for ourselves, who will?

Barack Obama sure won’t. He thinks of himself as one of the victims, hence we’re supposed to give him a pass on ALL of his unsavory relationships. Does he think he is owed the presidency? The media appears to think so. Likewise his supporters, his army, academia, and most of the world.

Perhaps his election is supposed to be the ultimate apology to every victim of the success of the West. Perhaps he represents all the dead and living victims of Western aggression and oppression.

If this is so, I think we can find better “victims” than Obama. He should not get a pass, he should be held accountable. That would be the best apology that we could make. These are the rules and victims have to play by them too. You are our equal.

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:28 pm 84. Pascal:

cryptic mika

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:38 pm 85. slade:

cryptic like a mortgage-backed security

Oct 9, 2008 - 3:59 pm 86. trangbang68:

Cannoneer, The Obamabot who sicced the Feds on the Texas housewife is not atypical in my mind. She’s the type that are attracted to the left. Self righteous, nanny staters, probably has no intention of ever having kids, but wants to tell me how to raise mine. God help us and keep us from the Cultural Revolution of the dreamy eyed little narcissistic clones of the left. They’ll probably criminalize public farting.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:05 pm 87. Cannoneer No. 4:

Prosecutors Drop Charge Related to “Passing Gas” in DUI Case

I fart in their general direction, and they pepper spray in my specific direction. They’d taze me but they don’t want to clean up after me.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:19 pm 88. Leo Linbeck III:

Andrew X,

I think my comment was misunderstood. I’ll try a different formulation – you may still think it’s insane, but at least you’ll think that way for the right reasons .

When I wrote of a “Constitutional Convention,” I was speaking to a very specific process laid out in the US Constitution. Article V of the Constitution is:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

The bolded clause is the critical one. The idea is to have State legislatures pass resolutions calling on Congress to consider specific amendments. The bolded clause gives States the right to call for a Convention, although the rules for such a Convention would be established by Congress.

This right sets up an interesting dynamic. If 2/3rds of the States passed a resolution calling for a Convention to consider specific amendments, it would be up to Congress to organize such a Convention. But the Convention would not be limited to only those amendments; it could consider other matters, although any proposed amendment coming out of the Convention would still need to be ratified by 3/4 of the States.

The practical effect of this dynamic is that Congress will almost certainly defer to the States and pass the amendments without a Convention. If they stray from this charge, the States are unlikely to ratify the amendments and call for another Convention. Moreover, such a deadlock would create huge pressure on Congress, as it still would have other business to transact.

This effect is exactly what happened on the Seventeenth Amendment, which required direct election of US Senators. This amendment failed many times (in the Senate, of course). So States started passing resolutions calling for a Constitutional Convention to propose this amendment, and the Senate ended up acquiescing to avoid all of the risks and costs of a Convention.

So, the basic approach would be this:

1. Draft a resolution calling for a Constitutional Convention to consider a small number of amendments, perhaps by a date certain.
2. Have State legislatures begin passing this resolution. Grassroots action is key here.
3a. If Congress fails to act before 2/3rds of the States pass the resolution, a Constitutional Convention is called.
3b. If Congress does act, the State resolutions automatically sunset.
4. The amendments return to the States for ratification.

This approach is a way for the States to create fundamental change at the Federal level that are otherwise unlikely to pass for structural or incentive reasons, things like term limits, gerrymander reform, and budgetary limitations. Because States can both start the process and have final approval over the amendments, there is still a check on the system getting out of control.

There is certainly a risk such a process could be hijacked, but the level of civic engagement this would create would be pretty amazing, IMHO. Everyone would watch the proceedings, and be able to express their views to their legislators, both Federal and State, and the States will have the final say.

Like I said, you might still find this insane. But it is a constitutional approach to state-led Federal government reform.

L3

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:32 pm 89. RWE:

Folks, the Design Margin idea was not based on the concept that we DESIGN our society but on the fact that you can only go so far before you hit the margins.

So, our society was “designed” in a manner like Leo Linbeck III so eloquently described – by trial and effort with the objective of producing “profit” – or simple efficent use of resources in government endeavors where there is no profit to be had. Check any management text and you’ll find that “profit” is just the word they use.

But when we load up what works with free mansions for immigrants and so forth (and don’t laugh at the Brits too hard – are you aware that elderly refugees from Cuba, for example, basically get U.S. Social Security payments?) then, eventually, you run out of margin.

All of these people wanting new lights for the basketball courts in the local park – or to feed the entire third world for free – or to bail out AIG – individually they may be reasonable, noble, and even not very burdonsome efforts. Collectively they are disasterous at some point. You run outa margin sometime.

P.S. The M1 Carbines from CMP are simply gorgeous.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:41 pm 90. mika2k1:

cryptic
==

You want to learn how this man changed his city:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jaime_lerner_sings_of_the_city.html

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:44 pm 91. Bonzo:

From One Cosmos an interesting POV:

“….Now, what of Obama? He obviously knows nothing. That goes without saying. And he has accomplished nothing. Even his most vocal supporters will concede that. Therefore, his support appears very much to reside in the dimension of being. He is the One. He will Heal the Nation. He will Change things. He gives us Hope. He’s just…. special.

So right away we see that Obama represents the projection and embodiment of deeply religious impulses, only deeply irrational (as opposed to transrational). To put it another way, anyone with a shred of spiritual discernment is not only immune to Obama’s attraction, but is repelled by such a man. He is full of phony authority on every level, but it’s not just an “absence,” but the positive presence of a negation. In other words, Obama does not just embody the emptiness of ignorance, but the fullness of lies, i.e., (-k). Worse yet, in his satanic spirituality, he embodies a kind of (-¶), or counterfeit holy man, like a Deepak Chopra, Tony Robbins, and other “divine salesmen” ….”

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:45 pm 92. whiskey:

Thanks Slade.

I have blogged on the article, currently up, on Culture 11 on why populism has failed and the elites been so decadent and static, stasis bound.

I think there is significant evidence, particularly if one examines my Native California, that the failure post 1990’s of populism (Ross Perot, Prop 187, Prop 209) vs. say Prop 13 and Ronald Reagan, have to do with the decline of the middle class family, the fountain of populism. ALL ACROSS THE WEST.

I’ve argued with the essayist Fjordman, at Gates of Vienna, that while what he describes in Sweden and elsewhere as an abolition of the nuclear family is accurate, the causes, i.e. cultural marxism in debased manner, feminism, and the like are not strong enough to be the primary cause. Rather it is broad social changes brought upon by TECHNOLOGY that change the way we live.

What the heck CHANGED in the West? Really, what happened?

Birth control pills, and cheap, reliable, mass produced condoms.

Anonymous Urban living, away from parents and neighbors and family, amidst young single peers, in social isolation.

These two alone, IMHO, explain almost everything about the West’s decline in facing reality. Everyone knew, and knew well, the risks of Fannie/Freddie. The risks of Obama plus a Democratic Majority (sell offs are desperate, frightened investors). The risks of nuclear proliferation. The stupidity of PC. The idiocy of Multiculturalism. But if your primary objective is positioning in the mating dance, male or female, these risks all make sense. Since your main objective is the attractive stranger in the bar tonight.

Yes there IS a huge divide between male/female, new to the West, and likely permanent. No other society has granted unlimited freedom to women (and men), beyond any social structure and control, and we are seeing the results. It will not end well. One need only look to communities dominated by single mothers to see the results.

Oct 9, 2008 - 4:50 pm 93. Lifeofthemind:

@L3,
You are making an assumption that a convention can be limited to considering certain specific amendments by either the resolution of Congress or by the Petitions passed by the several States. As I read Asticle V, and I believe most authorities agree with me, the States or Congress can call the Convention for any purpose but they can not bind or limit the Convention once it has assembled. Remember the original Constitutional Convention was called merely to propose amendments to improve the original Articles of Confederation. That instruction was ignored and they in effect created a completely new nation. If a Convention was called you could expect Obama’s supporters to work to pack it as they packed the Iowa and Texas caucuses. While I can think of a few good ideas to improve the Constitution the calling of a Convention could be a step off a very high cliff.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:03 pm 94. Orphaned Son of Liberty:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html

“Who Wrote Dreams From My Father?”

“The public is asked to believe Obama wrote Dreams From My Father on his own, almost as though he were some sort of literary idiot savant. I do not buy this canard for a minute….”

Interesting read on the literary effort which launched BHO as an intellectual and deep thinker. Also interesting to see the potential (but unproven) ties to Ayers that are implied.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:06 pm 95. Lifeofthemind:

It is accepted I believe that Ted Sorenson wrote Profile’s in Courage and Kennedy concealed that. Is there any suspicion that Kennedy did not write his senior thesis which was later published as Why England Slept? Obama has clearly shown no aptitude for sustained work where it would have been expected. We have no papers that he wrote in college or law school. He wrote one unsigned note we are told at the Law Review. He wrote nothing while he was a Lecturer at the U of C Law School that could have justified offering him a tenure track job.

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:34 pm 96. AZM:

FROM THE WSJ TODAY

For years, Swiss scientists have blithely created genetically modified rice, corn and apples. But did they ever stop to consider just how humiliating such experiments may be to plants?

That’s a question they must now ask. Last spring, this small Alpine nation began mandating that geneticists conduct their research without trampling on a plant’s dignity.

“Unfortunately, we have to take it seriously,” Beat Keller, a molecular biologist at the University of Zurich. “It’s one more constraint on doing genetic research.”

Dr. Keller recently sought government permission to do a field trial of genetically modified wheat that has been bred to resist a fungus. He first had to debate the finer points of plant dignity with university ethicists. Then, in a written application to the government, he tried to explain why the planned trial wouldn’t “disturb the vital functions or lifestyle” of the plants. He eventually got the green light.

The rule, based on a constitutional amendment, came into being after the Swiss Parliament asked a panel of philosophers, lawyers, geneticists and theologians to establish the meaning of flora’s dignity.

“We couldn’t start laughing and tell the government we’re not going to do anything about it,” says Markus Schefer, a member of the ethics panel and a professor of law at the University of Basel. “The constitution requires it.”

>>snip

…so, yeah, you can accuse Wretchard of sensationalizing and generalizing…that is until you crack open the daily newspaper and see what Western governments are doing in the name of God-knows-what…

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:44 pm 97. lc:

Interesting seat warmer theory by Andrew X – it makes me think of the poor little froggie all comfy and toasty on the slow boil – but, just what is mr. froggie really getting comfortable with?

And then there is the dark “The Future” by Leonard Cohen
” all the lousy poets coming round trying to sound like Charlie Manson….I’ve seen the future, brother, and its murder.”

but then he also wrote:
“its not a cry that you hear at night
its not someone who’s seen the light
its a cold and its a lonesome hallelujah”

design, design margin?….”the baffled king composing……”

sigh…

Oct 9, 2008 - 5:52 pm 98. slade:

Whiskey -

As recently as a few years ago I didn’t know a LIBOR from my lumbar, let alone Gramsci from my grandpa. My observations are empirical and limited in venue but I have lived and worked in nearly every western state. From that perspective I would agree that attribution to Gramscian influences cannot capture the cross currents that are changing western society at a speed that is now becoming apparent as the world watches itself melt faster than the polar ice caps.

Technology divorced the connection between action and consequences. Impact is now mitigated. But all of the risks you describe can also be explained by the contraction of time introduced by the digital revolution – the immediacy of the response in which long-term thinking is replaced by quarterly gain.

I can’t go the distance on the fern bar connection. I fall back on the very unoriginal platform that personal values make the difference, but the family construct is neither necessary nor sufficient in my view. I had two cousins – Cain and Abel brothers with the same biological parents. Night and day in terms of values. I’ll let the more eloquent observers of human life take it from there if they choose, but such complexity cannot be reduced to family alone any more than that little Gramsci twerp can explain modern western society.

As far as not ending well is concerned, it never does. I doubt there is much we can do to change that. But we can wash the dishes, mow the grass, fix the plumbing, and care. This is the fundamental disconnect of people like the Deep Ecologists who howl and scream in outrage at any footprint left by mankind and the hard core socialists who have every “disenfranchised” victim as a refugee from perfection firmly in their cross-hairs and whatever ideological persuasion was lounging in the California spa drinking wine four days before bankruptcy.

But I wouldn’t drop that weighty burden of humanity on the young single females who go bar-hopping on Saturday night.

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:03 pm 99. newscaper:

SF author Jerry Pournelle likes to say
“Efficiency is the enemy of reliability.”

You have to wonder how vulnerable to economic disruption all these businesses are who have moved to extreme Just-in-time supply chain mgt.

I would include refined petroleum products ane the electrical grid in that.

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:27 pm 100. fred:

I spent ten years of my life in the company of cultural Marxists, New Left Marxists, a few anarchists, old line Leninists, Trotskyists, and all the other riffraff of the Left and, in the end, when I began my exit from their world back in 1987, I left with the distinct impression that very, very few of them (mostly fellow Christians and Roman Catholics like myself)truly understood that the only effective way to love your fellow human being was to actually reach out and give something of yourself, your time, and your money to help them. For most of the rest, it was the political struggle to put in place the structures that would make direct altruism unnecessary. Everyone will have everything they need and some of what they want. And the telos of their thought was a world of Utopian fantasy.

I always struggled with that one, because I knew that baring some remarkable changes in human nature that was not going to happen. But I hung in with various currents of Marxist thought, hoping that I might be able to contribute to a project that would find a way around that decisive constraint. When I could not find it, and when I found out that the basis of tragedy and sin is way beyond our definitive control – intellectually I cut my ties and decided to bind myself even more tightly to faith, hope, and love.

The Left now is completely un moored from any kind of tether with objective truth and a scientific basis. Scientific materialism – classical Marxism – was dead as a doornail many decades ago. Cultural Marxism is another creature entirely, and when you are dealing with people who do not believe in reason there is no reasoning with them.

It isn’t technology that has un moored us and cast us adrift. Technology is a project and assembly of tools. People who take their cues as to how to live and what to aspire to from tools defy all understanding. They need to find their humanity. Something other than technology anchored them to such a shallow understanding of life. My computers are just my tools and nothing more. I use them to work with and to communicate with. I actually prefer to be face to face with people, who, despite their quirks are infinitely more interesting to spend time with. That is why, like most of my fellow men, I hate using the telephone unless absolutely necessary. I would much rather be face to face with the person I am talking to. The face to face encounter and conversation has nuances and subtleties you just cannot obtain or send via telephone or computer. In my job I often have to talk with people on the telephone. Inwardly, I endure it. And as much as I do not like business travel, somehow I would rather get on the plane and fly to that distant place to meet with people and have conversations with them.

At heart, I am like my ancestors from the far North in Quebec, traversing the woods with fellow European and friendly natives, engaging in trade or necessary hunting and trapping. And at periods during the day, sit before a fire, outdoors or indoors – it does not matter – and talk with and eat with people swapping stories or just being comfortable with the silence. To occasionally go to Mass with fellow Christians to celebrate The Meal.

Culture that is worth anything is about faith, hope, and love. Good News in the midst of tragedy and pain. And the truth that is ultimately a gift from far beyond us and our understanding, that compels our respect. Both the kind that science can reveal and the kind that only the whisper of the Spirit can seduce.

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:30 pm 101. Leo Linbeck III:

LOTM,

Fair points all. Additional thoughts:

The check on a Convention is that amendments would still have to be ratified by 3/4 of the States to take effect. That means the States control the end-game, which puts them in a position to impose their will (with a little leadership). I admit that it is a risk, and it is certainly possible that a Convention could spin out of control. But consider Hamilton’s take on this in Federalist 85:

Every Constitution for the United States must inevitably consist of a great variety of particulars, in which thirteen independent States are to be accommodated in their interests or opinions of interest. We may of course expect to see, in any body of men charged with its original formation, very different combinations of the parts upon different points. Many of those who form a majority on one question, may become the minority on a second, and an association dissimilar to either may constitute the majority on a third. Hence the necessity of moulding and arranging all the particulars which are to compose the whole, in such a manner as to satisfy all the parties to the compact; and hence, also, an immense multiplication of difficulties and casualties in obtaining the collective assent to a final act. The degree of that multiplication must evidently be in a ratio to the number of particulars and the number of parties.

But every amendment to the Constitution, if once established, would be a single proposition, and might be brought forward singly. There would then be no necessity for management or compromise, in relation to any other point — no giving nor taking. The will of the requisite number would at once bring the matter to a decisive issue. And consequently, whenever nine, or rather ten States, were united in the desire of a particular amendment, that amendment must infallibly take place. There can, therefore, be no comparison between the facility of affecting an amendment, and that of establishing in the first instance a complete Constitution. (emphasis added)

In other words, since any amendment must make it through 3/4 of the States, it will have to be simple, straightforward, and a single-purpose amendment. And writing a complete Constitution is much, much harder, and therefore less likely to be ratified, especially since it would require unanimity.

Additionally, in F85, Hamilton goes on to make the argument for having States control the Federal government through the amendment process:

The intrinsic difficulty of governing THIRTEEN STATES at any rate, independent of calculations upon an ordinary degree of public spirit and integrity, will, in my opinion constantly impose on the national rulers the necessity of a spirit of accommodation to the reasonable expectations of their constituents. But there is yet a further consideration, which proves beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the observation is futile. It is this that the national rulers, whenever nine States concur, will have no option upon the subject. By the fifth article of the plan, the Congres will be obliged “on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the States [which at present amount to nine], to call a convention for proposing amendments, which shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as part of the Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof.” The words of this article are peremptory. The Congress “shall call a convention.” Nothing in this particular is left to the discretion of that body. And of consequence, all the declamation about the disinclination to a change vanishes in air. Nor however difficult it may be supposed to unite two thirds or three fourths of the State legislatures, in amendments which may affect local interests, can there be any room to apprehend any such difficulty in a union on points which are merely relative to the general liberty or security of the people. We may safely rely on the disposition of the State legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority. (emphasis added)

So, I guess I see the Constitutional Convention of Article V as a State-driven, State-controlled mechanism to “erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.

And I read Hamilton’s last sentence as a clarion call to those of us who, “upon mature consideration,” believe that subsidiarity is the prescription of the day. The Federal government must be constrained, and that political space, which once served and was served by the body politic at the State level, must be reclaimed on behalf of its loyal citizens.

L3

Oct 9, 2008 - 6:37 pm 102. Zim:

OT: The Nikkea is plummeting, tomorrow is going to suck.

Oct 9, 2008 - 7:28 pm 103. slade:

Too Many Bankers?

What the crisis has made bluntly apparent is that all this intelligence is not employed in a particularly productive way. Admittedly, a financial sector is necessary to act as the intermediary between entrepreneurs and investors. But the sector seems to have taken a quasi-autonomous existence without close connection with the financing requirements of the real economy. Thomas Philippon calculates that the financial sector, which accounts for 8% of GDP in 2006, is probably at least 2% above the size required by this intermediation. Worse, the sub-prime crisis is almost certainly in part linked to the fact the needs of the financial markets (the insatiable demand from banks for the (in)famous “mortgage-backed securities”) led to excessive borrowing and a housing bubble. Watching the events of the last few days unfold does make us one want to send some of the finance CEOs back home. More pragmatically, the disappearance of their exorbitant earnings may encourage younger generations to join other industries, where their creative energies would be socially more useful. The financial crisis could plunge us into a severe and prolonged recession. The only silver lining is that it could cause a more realistic allocation of talents. One must hope that the bail-out packages in Wall Street and in Europe do not convince the best and brightest that the financial sector is still their best option.

The transition to a services dominated economy arrived in parallel with digital technology. A similar paragraph could be written for lawyers and the insurance industry.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:10 pm 104. Leo Linbeck III:

slade,

Very interesting stuff. Cool find.

I’ve observed that financial services provides the highest return to negotiating skills. The pinnacle of that industry – merger and acquisition advisory services – would pay bankers tens of millions of dollars for basically being great negotiators.

A close second is plaintiff law. Again, negotiating well can result in millions.

But what is negotiation? It’s a process of value claiming. Say a mortgage package is worth somewhere between $100M and $150M, depending upon the default rate of the underlying mortgages. A great seller gets $150M, a great buyer pays $100M. There’s huge premium to earn for someone who can just do a better job selling. The mortgages are what they are; nothing changes in the package, regardless of price. Crucially, however, sellers get their payoff immediately, while buyers had to wait years to realize their profits. So the better negotiators migrated to the sell side.

Negotiators are masters at managing perceptions, which is why high-powered bankers wear Brioni suits and Patek Phillippe watches. It made them look successful. And the buyers were impressed – they were rich, they must know something, and maybe if I hang out with them I some of that will rub off on me. Buyers ended up being snookered, and paying full price.

In truth, the buyers were like high-rollers in Vegas. The more they gambled, the more they lost, and the bigger the suite they were comped.

The higher the roller, the bigger the loser. But it felt good. That should count for something, right?

L3

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:38 pm 105. slade:

Leo

From the little I could watch of the news today, I was hearing an emphasis on managing psychology as the critical link between now and what will come tomorrow – negotiating perception.

The traders seem to be in near unanimous agreement that the Bush address tomorrow morning should not be delivered during market hours because any formal political statement of political intent makes the markets tremble like a near dead leaf in the wind.

I admit my nerves are shot.

Oct 9, 2008 - 9:59 pm 106. buddy larsen:

You & me both, slade. Have had a knot in my belly ever since the Rus rolled into Georgia. or really since november 1963.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:06 pm 107. slade:

November 1963 – thank you Franklin Delano Buddy. I’ve been quietly worried myself.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:24 pm 108. fred:

I gather that the issue now is the commercial paper market and also lines of credit for business working capital. Now, the vast majority of these businesses that take out short term loans are very safe. Defaults in the CP market are rare. They do happen, just not very often.

They should suspend the mark to market rule for awhile so that some sanity is restored. After all, as some banks write down the value of those assets, they are constrained to lend more. The account called bank capital takes a hit relentlessly in this environment, even if the loans are performing.

Much of the selling going on involves wealthy individuals and hedge funds unloading and getting cash as fast as they can get it.

If you don’t need your investments for at least five years, don’t get out. If you do, you should have been out to a much reduced position a long time ago. That’s why as you get closer to retirement age you should start being more conservative with the risk in your portfolio.

Me… since I’m a long ways away from that point I intend to keep on investing. But I don’t panic easily and am generally unflappable. But I do my research and try to stay close to the value style of investing. Even when value goes out of fashion and growth takes over I will add growth at a good price.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:26 pm 109. fred:

Unfortunately most people are not psychologically put together to invest. They are susceptible to fear, panic, and greed. When you invest with your emotions, usually you get hosed.

Oct 9, 2008 - 10:28 pm 110. slade:

History and such – explains the studied civility between the two candidates.

Oct 10, 2008 - 7:13 am 111. El_Heffe:

Wretchard: “There is something almost insane about these attitudes. It is almost a form of lunacy, and the worse for being completely unnoticed by the lunatics themselves. But if they knew they were crazy, they wouldn’t be, would they?”

“Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.” — Euripides

Fred: ” I left with the distinct impression that very, very few of them (mostly fellow Christians and Roman Catholics like myself)truly understood that the only effective way to love your fellow human being was to actually reach out and give something of yourself, your time, and your money to help them. For most of the rest, it was the political struggle to put in place the structures that would make direct altruism unnecessary.

Ah but direct altruism will, of course, always be necessary.

This makes me think of the parabale of the good samaritan

Luke 10:25-37
25 ¶ And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit aeternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy aheart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt alive.
29 But he, willing to ajustify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my bneighbour?
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and awounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.
33 But a certain aSamaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had bcompassion on him,
34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took acare of him.
35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the ahost, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

When Christ is telling the story we can tell that the priest and levite are hypocrites which have at best let an opportunity for service pass them by and at worst neglected their duty. Christ never says what happens to them, he just holds out the example fo the samaritan as the one to be followed.

I dont think that will ever change … utopian fantasies notwithstanding.

Fred: “when you are dealing with people who do not believe in reason there is no reasoning with them.”

“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.” — Euripides

@ Leo – Im learning alot … thanks.

PS. sorry if my italics are goofed up … i vote for a preview feature as well.

Oct 10, 2008 - 3:32 pm 112. Leo Linbeck III:

slade,

Managing psychology is the ultimate non-linear system.

Moe (to himself): Larry looks worried.
Moe (to Larry): Don’t worry.
Larry (to himself): Why is Moe saying that? He must be worried too!
Larry (to Moe): I’m not worried.
Moe (to himself): Why is Larry lying to me? He’s clearly worried. Maybe I should be worried too.
Moe (to Larry): Well, you look worried.
Larry (to himself): Wow! He is worried!
Larry (to Moe): Well, I’m not.
Moe (to himself): I was right. He is worried. Maybe I should reassure him.
Moe (to Larry): Well, I’m worried too. But it’s gonna be OK.
Larry (to himself): Hah! I was right. He is worried. Now I’m really worried.
Larry (to Moe): Yeah, I guess I’m worried too.
Curly (to both): gnuk gnuk gnuk

Moral of the story:
Stress makes a stooge of everyone because under stress, everyone seems like a stooge.

L3

Oct 10, 2008 - 5:53 pm 113. slade:

Leo – I’m reminded more of the following:

Abbott: Well Costello, I’m going to New York with you. You know Bucky Harris, the Yankee’s manager, gave me a job as coach for as long as you’re on the team.

Costello: Look Abbott, if you’re the coach, you must know all the players.

Abbott: I certainly do.

Costello: Well you know I’ve never met the guys. So you’ll have to tell me their names, and then I’ll know who’s playing on the team.

Abbott: Oh, I’ll tell you their names, but you know it seems to me they give these ball players now-a-days very peculiar names.

Costello: You mean funny names?

Abbott: Strange names, pet names…like Dizzy Dean…

Costello: His brother Daffy.

Abbott: Daffy Dean…

Costello: And their French cousin.

Abbott: French?

Costello: Goofè.

Abbott: Goofè Dean. Well, let’s see, we have on the bags, Who’s on first, What’s on second, I Don’t Know is on third…

Costello: That’s what I want to find out.

Abbott: I say Who’s on first, What’s on second, I Don’t Know’s on third.

Costello: Are you the manager?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: You gonna be the coach too?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: And you don’t know the fellows’ names?

Abbott: Well I should.

Costello: Well then who’s on first?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: I mean the fellow’s name.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy on first.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The first baseman.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy playing…

Abbott: Who is on first!

Costello: I’m asking YOU who’s on first.

Abbott: That’s the man’s name.

Costello: That’s who’s name?

Abbott: Yes.

Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.

Abbott: That’s it.

Costello: That’s who?

Abbott: Yes.

PAUSE

Costello: Look, you gotta first baseman?

Abbott: Certainly.

Costello: Who’s playing first?

Abbott: That’s right.

Costello: When you pay off the first baseman every month, who gets the money?

Abbott: Every dollar of it.

Costello: All I’m trying to find out is the fellow’s name on first base.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy that gets…

Abbott: That’s it.

Costello: Who gets the money…

Abbott: He does, every dollar. Sometimes his wife comes down and collects it.

Costello: Whose wife?

Abbott: Yes.

PAUSE

Abbott: What’s wrong with that?

Costello: Look, all I wanna know is when you sign up the first baseman, how does he sign his name?

Abbott: Who.

Costello: The guy.

Abbott: Who.

Costello: How does he sign…

Abbott: That’s how he signs it.

Costello: Who?

Abbott: Yes.

PAUSE

Costello: All I’m trying to find out is what’s the guy’s name on first base.

Abbott: No. What is on second base.

Costello: I’m not asking you who’s on second.

Abbott: Who’s on first.

Costello: One base at a time!

Abbott: Well, don’t change the players around.

Costello: I’m not changing nobody!

Abbott: Take it easy, buddy.

Costello: I’m only asking you, who’s the guy on first base?

Abbott: That’s right.

Costello: Ok.

Abbott: All right.

PAUSE

Costello: What’s the guy’s name on first base?

Abbott: No. What is on second.

Costello: I’m not asking you who’s on second.

Abbott: Who’s on first.

Costello: I don’t know.

Abbott: He’s on third, we’re not talking about him.

Costello: Now how did I get on third base?

Abbott: Why you mentioned his name.

Costello: If I mentioned the third baseman’s name, who did I say is playing third?

Abbott: No. Who’s playing first.

Costello: What’s on first?

Abbott: What’s on second.

Costello: I don’t know.

Abbott: He’s on third.

Costello: There I go, back on third again!

PAUSE

Costello: Would you just stay on third base and don’t go off it.

Abbott: All right, what do you want to know?

Costello: Now who’s playing third base?

Abbott: Why do you insist on putting Who on third base?

Costello: What am I putting on third.

Abbott: No. What is on second.

Costello: You don’t want who on second?

Abbott: Who is on first.

Costello: I don’t know.

Abbott & Costello Together:Third base!

PAUSE

Costello: Look, you gotta outfield?

Abbott: Sure.

Costello: The left fielder’s name?

Abbott: Why.

Costello: I just thought I’d ask you.

Abbott: Well, I just thought I’d tell ya.

Costello: Then tell me who’s playing left field.

Abbott: Who’s playing first.

Costello: I’m not… stay out of the infield! I want to know what’s the guy’s name in left field?

Abbott: No, What is on second.

Costello: I’m not asking you who’s on second.

Abbott: Who’s on first!

Costello: I don’t know.

Abbott & Costello Together: Third base!

PAUSE

Costello: The left fielder’s name?

Abbott: Why.

Costello: Because!

Abbott: Oh, he’s centerfield.

PAUSE

Costello: Look, You gotta pitcher on this team?

Abbott: Sure.

Costello: The pitcher’s name?

Abbott: Tomorrow.

Costello: You don’t want to tell me today?

Abbott: I’m telling you now.

Costello: Then go ahead.

Abbott: Tomorrow!

Costello: What time?

Abbott: What time what?

Costello: What time tomorrow are you gonna tell me who’s pitching?

Abbott: Now listen. Who is not pitching.

Costello: I’ll break your arm, you say who’s on first! I want to know what’s the pitcher’s name?

Abbott: What’s on second.

Costello: I don’t know.

Abbott & Costello Together: Third base!

PAUSE

Costello: Gotta a catcher?

Abbott: Certainly.

Costello: The catcher’s name?

Abbott: Today.

Costello: Today, and tomorrow’s pitching.

Abbott: Now you’ve got it.

Costello: All we got is a couple of days on the team.

PAUSE

Costello: You know I’m a catcher too.

Abbott: So they tell me.

Costello: I get behind the plate to do some fancy catching, Tomorrow’s pitching on my team and a heavy hitter gets up. Now the heavy hitter bunts the ball. When he bunts the ball, me, being a good catcher, I’m gonna throw the guy out at first base. So I pick up the ball and throw it to who?

Abbott: Now that’s the first thing you’ve said right.

Costello: I don’t even know what I’m talking about!

PAUSE

Abbott: That’s all you have to do.

Costello: Is to throw the ball to first base.

Abbott: Yes!

Costello: Now who’s got it?

Abbott: Naturally.

PAUSE

Costello: Look, if I throw the ball to first base, somebody’s gotta get it. Now who has it?

Abbott: Naturally.

Costello: Who?

Abbott: Naturally.

Costello: Naturally?

Abbott: Naturally.

Costello: So I pick up the ball and I throw it to Naturally.

Abbott: No you don’t, you throw the ball to Who.

Costello: Naturally.

Abbott: That’s different.

Costello: That’s what I said.

Abbott: You’re not saying it…

Costello: I throw the ball to Naturally.

Abbott: You throw it to Who.

Costello: Naturally.

Abbott: That’s it.

Costello: That’s what I said!

Abbott: You ask me.

Costello: I throw the ball to who?

Abbott: Naturally.

Costello: Now you ask me.

Abbott: You throw the ball to Who?

Costello: Naturally.

Abbott: That’s it.

Costello: Same as you! Same as YOU! I throw the ball to who. Whoever it is drops the ball and the guy runs to second. Who picks up the ball and throws it to What. What throws it to I Don’t Know. I Don’t Know throws it back to Tomorrow, Triple play. Another guy gets up and hits a long fly ball to Because. Why? I don’t know! He’s on third and I don’t give a darn!

Abbott: What?

Costello: I said I don’t give a darn!

Abbott: Oh, that’s our shortstop.

Who’s on First by Abbott and Costello

(Did you know that this exchange has been translated into nearly thirty languages and some of them were even done by Abbott & Costello?)

Oct 11, 2008 - 7:21 am 114. Bob Murphy:

I urge some caution about being totally dismissive of Switzerland.
Anyone here ever read, “Total Defence”? It’s about how every able bodied man is in the armed forces or the reserves and has his military equipment including rifle at home so he can be mobilized in short order.
Shortly before WWII the Swiss equipped their army with a new anti-tank cannon and then called for tenders to supply their army with tanks. During part of the testing they shot at the tanks. The German tanks didn’t fare well.
The Swiss bought Messerschmitt 109s from the Germans before the war.
Every time the Luftwaffe made an incursion, a probe, they got shot down by the Swiss in dogfights using the same planes the Luftwaffe had.
They’re bland, but they take care of business in more ways than one.

Oct 11, 2008 - 3:37 pm 115. Bob Murphy:

@Slade re Abbott and Costello
That’s bloody wonderful, the first long post I’ve seen that couldn’t have been shortened without damage.

Oct 11, 2008 - 3:45 pm 116. slade:

Thanks Bob – I expected some tut-tutting from the Bandwidth Nazi’s but there it is – the 110th Congress doing high finance.**

** September 2008 just lost me completely. The only policy I will ever support from this collection of cartoon characters is devolution of power to the states and national security. It’s not so much IQ as it is lack of guts. Individually or collectively, they have neither.

Oct 11, 2008 - 5:09 pm 117. buddy larsen:

when that French king and his childhood pal the Pope attempted to surprise and destroy the out-of-favor Knights Templar (who had been, among other things, the bankers for the Crusaders), many of the KT escaped into the Alps, with enough of the KT treasury (which is what the French king had been after) to continue banking, in their new and perfectly defensible mountain fastness. Look at the Swiss flag –the KT battle-smock and shield graphic. And to this day they bank, and live prepared to fight the lowlanders. The Pope’s bodyguard unit, the guys in the striped mideval uniforms, the Swiss Guards, have held the job for these centuries because they are the “ever-vigilant”.

Oct 12, 2008 - 10:53 pm 118. veracious:

Yes, the Swiss weather time well, but Jewish devotion is thousands of years longer and suffereth more.

Oct 13, 2008 - 12:57 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.