Wednesday, September 2, 2009

End The Fed, by Congressman Ron Paul - Pure, Undiluted Greatness

I got an advance copy of a long-awaited book in the mail today. Here's one of the opening paragraphs.

"....After all is said and done, the Fed has one power that is unique to it alone: it enables the creation of money out of thin air....Given that money is one half of every commercial transaction and that whole civilizations literally rise and fall based on the quality of their money, we are talking about an awesome power, one that flies under cover of night. It is the power to weave illusions that appear real as long as they last. That is the very core of the Fed's power.
As President Obama said of the economic boom that went bust: "I think it's important to understand that some of that wealth was illusory in the first place."
Exactly.


Those are among the opening paragraphs of Ron Paul's new book "End The Fed". I'm about halfway through my advance copy (I LOVE my new status as a member of the fourth estate), and so far, the book is pure, undiluted greatness. Brilliant.


When I get through reading a good book, there are markings on about 10% of the pages. By the time I got a few pages into "End The Fed", I was losing the ability to distinguish between the good, the great, the superlative, and the immortal passages that should be tattooed on Ben Bernanke's nether regions.
There's no point in underlining and highlighting in a book when it inspires this kind of frantic vandalism:


Here are a few of Dr. Paul's comments on the Fed's practice of pumping money into the economy whenever it suits them:


"It is and should be a mainstream cause to end the power and secrecy of the Fed. It's my own view that ending the Fed would address the most vexing problems of politics of our time. It would bring and end to dollar depreciation. It would take away from the government the means to fund its endless wars. It would curb the government's attacks on the civil liberties of Americans, stop its vast debt accumulation that will be paid by future generations, and arrest its massive expansions of the welfare state that has turned us into a nation of dependents....Essentially you take away from the government the capacity to expand without limit. It is the first step to restoring constitutional government. Without the Fed, the federal government would have to live within its means. It would still be too big and too intrusive, just like all state governments are today, but the outrageous empire at home and abroad would have to come to and end."


This little snippet got 3 stars in the margin:


"Even the Fed itself claims that part of its job is to keep inflation in check. This is something like the tobacco industry claiming that it is trying to stop smoking or the automobile industry claiming that it is trying to control road congestion. The Fed is in the business of generating inflation.....the entire reason for the Fed's existence is to generate more (inflation), not less of it.
What the largest banks desire is precisely what we might expect any large corporation to desire: privatized profits and socialized losses. The profits come from successful loan activities, sometimes during economic booms. But when the boom turns to bust, the losses are absorbed by third parties and do not affect the bottom line. To cover losses requires a supply of money that stretches to meet bankers' demands.....
Whenever instability turns up, so do efforts to socialize the losses."

Paul goes on to explain the history of the Fed, and how its stated goal was to stabilize the money supply. But then,


"In practice the reality has been much different. One only needs to reflect on the dramatic decline in the value of the dollar that has taken place since the Fed was established in 1913. The goods and services you could buy for $1.00 in 1913 now cost nearly $21.00. Another way to look at this is from the perspective of the purchasing power of the dollar itself. It has fallen to less than $.05 of its 1913 value. We might say that the government and its banking cartel have together stolen $.95 of every dollar as they have pursued a relentlessly inflationary policy."


Dr. Paul gives us a chapter on his intellectual influences, and gives some credit to his grandmother, who knew her Bible well. Shortly after the end of WW2, prices were rising because of inflationary war financing, causing Grandmother Paul to remember Genesis 47:15, a passage describing Joseph has become Pharaoh's Bread Czar:

"So when the money failed in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came to Joseph and said, 'Give us bread, for why should we die in your presence? For the money has failed.' "
Our current problem was well established, even in ancient Egypt. Debased currencies fail. Governments cannot manage money.

That's my new favorite Bible verse. Genesis 47:15.
Dr. Paul also discusses FDR's ham-handed attempts to eliminate competitors of Fed Funny Money:

"Roosevelt, by executive order (6102) in 1933, confiscated all gold held by private citizens, with a few minor exceptions such as numismatic (collector) coins, and levied severe penalties on those who disobeyed. The penalty (for owning gold) was $10,000 and/or ten years in prison. In today's money, that's more like $400,000. It was a rather bold, arrogant move from which much harm has come."

And then he writes:

Before gold became legal in 1975, many gold bugs were buying it. I purchased my first gold shortly after the breakdown of the Bretton Woods Agreement. The law was circumvented by buying numismatic coins (any coin dated 1947 or older was considered a numismatic coin). Mexico accommodated American citizens by minting the beautiful Mexican 50 peso, weighing 1.2 ounces, and placing the date 1947 on it.

I love it. I've read through chapter 3, but will probably finish the book tonight.
You must own this book.
Sometime soon, when we're assured of the official on-sale date, we're going to have the Tarrant County Libertarian Meetup at the Border's Books at Hulen and I-30 in Fort Worth. This book will be the topic for discussion.
Stay tuned.

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Another nominee for The Whitey - Charles Rangel

Six or seven months ago, when The Teleprompter Jesus was trying to fill his cabinet, I created something called The Whitey Award. The Whitey is given for the best effort at eliminating government waste. Special consideration is given to nominees who accomplish this by not giving the government any of their money.

Previous nominees include Tom Daschle, Rahm Emmanuel, She Whose Name Is Not Spoken, Tim Geithner, Hilda Solis, and the two guys who wheeled a corpse into a convenience store in an effort to cash the dead guy's Social Security check. (Hey, if that dead man's money had gone back to the government, it would've been spent on Clunkers, stimulus programs, or bailouts, instead of drugs and alcohol.) You can go here to read the qualifications of each Whitey nominee.

Early on in the Obama administration, I thought I was going to have to retire the trophy. The playing field was almost like the Special Olympics: too many winners. Then we went about three months without a new scandal, and we seemed to have achieved tax-paying compliance from those we pay our taxes to.

Then comes Charlie Rangel. Rangel is chair of The House Ways And Means Committee, and controls more money than Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong-Il, or any other socialist I can think of. And he goes to great lengths not to share any of the pile that is his. Here's a blogger named Ripclawe, from someplace in the Caribbean, on Rangel's latest accomplishment:

Representative Charles B. Rangel failed to report hundreds of thousands of dollars in income and assets on his financial disclosure forms for 2002 through 2006, including tens of thousands of dollars in rental income from a Harlem brownstone he sold in 2004, according to records filed this month with the clerk of the House of Representatives.


Mr. Rangel, who is facing investigations by two House subcommittees into his personal finances and fund-raising, filed amended financial disclosure forms on Aug. 12 acknowledging that he had omitted an array of assets, business transactions and sources of income. They include a Merrill Lynch Global account valued between $250,000 and $500,000; tens of thousands of dollars in municipal bonds; and $30,000 to $100,000 in rent from a multifamily brownstone building he owned on West 132nd Street.

So to Representative Charles B. Rangel, you have our respect and undying gratitude for doing your part to eliminate government waste. Your nomination has been recorded, and we wish you good luck beating the rap on this one.
If you ever get your hands on your own tax money, you'll probably just waste it.

Monday, August 31, 2009

The Top 10 Signs You Might Not Be A Libertarian, and The Top 10 Signs That You Just Might Be

Someone called Darksyde has written something for the Daily Kos called "The Top 10 Signs You Might Not Be A Libertarian". Parts of it are pretty funny, and Darksyde makes some good points about the libertarian ranks swelling because of the recent Republican debacles. All of my additions to Darksydes original post are in italics.

Notice a propensity of newly minted Libertarians showing up lately? Perhaps it's just coincidence their ranks swelled in inverse proportion to George Bush's approval rating, ditto that so many are mouthing traditional conservative talking points. But what about the everyday gun toting townhall screamers and taxcutters and deficit hawks we see on cable news: are they really libertarian as so many claim, or just conservatives in glibertarian clothes? Here's a few warning signs.

  1. If you think Ron Paul isn't conservative enough and Fox News is fair and balanced, you might not be a Libertarian. I think that Ron Paul generally acts on a different continuum than the Conservative/Liberal one. He's "small l" libertarian, as opposed to a Statist. And why does every Lefty that I encounter obsess over Fox News? Do they not own remote controls? I can't watch Fox or the Castro News Network without throwing shoes at the screen. A pox on both their houses.
  1. If you believe you have an inalienable right to attend Presidential townhalls brandishing a loaded assault rifle, but that arresting participants inside for wearing a pink shirt is an important public safety precaution, there's a chance you're dangerously unbalanced, but no chance you're a Libertarian. I think that the people carrying assault rifles to Presidential townhalls are less dangerous to society than the featured speaker at Presidential townhalls. I also own two pink shirts.
  1. If you think the government should stay the hell out of Medicare, well, you have way, way bigger problems than figuring out if you're really a Libertarian. By the time I qualify for any Medicare assistance, the program will be as broke as The Ten Commandments, and government will have decided to stay the hell out of Medicare. It's a moot point for me.
  1. If you rank Anthonin Scalia and Roy Moore among the greatest Justices of all time, you may be bug fuck crazy, but you're probably not a Libertarian. I kinda like Anthony Scalia. I've already written my opinions of Roy Moore. He isn't bug fuck crazy, but is instead.... (I think this is the third time I've been obligated to use that link. Sorry, Mama.)
  1. You might not be a Libertarian if you think recreational drug use, prostitution, and gambling should be illegal because that's what Jesus wants. Jesus supposedly turned water into wine (homegrown), he was criticized for hanging out with prostitutes, and he forgave the soldiers who were gambling for his clothes at the foot of the cross. 'Nuff said.
  1. If you think the separation between church and state applies equally to all faiths except socially conservative Christian fundamentalism, you're probably not a Libertarian. Don't get me started. I'm even for separation of Americans and State.
  1. You're probably not a Libertarian if you believe the federal government should remove safety standards and clinical barriers for prescription and OTC medications while banning all embryonic stem cell research, somatic nuclear transfer, RU 486, HPV and cervical cancer vaccination, work on human/non human DNA combos, or Plan B emergency contraception. I kinda hope the government continues to stay out of all those fields of research, because I'm confident that China is researching all of the above like crazy. If our legislators are in charge of the funding, they'll just screw it up.
  1. If you think state execution of mentally retarded convicts is good policy but prosecuting Scott Roeder or disconnecting Terri Schiavo was an unforgivable sin, odds are you're not really a Libertarian. I can go one further than that....I think we should consult with his family, and then pull the plug on Democratic Senator (and former Community Organizer for the Ku Klux Klan) Robert Byrd.
  1. If you argue that cash for clunkers or any form of government healthcare is unconstitutional, but forced prayer or teaching old testament creationism in public schools is fine, you're not even consistent, much less a Libertarian, and you may be Michele Bachmann. Public schools? Public schools? What government official in Washington, now that Jimmy Carter has been sent packing, would ever dream of sending their kids to the Public Schools? What point was Darksyde trying to make here?

And the number one sign: if you think government should stay the hell out of people's private business -- except when kidnapping citizens and rendering them to secret overseas torture prisons, snooping around the bedrooms of consenting adults, policing a woman's uterus, or conducting warrantless wire taps, you are no Libertarian.

Darksyde was doing ok until that last paragraph. He happened to step on a different set of toes there. I'm actually surprised that Daily Kos ran that part of his post. Because I think the Libertarians will soon be seeing some refugees and carpetbaggers from another political party, giving me the opportunity to write something like this. I'll go out of italics mode here.....

Notice a propensity of newly minted Libertarians showing up lately? Perhaps it's just coincidence their ranks swelled in inverse proportion to Barack Obama's approval rating, ditto that so many are mouthing traditional Lefty talking points. But what about the everyday anti-war protesters and transparency lovers we used to see on cable news: are they really libertarian as so many claim, or just traditional Big State Fat Cats dressing down to go slumming with The Proles? Here are a few warning signs that you really might be a Libertarian.

  1. If you thought you were electing the most transparent administration in history, but were sorely disappointed, you might now qualify as a Libertarian.
  1. If you recently discovered that anti-government protests aren't reserved for "progressives", but for anyone who believes that government's programs hurt the poor and needy the most, well, you just might be a Libertarian.
  1. If you recently looked at your Social Security contributions, and compared them to your 401K contributions, and the money you'll get from each, you'll soon become a Libertarian.
  1. If you recently discovered that Ted Kennedy gave less than 1% of his money to charity, which is a lot more than Joe Biden has given to charity, but they both wanted you to give a higher and higher % of your money to them??? And you finally woke up and wondered what the hell is up with that??? You might really be a Libertarian.
  1. You might be a Libertarian if you've ever wondered why Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Carrie Prejean (the now-infamous Miss California) all have the exact same position in opposition to Gay/Lesbian marriage.
  1. If you've ever looked into why Nancy "Greater Tuna" Pelosi has exempted employees in a certain industry from minimum wage legislation, you've probably become a Libertarian by now. Besides that, she's batshit crazy.
  1. If you still believe that the Department of Energy - created to reduce our dependence of foreign oil, the Department of Education - created to help teach something or other, or the Federal Reserve - created to help stabilize the value of the dollar, or this ignorant-assed website have been remotely effective, there's no hope for you and you're probably not a Libertarian.
  1. If you became deeply and profoundly irritated when you realized that Extraordinary Rendition would continue during the Obama presidency, you may have become a Libertarian. Or maybe it was when you learned that warrantless wiretaps would continue. Or perhaps you looked at the Obama The Warmonger widget to your right, and got tired of me asking HOW'S THAT HOPE AND CHANGE THING WORKIN' OUT FOR YA ?????
  1. If you decided it was somewhat hypocritical to claim as many tax deductions as possible while arguing for more goverment spending, you may have seen the light and become a Libertarian.

And the number one sign: if you think government should stay the hell out of people's private business -- except when kidnapping citizens and rendering them to secret overseas torture prisons, snooping around the bedrooms of consenting adults, or conducting warrantless wire taps, you are no Libertarian.

But some of us have elected a Democrat president and congress who, by commission or omission, continue to approve all of the above.

The Libertarian Party awaits.....

Sunday, August 30, 2009

A note to the new Pay Czar

From Michelle Malkin, on the compensation level of Obama's "Pay Czar", the individual tasked with determining how much money someone can earn:

Kenneth Feinberg made $5.76 million last year as a partner in his Washington law firm, Feinberg Rozen LLP, according to a government ethics filing obtained by Reuters.
And his assets, which include a stake in his law firm, two homes and dozens of investments, are worth anywhere from $11 million to $37 million, according to the filing, which places assets in broad value categories.
His homes are a $1.66 million house in Bethesda, Maryland, near Washington, and a $1.96 million vacation home in West Tisbury, Massachusetts, on Martha’s Vineyard.
Please allow me a brief digression about Martha's Vineyard....Who was Martha? Why is her Vineyard so popular with those of a certain political persuasion? Did Martha begin with a small summer camp for pious hypocrites, and it grew from there? Just wondering.

As long as I can remember, groups of Lefties have advocated topping organizational salaries at a multiple of someone else's earnings. I can remember people admiring the restraint of Ben & Jerry's founders (Ben & Jerry), who refused to take home more than, say, 10 times the salary of their lowest paid employee. I don't remember the exact number. This exercise in posturing didn't extend to Ben & Jerry's stock options, though, and after cloaking themselves with righteousness for a decade, they walked away with a lots more than 10 times the salary of the lowest 8 percent of the least compensated quartile of the blah blah blah blah blah. The whole thing makes me ill.

Anyway, the salary czar seems fixated on evil CEO's, Wall Street villains, people who burn orphanages, and the like. I think he should roll out something like this:

No lawyer can earn more than 12 times the amount earned by the paralegal who prosecuted Ted Kennedy's manslaughter case.

No actor, regardless of his political activism, can earn more than 17 times the director's salary of the Merigold Mississippi Community Theatre.

Take the cost of shipping one truckload of freight from Fort Worth, TX to a convention center in Chicago. Include Fuel, driver, use of tractor, use of trailer, road use taxes, and wear and tear on the vehicle for the 800 mile trip. From this number, subtract the cost of two union guys spending 20 minutes on forklifts unloading this freight at a Chicago convention center. Assume that this cost is lower than the freight cost. Sometimes it isn't. The leftover amount is the maximum monthly pay for any union leader.

No athlete can earn more than 7 times the annual salary of that guy from your high school who was a bust in the NFL draft, but who never learned how to do anything in school, and now spends his weekends watching his high school and college glory days on old videos.

No government official who leaves "Public Service" (ahem) to become a lobbyist can earn one cent more than the earnings of one of Fort Worth's Rosedale/Lancaster street whores. Equal work, equal pay.

Friday, August 28, 2009

Russell Roberts on The Unimaginable

Several years ago, Russell Roberts, half of the George Mason University Economics blogging duo Cafe Hayek, wrote a parable called "The Choice: A Fable Of Free Trade And Protectionism".


(I found it at Half Price Books in Dallas a few years ago. Good stuff.)


At one point in the book, Perfesser Roberts needed to come up with the most idiotic Straw Man argument he could think of to illustrate that destroying things so you could make them again doesn't improve the economy.

He had to think for a long time. He wanted something so bizarre, so unlikely, and so... so.... so.... freakin' dumb that anyone reading his book would get his point and be forced to agree.


So what scenario did he think of, waaaaay back in 2005, to show that cleaning up after vandalism doesn't create wealth? Here goes....


"Let's flip it around. Suppose you wake up in the morning, and there's no new car in the driveway - just the same one you've been driving. But the president makes a similar speech. A government official will be coming to get your car and drive it off a cliff, where the remains will be buried. Sure, you're going to have to buy a new car but employment in the U.S. auto industry will increase, and prosperity will follow, won't it? Or will it? Will that policy make America richer or poorer?"
"It would make Detroit richer."

"That's right. The auto industry would expand. But the country as a whole would be poorer for it. You don't get rich destroying things. You get poorer."


There you have it, written in 2005. Irony is now dead. Irony has achieved room temperature, and is pushing up daisies. You can put a morgue tag on its toe.


Russell Roberts sat down with his doctorate in economics, and tried to imagine a government program so dumb that no one would dare try it.


He failed.


If you didn't hit the link at the top, after giving us the excerpt from his book Perfesser Roberts goes on to write "Cash for Clunkers has ended for now. It was an intellectual travesty. I am grateful that it was poorly administered. It might have done even more damage."

Thursday, August 27, 2009

The Obligatory Post About Ted Kennedy

I'm a huge fan on the movie "Shattered Glass", a film in which journalist Michael Kelly is portrayed as a brilliant editor for The New Republic magazine. After leaving TNR, Kelly went on to edit several other news and opinion journals and was eventually killed while covering the war in Iraq.
I immediately bought a copy of "Things Worth Fighting For", a collection of Kelly's collected journalism pieces. One of my favorites in the book is this gem, which was originally published in GQ. The link is much shorter than the original. I hope you'll go there and get back to me. It's pure, undiluted greatness.

Next, imagine if GW Bush had done this....





But, as Shakespeare said (or maybe it was Christopher Marlowe), the evil that men do lives after them, the good is oft interred with their bones. Here's Nick Gillespie, of Reason magazine on Kennedy's major accomplishment:

There is, buried deep within Kennedy's legislative legacy, a different set of policies worth exhuming and examining, precisely because they were truly a break with the normal way of doing business in Washington. During the 1970s, Kennedy was instrumental in deregulating the interstate trucking industry and airline ticket prices, two innovations that have vastly improved the quality of life in America even as—or more precisely, because—they pushed power out of D.C. and into the pocketbooks of everyday Americans. We are incalculably richer and better off because something like actual prices replaced regulatory fiat in trucking and flying. Because they do not fit the Ted Kennedy narrative preferred by his admirers and detractors alike, these accomplishments rarely get mentioned in stories about the late senator. But they are exactly the sort of legislation that we should be celebrating in his honor, and using as a model in today's debates about health care, education, and virtually every aspect of government action.



So at least he deregulated the trucking industry. I owe him a big one.

Here's a picture of him coming out of the swimming pool, shortly after killing somebody.

Multiple coats of high gloss Whitening to Instapundit for the collections of links.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Seen and Unseen 101, by Don Boudreaux

Here's a letter that Don Boudreaux, of George Mason University, sent to The Wall Street Journal:

Fred Hochberg, President of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S., says proudly that “the mandate of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (Ex-Im Bank) is to help create and sustain U.S. jobs by financing U.S. exports” (Letters, August 21). I’ve some questions – and answers – for Mr. Hochberg.

From where does the Ex-Im Bank get the dollars it spends to subsidize U.S. exports? (Answer: taxpayers.)

Would taxpayers not spend or invest these dollars if these dollars were not taxed away? (Answer: of course they would.)


Would not this spending and investing by less-onerously-taxed Americans not “help create and sustain U.S. jobs”? (Answer: of course it would.)


Is there anything particularly desirable about a job producing and selling output for export as opposed to a job producing and selling output for domestic consumption? (Answer: nope.)


Can you spend money more wisely than it can be spent by the taxpayers from whom it is confiscated? (Answer: no; you almost surely spend it less wisely.)

So at best the Ex-Im Bank creates jobs in export industries by destroying jobs in non-export industries.


Final question, then: Why does the Ex-Im exist?

Sincerely,Donald J. Boudreaux

(Answer to the final question: to transfer wealth from unsuspecting taxpayers and consumers to politically powerful corporations; the Ex-Im Bank exists only to supply corporate welfare.)


**************************************

Picture of Frederic Bastiat, author of "Things Seen And Unseen" came from here. The picture of the leadup to the Karate Kid Crane Kick came from here.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Yet another call for a new Biblical Canon

I'm fascinated by what made it into various Bibles, and what didn't. I'm equally fascinated by the committee process that elevated these books to the category of "inspired", and why some of us blindly accept some of the decisions of those committees, and reject other decisions by the same committees.

The Council Of Hippo, for instance, solidified the basic Christian canon in 393 A.D. They also voted in favor of clerical celibacy. 1600 years later, Protestants will take up arms if you try to remove the Gospel Of John from the bible, but they would do the same if you suggest that preachers shouldn't marry. Why do we trust The Council Of Hippo on some issues but not others?
Plus, there's a lot of disagreement over what is inspired and what isn't. There were a multitude of gospels, epistles, apocalypses and such being passed around in the early days of the church.



(For the best layperson's guide to everything I've said so far, see Bart Ehrman's Jesus, Interrupted. You really must hit that link. It's an excellent interview.)

Here's a handy chart that shows what the many branches of Christianity accept as "Bible". Click on the chart, and it will take you to an interactive site that explains who deleted what, added what, and why. "God's Word", as you sometimes hear it called, is open for a lot of debate.


What's in Your Bible? Find out at BibleStudyMagazine.com

Which gets me to my point.... This afternoon, a friend of mine named Gene Elliott sent me and several other folks an interesting email. (Hit the Gene Elliot label below to read some of his outstanding political rants)
Here goes:

Let's edit and update the bible. Our bible is frozen in a time warp ranging from 1,900 to 2,700 years. Since then there has been immense progress in science and morals. For example, we now know the earth is not flat and that the sun does not revolve around it. We no longer accept slavery as the norm and do not accept repression of women, both of which were previously accepted.

If we dared to use our minds with current knowledge, what would we edit out of the bible? What would we add. Sunday, in a conversation with (deleted) on this subject, he enlightened me by suggesting that some of Martin Luther King's sermons might make positive contribution to our new, imaginary bible.

As John Spong has suggested, some of the things in the bible that we now know are ridiculous are what drives away educated, intelligent people from Christianity. What would you edit out of the bible if you could do so? Even though we can not literally edit and reprint the bible, we can think about and discuss what we think would advance the cause of Christianity and improve lives if things were removed or added.

If any of you are offended by this, I accept whatever criticism you wish to direct my way. I have never been accused of being a diplomat.

Gene

Well, this is what happens when the Southern Baptists kick people out of their convention.

What would I delete? Well, the book of Revelation doesn't make a lick of sense. The Gospels would do well to kick out John and add Thomas. If the Old Testament book of Numbers was inspired, it was inspired by Nyquil. I could go on and on, but what would be the point?

In the meantime, let me suggest one addition. This is from novelist Tom Robbins, Skinny Legs And All, page 167.

"Early religions were like muddy ponds with lots of foliage. Concealed there, the fish of the soul could splash and feed. Eventually, however, religions became aquariums. Then, hatcheries. from farm fingerling to frozen fish stick is a short swim.

....If one yearns to see the face of the Divine, one must break out of the aquarium, escape the fish farm, to go swim up the wild cataracts, dive in deep fjords. One must explore the labyrinth of the reef, the shadows of lily pads. How limiting, how insulting to think of God as a benevolent warden, an absentee hatchery manager who imprisons us in the "comfort" of artificial pools, where intermediaries sprinkle our restrictive waters with sanitized flakes of processed nutriment.


A longing for the Divine is intrinsic in Homo sapiens. (For all we know, it is innate in squirrels, dandelions, and diamond rings, as well.) We approach the Divine by enlarging our souls and lighting up our brains. To expedite those two things may be the mission of our existence.
Well and good. But such activity runs counter to the aspirations of commerce and politics. Politics is the science of domination, and persons in the process of enlargement and illumination are notoriously difficult to control. Therefore, to protect its vested interests, politics usurped religion a very long time ago. Kings bought off priests with land and adornments. Together, they drained the shady ponds and replaced them with fish tanks. The walls of the tanks were constructed of ignorance and superstition, held together with fear. They called the tanks "synagogues" or "churches" or "mosques". After the tanks were in place, nobody talked much about soul anymore. Instead, they talked about spirit. Soul is hot and heavy. Spirit is cool, abstract, detached. Soul is connected to the earth and its waters. Spirit is connected to the sky and its gases. Out of the gases springs fire. Firepower. It has been observed that the logical extension of all politics is war. Once religion became political, the exercise of it, too, could be said to lead sooner or later to war. "War is hell." Thus, religious belief propels us straight to hell. History unwaveringly supports this view. (Each modern religion has boasted that it and it alone is on speaking terms with the Deity, and its adherents have been quite willing to die - or kill - to support its presumptuous claims.)

Not every silty bayou could be drained, of course. The soulfish that bubbled and snapped in the few remaining ponds were tagged "mystics". they were regarded as mavericks, exotic and inferior. If they splashed too high, they were thought to be threatening and in need of extermination. The fearful flounders in the tanks, now psychologically dependent upon addictive spirit flakes, had forgotten that once upon a time they, too, had been mystical.

Religion is nothing but institutionalized mysticism. The catch is, mysticism does not lend itself to institutionalization. The moment we attempt to organize mysticism, we destroy its essence. Religion, then, is mysticism in which the mystical has been killed. Or, at least diminished."

*****************************************
That's the great Tom Robbins.

Infallible? No.
Inerrant? No.
Inspired by God? No.

Better than, say, Leviticus? Definitely.

Picture of the Human Aquarium came from here.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Thomas Sowell on Global Cooling, Barack Obama, and Velcro

Please stand for this month's reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas....

Economist Thomas Sowell, the smartest man in the world now that Milton Friedman is dead, has given us an assortment of new scriptures to ponder.
As Saint Thomas has grown old, his offerings to his disciples have become shorter, but no less pithy. We should treasure them, ponder them, and hold them in our hearts. I'll begin with his observations on the weather:

New York and Chicago have both recently had their coldest June in generations. If they had had their hottest month, it would have been trumpeted from the media 24/7 by global warming zealots. But the average surface temperature of the earth has not changed in more than a decade, according to the Cato Institute.

This, of course, is true. But as we have often said from this very pulpit, "What profiteth a man from cooling, when the fear of warming hath been shouted from the rooftops?"
Let us continue with the next verse:

Different people have very different reactions to President Barack Obama. Those who listen to his rhetoric are often inspired, while those who follow what he actually does are often appalled.

And yet The False Prophet Of Change still has the support of those who would close the abomination of Gitmo, those who would have us beat our swords into plowshares, and those who would preach marriage to the sodomites (not that there's anything wrong with that).
Saint Thomas continues with another verse:

With Velcro and other modern adhesives available, can't someone design a boxing glove that doesn't require fights to be stopped in the middle of a round so that loose tape can be repaired? Often the break in the action changes the whole tempo of the fight and can affect the outcome.

We must remember that Saint Thomas's ways are not our ways. If he says we need Velcro inside boxing gloves, let us develop Velcro boxing gloves. He's been right about everything else.

The man has spoken.

Thus endeth the reading from The Gospel According To Saint Thomas.

You may be seated.

Those of you interested in other lessons from this sermon series from the writings of Saint Thomas may go here.

Read This

Go here.
Read it.
Answer all questions.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Libertarians and The 9-12 Project

Being a member of the Libertarian Party puts one in an interesting situation.

We share a few values and beliefs with the stated goals and values of many Republicans - smaller government, 2nd amendment rights, property rights, a desire for lower taxes, and a distrust of the Obama administration. I've helped staff the Libertarian booth at many a Fort Worth Gun Show, and a couple of the Tea Party protests.

We also have some overlap with the stated goals and values of many Democrats - the right to privacy, a general suspicion of military adventures overseas, a desire for separation of church and state. We also see a need to reform drug laws. Like many Democrats, we distrust the Obama administration, but are free to be more vocal about it. I wasn't able to participate last year, but the Libertarians always sponsor a float in the Dallas Gay/Lesbian rights parade.

Then there's the 9-12 Project. This group was started by talk show host Glenn Beck, in an effort to get America back to the values we supposedly shared on the day after 9-11.


The Tarrant County Libertarians have been asked to participate in a 9-12 parade (to be held on, you guessed it, 9-12) in downtown Fort Worth. Since our enemy's enemy is our friend, we've agreed to participate. Here's how I see our points of agreement and disagreement on their 9 Principles and 12 Values, and I'm sure that other local Libertarians will give us their opinions soon:

The Nine Principles

1. America Is Good. I'm reminded of Mark Twain's quip about the phrase "My Country, right or wrong". Twain said "My Country, right or wrong" was like saying "My Mother, drunk or sober". If institutions or committees or countries can be good or bad, yeah, America is pretty good. But no country is always good. Not ours. Not yours. Not even neutral Switzerland. Not even the Vatican. This is, at best, a meaningless statement thrown in to dare the other side to deny it.

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life. Which God, or Gods? The 9-12'ers like to talk about the Judeo-Christian God, a being who went through some severe personality changes over the last 6,000 years, and whose Jewish and Christian devotees have some mutually exclusive claims about the afterlife. Do they mean Yahweh? Jesus? Allah? Zeus? The Flying Spaghetti Monster? And what does believing in God(s) have to do with opposition to The Teleprompter Jesus?
There's one other difficulty....I've never known anyone who had God as the center of their life. Not one.

3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday. Ok. A worthy goal.

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government. One small problem here, and that's Glen Beck's divorce. But I like the idea of the family unit being the ultimate authority.

5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
I disagree with this one. People could once make the claim that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". But when laws are passed that have nothing to do with fairness, rights, or morality, but to provide benefits to contributors and cronies, then one can longer have an instintive knowledge of the law. (See section IIA of this link.) For instance, I should have the right to import whatever I want into this country, as long as it doesn't do physical harm to others. I should be able to break the regulations that prevent me from doing so. I'm above those laws because they were written by whores.

6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results. Yep. Well said.

7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable. Agreed. I'm still waiting on somebody, anybody, to tell me what giving part of my income to a gang of Chicago Machine Politicians has to do with Christian Charity.

8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion. Agreed. Hence the existence of this site.

9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me. Yep. If it really matters to you who is elected President? Then the government has gotten too big. It should be no more important than choosing a lawn care service.

The 12 Values
* Honesty - No problem there.
* Reverence - Why should we automatically be reverent toward anything or anybody? It's like when Bush Jr. kept saying he had respect for Islam. If you have respect for Islam, you bow toward Mecca a few times every day, you abstain from eating pork, and you believe that The Prophet flew to Medina on a winged horse that had the face of a man. That's what it means to "respect" Islam. I don't respect it. You probably don't either. It's a belief system that isn't worthy of reverence.
* Hope - I wish they would replace Hope with Effort. Anyone can sit on the couch and hope.
* Thrift - Ok.
* Humility - Have you ever met a blogger with an excess of humility? I haven't either. Humble people usually don't ride in parades. Nix this one.
* Charity - Ok.
* Sincerity - Ties in with honesty, and is therefore redundant.
* Moderation - This one is ok, as long as I don't have to be excessive about it.
* Hard Work - Ok. Although some of the best work isn't that hard.
* Courage - Ok.
* Personal Responsibility - Ok.
* Gratitude - Ok.

I dunno how all the other Libertarians feel about it, but that's enough overlap for me to help with the 9-12 parade.
I still prefer the Libertarian 5 to the Beck 9-12. It's much more elegant and easy to remember.

Another modest wager

Here's Jonathan Adler, in National Review's "The Corner" blog:

Time to Change the Subject?
Let's see now. Deficit projections are once again on the rise as Obama's approval rating falls. Health-care reform is faltering, climate-change legislation is stalled, and David Axlerod is under fire for his conflicts of interest.
Seems like a good time to change the subject.
Contents of the CIA inspector general's report on harsh interrogation methods have already leaked, so it won't do the trick.
If I were a betting man, I'd expect something else to drop Monday or Tuesday.

I agree. I visit Talking Points Memo almost every day (they're one of the biggest Democrat clearinghouses for leftover Bush scandals), and they've had the same headline for about 48 hours. I'll bet a scandal from the Bush boom is exposed sometime before lunch on Monday.

Would you buy aluminum siding from these people?

A stranger calls you on the phone, trying to sell aluminum siding for your home. You don't want any aluminum siding. He's very persistent, and gives you the addresses of other homes in the neighborhood where he's done some work. He hints that aluminum siding will soon be a neighborhood requirement, and that you might as well buy the stuff now.

You tell him you'll get back with him later. On your way to work the next day, you check out the houses the salesman mentioned. They look horrible. Panels are flapping in the breeze. The colors don't match. Some panels are already missing.

One homeowner is mowing his yard, and you ask him about the siding. He says he hates it.

Now, imagine your motivations for not wanting to purchase any aluminum siding from those clowns. Then imagine reading this analysis of why you didn't want to make the purchase:

"Racial anxiety," guessed New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
"Nihilism," theorized Time's Joe Klein.
"The crazy tree blooms in every moment of liberal ascendancy," historian Rick Perlstein proclaimed in the Washington Post.


No, there's a much simpler explanation. This is what I see when I look across the landscape....

I interview kids with diplomas from public high schools who can't fill out a job application or read a tape measure.
I read about the V.A. hospitals.
The U.S. Post Office can't deliver Sports Illustrated to my home when the Dallas Cowboys are on the cover. They seem to have a theft problem.
The Department Of Energy.
The Department Of Agriculture.
THE FORKLIFTS
The Middle East Military Money Pit.
More than a BILLION dollars has been spent on Fort Worth's Trinity River project, and as best I can tell, they haven't moved a shovel of dirt yet.
Barney Frank.
Senator Charles Grassley (Ethanol, Iowa)
49-year old government retirees.
The 3-month Cash For Clunkers program ran out of money in 5 days. The website keeps crashing. They're bringing people in from the FAA to help, 7 days a week. Auto dealers are in a blind freakin' panic.
Social Security is as broke as the 10 Commandments.

The Town Hall meeting protests aren't about racial anxiety, nihilism, or the fruit of the Crazy Tree. They're about track records, incompetence, and fiscal sanity.

Plus, Barack Obama isn't the only person who can read Saul Alinsky. Check out Alinsky's Rules For Radicals when you get a chance.

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Another apology for using bad numbers

For the last few months I've been sending out apocalyptic messages about our Seven Trillion Dollar budget deficit, the amount I thought we were going to be short for the next 10 years.




My bad.

The true amount is $9 trillion. Whoever combined this Washington Post chart with the Obama logo wasted his time, for it's now inaccurate.



The nine-trillion dollar amount assumes that Obamacare will be "budget neutral", but that's the number I'm running with from now on.

Please stay tuned for future apologies.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

NO AID OR COMFORT TO THE ENEMY, NO WAY !

I'm probably as patriotic as the next person.
I think that we in the U.S. probably have the best system of government, as long as we don't convert it into a feed trough for friends of our upper level government employees.
I stand up for the National Anthem, and sing loudly.
I learned a long time ago that declaring perpetual allegiance to a concept is a bad idea. Anyone wanting you to stand up and recite a pledge is probably manipulating you. That's why I don't like the idea of a "pledge" of allegiance to a flag, or any other kind of loyalty oath.
Our national monuments are better than anyone else's national monuments.
I appreciate veterans.

Then there's this:

This is a trailer owned be Central Transport, a "Less Than Truckload" freight company. All of their trailers have the same flag and slogan on the back door.

(One other thing I believe in, and this comes from being a Boy Scout....if you're going to put the flag on something, you're supposed to keep it clean. And if you're going to fly the flag, and the flag gets tattered, you're supposed to take it down and burn it. If the right-wingers ever get their way, the driver of this truck will be prosecuted for flag desecration. Freakin' filthy. )

Now let's get to the point. I need for someone to explain this slogan to me, using little bitty words that I can understand.

"Support Our Troops Whenever We Go...."
Are the people at Central Transport encouraging us to support our troops whenever we go to war? Whenever the CT trucks are rolling? Whenever we go....potty?
This is vague, and needs clarification.

"No Aid of Comfort To the Enemy - No Way!"
That first sentence was a masterpiece of clarity compared to this one.
Are Central Transport drivers occasionally asked to attend housewarming fundraisers for Osama bin Laden? Are the CT freight terminals surrounded by Al-qaeda operatives who want to come inside for coffee and donuts? Do ABF, Estes, SAIA, and YRC sometimes try to make a fast buck by shipping nukes into Afghanistan? And Central Transport doesn't want any part of it?

I'm just wondering.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Let me get this straight

My mother sent me this today:

Let me get this straight.
Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it,
passed by a Congress that hasn't read it,
signed by a president who smokes,
funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes,
overseen by a surgeon general who is obese,
and financed by a country that is nearly broke.
What could possibly go wrong?

Mama, I'm not worried about it going wrong. I'm worried about what happens if it works exactly as planned.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Teleprompter Jesus

TELEPROMPTER JESUS

If you've got a problem,
Or even think you might,
Just tell him, and he's on it
He'll make everything all right.


He's the D.C. Santa Claus,
He'll meet every need,
He can stop the polar thaws,
cause the oceans to recede.



(Voter Chorus)
Give us everything we want,
We know you want to please us,
If they type it, you will read it,
You're the Teleprompter Jesus !



Cash For Clunkers, Bailouts,
Porkulus and TARP !
Took G.M. and Chrysler,
and he's still looking sharp !



Geithner and Pelosi,
Biden, Harry Reid,
Gonna work together to get
Everything we need.


(Children's Chorus, groaning under the weight of debt)
Give them everything they want,
But if you want to please us,
Make our parents pay their share,
You're the Teleprompter Jesus !



Nine Trillion, Ten Trillion,
Eleven Trillion debt,
As long as China's lending,
Then he ain't finished yet.



Spending all this money,
It's really not so hard,
When he puts the charges on
our childrens' credit card.



(Groaning Chorus of Debtor-Fetuses)
Give them just a little less,
We know you want to please us,
Don't read everything they type,
Dear Teleprompter Jesus !



Jesus fed five thousand
With some fishes and some bread,
Our Man could print a trillion bucks
With one nod of his head.


Gonna spread the wealth around
At least that's the plan,
It won't cost you a penny,
You don't make two-fifty grand.



(Final Chorus, repeat and fade)
Give us everything we want,
We know you want to please us,
If they type it, you will read it,
You're the Teleprompter Jesus !



I've got a basic guitar chord pattern down for this, still working on the melody.
Pics from
here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here.

So many topics, so little time....

I have blogger friends who occasionally claim that they don't have anything to write about. I repeat....I have blogger friends who claim that they don't have anything to write about.

We've been dumped into the middle of the most amazing, hog-stomping, buck-raking, fleece The Sheeple circus anyone could hope for. Anyone that who can type should get out of bed in the morning thanking god for the chance to be alive in the year of our Lord 2009.

Here's everything I'd be ranting about at great length today if I had more time to do so.....

The Netroots folks who put the Democrats in charge of the House, the Senate, and The White House have been strangely silent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. What happened to THE FIERCE MORAL URGENCY OF NOW that we heard so much about until January? Write a post about how and where THE FIERCE MORAL URGENCY was lost, and the efforts of the White House janitorial and landscaping staff to find it. Photoshop a milk carton to show TFMU as a missing person.

Roger Kimball has latched onto the Yale University Press decision to censor the book about the censorying of the Danish cartoons of Muhammed. The plot is thickening. The book had already been vetted by Yale's legal staff, and some Islamic scholars had already approved of the book and its contents. But Yale has some financial relationships with some nasty places in the Middle East. Ye shall know the Veritas....

Ron Paul wants to audit The Fed. Copy the entire editorial onto this site. No snarky comments allowed.

George Will thinks the people who run the United States Lottery programs have no business moralizing about online poker. Write a post about the people who subsidize the lottery, vs the people who would contribute towards online poker. Or, God help us all, blackjack.

Charles Krauthammer takes up the idea that government involvement in health care would save money. He has a good time with it. But not as much fun as I would have, bringing up defense contractors, $800 screwdrivers, $5,000 toilet seats, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, VA Hospitals, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Post Office, and every other government money pit.

Little Green Footballs 2.0 has a funny picture of Obama as The Joker as a Doctor. Follow up with this gem where they're saying that if you don't think the Obama/Joker posters are racist, you're a racist. Print it as is, but delete the text. Ask for captions.

It seems that people aren't dressing properly when they approach the thrones of their lords and masters at the Healthcare Town Hall meetings. How dare the serfs wear a ballcap while addressing a U.S. senator? Go Medieval. Explain for the 10,000th time that these are not our leaders. They are our employees. In a truly just society, electing a president or a senator would be like deciding whether to keep the old lawn service or hire a new one.

Ed Morrisey continues The Obamateurism Of The Week. Link to it, then "share it" on Facebook.

There's a new documentary about Saint Albert, The Goracle Of Music City and radical environmentalism. It's called "Not Evil, Just Wrong". Post the trailer. Clear the Comment Field for Cedric Katesby.

ABC's John Stossel is understandably puzzled by the Feds raiding medical marijuana dispensaries in California. What were you expecting from the new Hope and Change administration? Change?

Professor Bainbridge contrasts the Healthcare Town Hall crazies with previous crazies. Compare all of these groups to Martin Luther and the church door, various clerics who waited three days barefoot in the snow to see the pope, Buddhists igniting themselves during the Viet Nam war, and every other performance art protest. Sometimes a letter to the editor isn't enough.

From the Talking Points Memo, on The Family, the conservative Christian lobbying group....
The right-wing Christian Broadcasting Network does damage control for C Street, explaining that the real question isn't, how many affairs were covered up, but rather, "how many affairs were thwarted." These are the guys that Nevada's John Ensign, Mississippi's Chip Pickering, and South Carolina's Mark Sanford have been hanging out with. Quietly and calmly ask why The Family has a tax-exempt status, when all they do is lobby congressmen and senators. And provide meetup places for their administrative staff.

Send people HERE. Warn them that they will wander around in there for days.

Valarie Jarrett, one of Obama's spokesmuppets, was recently booed and hissed at a Netroots Nation conference. The Netroots people aren't happy that Obama has kept almost EVERY objectionable George W. Bush war policy and program in place. Write a breathless expose which proves that Obama is merely a front for Karl Rove. Dick Cheney is the guy who programs Obama's Teleprompter.

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Miko Andres, the world's youngest sharpshooter

From The Telegraph in the UK, where even the police don't have guns:


Pictured here at the Armscor Shooting Club, Miko loads, aims and fires his semiautomatic weapon at moving targets.
Complete with a gun belt, shades and a tailored shirt, Miko travels across the country participating in national junior competitions.

Competing against children ten years his senior (in the 9-17 age group), Miko is now looking to travel to America to test his talents.
For Miko's father, Cresencio "Mike" Pascua Andres JR, the boy's passion and natural ability for practical shooting has been carefully monitored by his family and shooting community.
"It is within the family and friends that Miko was influenced to love and enjoy the practical shooting sport," says Mike. "Because of his interest, we took turns in teaching, training and coaching him on the basics of the sport."
Practical shooting is one of the fastest growing sports in the Philippines and Miko took up the sport in January this year.
Seven months later, Miko is fully versed in the strict laws of the sport.
Despite the obvious dangers and concerns raised over a boy of six handling such a weapon, Mike is eager to stress that safety is always at the forefront of his mind.


Click here to read the rest of the article, which, BTW, reads like it's been translated from Choctaw to Philippino to English by someone using Google Translate. A rarity for British journalism.
Here's a random video of Miko in action on the range:



A coat of Whitening to Perry De Haviland of Samizdata, who congratulates Miko on not being British.

And on the seventh day, Donald Boudreaux rested....

George Mason University economics professor Donald Boudreaux has gone on a tear. The last few days on his Cafe Hayek blog have included some of the best posts I've ever read.

First, he has to correct Harold Meyerson's assertion that American manufacturing is declining. It isn't. We're combining parts from all over the world with our parts. That's what we do at my Jukt Micronics gig. If you're so inclined, you can go here to read an ancient post of mine about Harold Meyerson. Before this blog was two months old, I already knew I'd be needing a "Harold Meyerson" post label.

Professor Boudreaux then went to bed, but apparently slept fitfully. Perhaps he knew that there were still some mercantilist rent-seekers who hadn't been properly bitch-slapped. We will never know what motivated him, and it's not our place to ask the great man why, but The Professor got up early the next morning and explained to the English-speaking world that if you "protect" some of your citizen-manufacturers, all you're doing is making their products more expensive than they should be. This, in the long run, helps a small number of your wealthy citizen-manufacturers, but it hurts most of your citizen-citizens.

Later that afternoon, someone defiled Professor Boudreaux's comment field with disturbing news about what Beijing was doing to protect Chinese manufacturers. The Professor took off his academic robe, placed his chalk in the tray at the bottom of the board, and delivered a Karate Kid Crane Kick to the commenter. (I've added the commenter and his family to the prayer list at Broadway Baptist Church, and wish him a speedy recovery.)

Finally, before embarking on a much-deserved Sabbath day of rest, The Professor explains why there's no such thing as a free subsidy. Whether it's cotton, soybeans, corn, tobacco, or those things for which you can trade in a Clunker, someone is paying for every subsidy. And that would be you.

The posts about the Whole Foods boycotts are the dessert.

Brilliant, brilliant stuff. I want to go to George Mason U., and follow The Professor around while he teaches the multitudes. Maybe spend some time fishing on the Sea Of Galilee with him. Hold his coat while he heals some lepers. And then when Obama has him arrested for heresy, deny three times that I ever knew him. Then retire to my home village to write The Gospel of Saint Don.

It could happen.

William Mostow makes a controversial statement about rubbing dirt into wounds, long before results can be seen

Here's William Mostow, in the September issue of Liberty magazine:

It's interesting to see the political correctness with which free-market advocates respond to current statist interventions in the American economy. Even on talk radio and Fox, commentators express reservations about the stimulus plan and the government takeover of various industries but then indicate that time will tell whether any of these plans will work. Our president's intelligence is invariably mentioned as a preface to any criticisms of his policies.

If a patient were to tell me that he had been advised to rub dirt into a fresh wound, as a physician, my response would not be, "Well, I come from a different school of thought on wound care, so I'm pessimistic about the outcome of your treatment. But I guess we'll find out in a few weeks whether I'm right." Rather, I'd say, "All science and experience on the subject indicates that rubbing dirt in your wound is foolish, and bound to make your condition worse." So why aren't the same standards applied to economic arguments when the evidence is just as powerful?

Too many people see the present debate as one conducted among experts from different schools of thought. It is the obligation of anyone possessing any knowledge of classical economics to unequivocally describe our policymakers as either fools or charlatans, and their intellectual backers in academia and the media as quacks.

Well, we'll see. Time will tell. It's obviously too early to see if printing money to pass out to supporters is going to be effective or not.
Just because all the other government interventions have been boondoggles and financial disasters doesn't mean this one has to be. I mean, if you found some dirt that someone had thrown penicillin and Neosporin into, that dirt could help a wound, couldn't it? It really could happen.

My Political Opponent Is Hitler

Zomblog has documentation of the recent "My Political Opponent Is Hitler" trend that Speaker Pelosi has been lamenting.
Kind of hard to argue with.
Point conceded.
It's happening.

Friday, August 14, 2009

John Donatich, Yale University Press, The Jewel Of Medina, and the whimper of whipped dogs.

About a year ago, Random House pulled the plug on a novel about the prophet Mohammed and his child bride.
When time permits, please compare the Weasel Words in this old press release about "The Jewel Of Medina" by Sherry Jones, and John Donatich's whimpering in yesterday's NYT about "The Cartoons That Shook The World", a Yale University Press book about the cartoons published in Denmark that won't be published in Yale's book about the cartoons. (See previous post.)

After sending out advance editions of the novel THE JEWEL OF MEDINA, we received in response, from credible and unrelated sources, cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment.
We felt an obligation to take these concerns very seriously. We consulted with security experts as well as with scholars of Islam, whom we asked to review the book and offer their assessments of potential reactions.

I'll bet you dollars against donuts that the security experts and "scholars of Islam" in the Jewel Of Medina controversy overlap with the security experts and schoolmarms that John Donatich allowed to squash the Danish cartoon book.
These people are authoritative, yet anonymous.

We stand firmly by our responsibility to support our authors and the free discussion of ideas, even those that may be construed as offensive by some.

No, you don't. You didn't. You can't say that any more. You really can't. The point of publishing something like this is to offer another point of view, change people's minds, provoke a discussion, and possibly offend people. You caved in. You didn't support your authors and the free discussion of ideas. Notice the Weasel Words "may", "construed", and "some".

However, a publisher must weigh that responsibility against others that it also bears, and in this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel. The author and Ballantine subsequently agreed to terminate the agreement, with the understanding that the author would be free to publish elsewhere, if she so chose.

- The Random House Publishing Group

So who are these people that can tell Yale and Random House what to censor? Who elected them? Do they even exist? If you look at the article on the cartoon book, you'll see that they only way to learn what they said is by promising not to tell anyone.

Amazing.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Yale University Press bans controversial cartoons of Muhammad in new book about controversial cartoons of Muhammad.

I don't expect anyone to read this ridiculously long post. I'm just ranting. This is from The New York Times, with a fresh coat of Whitening for Hot Air....

It’s not all that surprising that Yale University Press would be wary of reprinting notoriously controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in a forthcoming book.

Actually, it is surprising. And it's funny. When I was in the literary retail racket, I didn't hesitate to sell Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" or "American Psycho" by Brett Easton Ellis, or to host autographings by the Roe vs Wade lawyer, all despite some threats. You hire a security guard, and go on with your job.

Full Disclosure: I'm not proud of it, but I also sold a lot of Danielle Steel novels.

After all, when the 12 caricatures were first published by a Danish newspaper a few years ago and reprinted by other European publications, Muslims all over the world angrily protested, calling the images — which included one in which Muhammad wore a turban in the shape of a bomb — blasphemous.
That makes it sound like an immediate cause and effect relationship. It wasn't until a group of outrage-mongers produced a drawing of Big Mo's face on the body of a pig, several months after the initial publication of the cartoons, that the "Muslims all over the world angrily protested".

In the Middle East and Africa some rioted, burning and vandalizing embassies; others demanded a boycott of Danish goods; a few nations recalled their ambassadors from Denmark. In the end at least 200 people were killed.

That's what happens when you spread ink on paper to make satirical comments about all-powerful beings who can't take up for themselves.

So Yale University and Yale University Press consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous:

Let's get real here....Is there ANY doubt in your mind what that group is going to recommend?

The book, “The Cartoons That Shook the World,” should not include the 12 Danish drawings that originally appeared in September 2005.

This is like writing a book about pencil sharpeners, but being told that you can't mention, you know, those devices with rotating blades that, you know what I'm talking about? they, like, fit on the end of wooden writing instruments, and you rotate them so that, you know, it gives them a fine point?

What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included, specifically, a drawing for a children’s book; an Ottoman print; and a sketch by the 19th-century artist Gustave Doré of Muhammad being tormented in Hell, an episode from Dante’s “Inferno” that has been depicted by Botticelli, Blake, Rodin and Dalí.

This is what we now call academic freedom. It's why they get tenure. It's why people who work in that environment have jobs for life. So they don't have to worry about offending people who think their god(s) can't take up for themselves.

The book’s author, Jytte Klausen, a Danish-born professor of politics at Brandeis University, in Waltham, Mass., reluctantly accepted Yale University Press’s decision not to publish the cartoons. But she was disturbed by the withdrawal of the other representations of Muhammad. All of those images are widely available, Ms. Klausen said by telephone, adding that “Muslim friends, leaders and activists thought that the incident was misunderstood, so the cartoons needed to be reprinted so we could have a discussion about it.” The book is due out in November.
I can't wait to open this book and dive into the Politically Correct Sensitivityspeak that Yale is going to dump into the preface. Can't wait. Will reprint it here.

John Donatich, the director of Yale University Press, said by telephone that the decision was difficult, but the recommendation to withdraw the images, including the historical ones of Muhammad, was “overwhelming and unanimous.” The cartoons are freely available on the Internet and can be accurately described in words, Mr. Donatich said, so reprinting them could be interpreted easily as gratuitous.

John Donatich can be described in words also, but I'll refrain. Notice the weasel words "could" and "interpreted".

He noted that he had been involved in publishing other controversial books — like “The King Never Smiles” by Paul M. Handley, a recent unauthorized biography of Thailand’s current monarch — and “I’ve never blinked.” But, he said, “when it came between that and blood on my hands, there was no question.”

A lot of great work has been produced in dangerous circumstances. Tom Paine - Common Sense. William Tyndale - The English Bible. John Bunyan - Pilgrim's Progress. Voltaire scratching out plays in the Bastille.

The line ends with John Donatich.

Reza Aslan, a religion scholar and the author of “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam,” is a fan of the book but decided to withdraw his supportive blurb that was to appear in the book after Yale University Press dropped the pictures. The book is “a definitive account of the entire controversy,” he said, “but to not include the actual cartoons is to me, frankly, idiotic.” In Mr. Aslan’s view no danger remains. “The controversy has died out now, anyone who wants to see them can see them,” he said of the cartoons, noting that he has written and lectured extensively about the incident and shown the cartoons without any negative reaction. He added that none of the violence occurred in the United States: “There were people who were annoyed, and what kind of publishing house doesn’t publish something that annoys some people?”

Most academic writing is so dense and burdened with so much jargon that it really doesn't annoy anyone. No one finishes it who doesn't already agree with it.

“This is an academic book for an academic audience by an academic press,” he continued. “There is no chance of this book having a global audience, let alone causing a global outcry.” He added, “It’s not just academic cowardice, it is just silly and unnecessary.”

True. My younger brother is a history professor, and recently published a book through an academic press. He's got an interesting story to tell, he's a great writer, but the dang book costs $78.00. Not much chance of a global audience there.

Mr. Donatich said that the images were still provoking unrest as recently as last year when the Danish police arrested three men suspected of trying to kill the artist who drew the cartoon depicting Muhammad’s turban as a bomb. He quoted one of the experts consulted by Yale — Ibrahim Gambari, special adviser to the secretary general of the United Nations and the former foreign minister of Nigeria — as concluding: “You can count on violence if any illustration of the prophet is published. It will cause riots, I predict, from Indonesia to Nigeria.”

That swath of real estate from Indonesia to Nigeria doesn't include Yale, does it?

Aside from the disagreement about the images, Ms. Klausen said she was also disturbed by Yale’s insistence that she could read a 14-page summary of the consultants’ recommendations only if she signed a confidentiality agreement that forbade her from talking about them. “I perceive it to be a gag order,” she said, after declining to sign. While she could understand why some of the individuals consulted might prefer to remain unidentified, she said, she did not see why she should be precluded from talking about their conclusions.

I've beaten this dead horse elsewhere, but outside of a Townhall Healthcare meeting, is there any place on earth that stifles Free Speech more than academia? (I really do hate to sound so anti-intellectual, but damn....)

Linda Koch Lorimer, vice president and secretary of Yale University, who had discussed the summary with Ms. Klausen, said on Wednesday that she was merely following the original wishes of the consultants, some of whom subsequently agreed to be identified.

1. We're going to get people from all over the world to tell us what to do in this situation.
2. We're going to keep their recommendations (and identities) a secret.
3. The only way to read their recommendations is to promise that you won't ever, ever, ever discuss their recommendations.
4. Therefore, the 14-page document outlining their recommendations could be whatever the person who typed it wants it to be.
5. Brilliant.
....Other publishers, including The New York Times, chose not to print the cartoons or images of Muhammad when the controversy erupted worldwide in February 2006...
Face Of Muhammad cartoon came from here.

Why We Owe Barack Obama

Despite the Porkulus Program, Cash For Clunkers, The Bailouts, TARP, the unemployment rate, the cabinet that didn't want to pay taxes, the GM Takeover, and the fact that my dogs won't let me sleep....
In spite of all that, we still owe Barack Obama a huge debt of gratitude.

She Whose Name Is Not Spoken recently did a Q&A session someplace in Africa. It wasn't pretty.



If it weren't for Barack Obama.... I don't even want to think about it.

How long will this unfair competition be tolerated?

LittleGreenFootballs2 has some interesting stats about the results homeschoolers are getting relative to the public school system.

The most interesting part? Family income, whether the parent(s) have college degrees, or whether either parent have a teaching certificate has almost no impact on the homeschooled kids' test scores.

Next point of interest.... Think of all the miserable hours the public schools spend Teaching The Test.

Next question....If these kids aren't in a school system, where do they get their drugs?