It Gets Worse (Better)

It keeps getting worse for the Left.

Just take a look here and here.

BTW--

I just found out that if you have Adobe Flash, you can scroll your mouse over the graph and get additional date info. Cool! (Gawd, I'm so old!)

So, what's the line? Flipped before the end of the year? End of January? And why can't we just all learn to get along?

Understanding Obama,Pt. 2

Learning to think critically is an inherently difficult task. It is much easier to adopt the method of the goose, to whom the world is eternally new with every blink of the eye.

Children, especially, have problems with critical thinking. There is a wealth of information on Object Constancy, and the process a human goes through to begin to understand that there is a reality that exists outside of that human's intuition. (For a brief explanation of the nature and usefulness of critical thinking, see Facione, "Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts" pdf.)

The role played by Buckkey in this, the second part of the conversation between Buckley and noted Leftist Noah Chomsky, as interlocutor is in his need to repeatedly interrupt Chomsky for Chomsky's clarification. So much of what attempts to pass as an accepted position by the Left is so clearly fallacious, the experience of listening to Chomsky as he attempts to further refine his equivocal answers in the face of Buckley's questioning is instructive as an exercise.

For Chomsky, as in Obama, the mere presence of military troops is offensive--as an act of American Imperialism. Forget about the defense of the national interest. For the Left there are no conditions under which use of force is justifiable. Unless that force is used against the citizens of their own country. Note, especially, the attempt to dichotomise between the French and the Greek experience. Even though that we can define an evil is not justification for our opposition to that evil.

Climatequiddick

Chappaquiddick. A girl died. The man responsible became a revered legend of the Left.

Science used to be above the weight of one person's, or of a group's, opinion. Just as criminal investigations used to be above the weight of one person's--Ted Kennedy's--popularity or celebrity. Nothing in science was, or is, ever settled, because the scope of our inquiry was always changing as the amount and complexity of the world was slowly revealed to those engaged in scientific inquiry.

Just as a "group of scientists" engaged in a political movement that says Man Made Global Warming is settled science are exposed as frauds and hucksters, just as Ted Kennedy was revealed to be the killer of Mary Jo Kopechne, the lack of accountablility of either of these events will slowly fade away, until, I'm sure, we will all adhere to the notion that Man Made Global Warming is true, and that Ted Kennedy wasn't a cowardly killer.

Welcome to the most important scandal of the 21st century. And yet, chances are your kids have never even heard of it. Why? Unionized public school teachers. It's part of the Democrat agenda that there is Man Made Global Warming so that they may increase the amount of money they take from the private sector to feed the size of increasing state and federal budgets. It's for the kids. And social justice. And stuff.

Manufactured News

Chinese TV at least gets credit for trying to get the story, even if they had to manufacture their presentation. Contrast this with the complete neglect of Climatquiddick in your local paper or on network news shows.



I suppose it is a gift to live in a state where intellectual curiousity is in such little demand. Keeps the price low.

Understanding Obama

I've spent the last few weeks reading Noah Chomsky. After listening to the President at West Point, you need to listen to Professor Chomsky in order to understand the policy implications of the President's speech.

The two major features of the Left is its narcissism and its pessimism. It embodies the weakenesses of Malthus and Hobbes. The Left relies upon a cosmology that embraces contrariness as an indicator of the Left's special place of origin for important ideas. Common sense and long practise may be rejected out of hand as the problems that face us in our daily lives seem to remain those problems that were faced a year ago, a decade ago, a century ago; a world of nation-states at war, poverty and hunger and a need to provide for ones own self and family.

It is obvious to the Left that the necessary prescription for ending war, poverty, hunger and the individuals' responsibility to provide for himself is to take from the wealthy. That America is wealthy is evidence, not of its inherent goodness, but of its inherent evil.

We, as Americans, says the Left, cannot continue on a path of cowboy politics. We, as Americans, cannot be trusted in this world, since the values that we hold dear result in other countries' wealth being diminished through the comparison of who and what they are, to what we are.

The only solution is to diminish what we are, here in America, in order to achieve a world-view goal of social justice among all nations. Anything less is selfish. And evidence of an arrogant imperial world-view.

Listen to Professor Chomsky carefully. He is talking about the now and our future.

Cuchulain

If you are a long time reader of this space, you know my affection for Yeats.

He is our best poet. While I know that others will proffer others, the beauty of my system is, I don't need to pay attention to their remonstrations.

Just as if I were an advocate of Man Made Global Warming.

There is a poem of Yeats that I've always found particularly pleasing. The poem is called "Cuchulain's Fight with the Sea".

A man came slowly from the setting sun,
To Emer, raddling raiment in her dun,
And said, ‘I am that swineherd whom you bid
Go watch the road between the wood and tide,
But now I have no need to watch it more.’

Then Emer cast the web upon the floor,
And raising arms all raddled with the dye,
Parted her lips with a loud sudden cry.

That swineherd stared upon her face and said,
‘No man alive, no man among the dead,
Has won the gold his cars of battle bring.’

‘But if your master comes home triumphing
Why must you blench and shake from foot to crown?’

Thereon he shook the more and cast him down
Upon the web-heaped floor, and cried his word:
‘With him is one sweet-throated like a bird.’

‘You dare me to my face,’ and thereupon
She smote with raddled fist, and where her son
Herded the cattle came with stumbling feet,
And cried with angry voice, ‘It is not meet
To idle life away, a common herd.’

‘I have long waited, mother, for that word:
But wherefore now?’
‘There is a man to die;
You have the heaviest arm under the sky.’

‘Whether under its daylight or its stars
My father stands amid his battle-cars.’

‘But you have grown to be the taller man.’

‘Yet somewhere under starlight or the sun
My father stands.’
‘Aged, worn out with wars
On foot, on horseback or in battle-cars.’

‘I only ask what way my journey lies,
For He who made you bitter made you wise.’

‘The Red Branch camp in a great company
Between wood’s rim and the horses of the sea.

Go there, and light a camp-fire at wood’s rim;
But tell your name and lineage to him
Whose blade compels, and wait till they have found
Some feasting man that the same oath has bound.’

Among those feasting men Cuchulain dwelt,
And his young sweetheart close beside him knelt,
Stared on the mournful wonder of his eyes,
Even as Spring upon the ancient skies,
And pondered on the glory of his days;
And all around the harp-string told his praise,
And Conchubar, the Red Branch king of kings,
With his own fingers touched the brazen strings.

At last Cuchulain spake, ‘Some man has made
His evening fire amid the leafy shade.
I have often heard him singing to and fro,
I have often heard the sweet sound of his bow.
Seek out what man he is.’

One went and came.
‘He bade me let all know he gives his name
At the sword-point, and waits till we have found
Some feasting man that the same oath has bound.’

Cuchulain cried, ‘I am the only man
Of all this host so bound from childhood on.’

After short fighting in the leafy shade,
He spake to the young man, ‘Is there no maid
Who loves you, no white arms to wrap you round,
Or do you long for the dim sleepy ground,
That you have come and dared me to my face?’

‘The dooms of men are in God’s hidden place.’

‘Your head a while seemed like a woman’s head
That I loved once.’
Again the fighting sped,But now the war-rage in Cuchulain woke,
And through that new blade’s guard the old blade broke,
And pierced him.
‘Speak before your breath is done.’

‘Cuchulain I, mighty Cuchulain’s son.’

‘I put you from your pain. I can no more.’

While day its burden on to evening bore,
With head bowed on his knees Cuchulain stayed;
Then Conchubar sent that sweet-throated maid,
And she, to win him, his grey hair caressed;
In vain her arms, in vain her soft white breast.
Then Conchubar, the subtlest of all men,
Ranking his Druids round him ten by ten,
Spake thus: ‘Cuchulain will dwell there and brood
For three days more in dreadful quietude,
And then arise, and raving slay us all.
Chaunt in his ear delusions magical,
That he may fight the horses of the sea.’
The Druids took them to their mystery,
And chaunted for three days.

Cuchulain stirred,
Stared on the horses of the sea, and heard
The cars of battle and his own name cried;
And fought with the invulnerable tide.

Inno--

There was a limit on the number of characters on a comment I attempted to post to Innonimatus' comment to this post.

So, here it is:

Inno--

I take an onion at the dinner table and explain that Gross National Product is equal to C+I+G.

C references consumption. The total of goods and services supplied by the private sector.

I references investment. That money that is spent on capital goods. Capital goods are the buildings and machines that make the goods and services provided above.

G is the amount of money spent by various governments. Governments don't create consumption or investment. Governments spend money.

As the amount of money taken by government increases, the size of the onion is diminished. Remember, that the money that pays for government comes from those that either consume or invest.

Taxes increase as government increases. Otherwise you have a budget deficit. That means that government is spending more than the money it takes in from the private sector; that is consumption or investment.

Governments are different than your dead-beat brother-in-law. When your dead-beat brother-in-law borrows to much money, you can tell him to stuff it.

As C+I+G shifts from being driven by C and I, the role of government as a constituent part of GDP increases as government spending increases, in the face of declining C and I. The productive part of the onion is getting smaller and smaller, and asked to give more of its work product to government, as the size of government increases.

Ineluctably, as the onion that produces wealth decreases, as that dross that is reflective of government increases, those who produce the wealth are increasingly left to ask, at what are they expending effort for?

Governments are different, because if you tell them to stuff it, they can send you to jail.

Jail is a place you don't want to be. Oh, and they can take whatever wealth they want as a fine. So, you're broke, you're in jail. Governments like this used to exist in the 18th century. England had one such government.

That's why Americans came up with the idea of "limited government". The idea was, if we had a written Constitution that enumerated the powers of the government, we would only be able to change these enumerated powers by a process known as the Amendment Process.

Unfortunately, the judicial branch of our government became the hotbed of Leftist rigour. That means, judges have sold our country down the river.

Not all judges, mind you, but in our system of governance is a clause in the Constitution that requires the Senate to Advise and Consent on the issue of Supreme Court nominees.

That means that the Senate has become the fulcrum upon which the Left has been allowed to gain authority that exceeds the authority of the Constitution, by allowing Supreme Court Justices to be confirmed that have absolutely no faith in the system of government that was bequeathed us by our Forefathers.

So, you at least have two different forces working to diminish your wealth, taxation and government action.

That is, while you are working hard to pay your bills and your taxes, governments are imposing new impediments to earning wealth; these are now being referred to as "issues of social justice."

The major issues of social justice are health care and global warming.

That the government is willing to impose increased external costs to you in order to deal with their issues of social justice are simply excuses to take more money from the productive class in America and give it to the un-productive class.

The most worrisome detail in this taking is that not all the costs are being undertaken by the productive class. The most nefarious of these takings are taking place in plain view. The monetization of our public debt. And the loss of value of our national currency.

It's true that not all of us can follow the description of the economic events that are swallowing each and every one of us, described above.

What's important is, you understand it, and the readers who frequent this site understand it.

Government, as we know it today, has become unsustainable.

Limited government had a chance and we allowed the progressives, the Left, to steal it from us.

And don't think that this will end well.
.

Do You Need To Be In Denial To Be A Leftist?

No. You do not need to be in denial to be a Leftist.

It helps though. If you don't have denial, you'd have to rely upon complete ignorance as a method to explain the policy prescriptions with which the Left comes up.

Here's the latest from one of my favourite Leftists, Oregon Democrat and House Speaker Dave Hunt;

“There is no magic wand to wave that will somehow provide us with hundreds of millions of dollars. There are no secret plans to balance the budget. There are no funny money schemes like long term borrowing to pay for today’s services that will pass this Legislature."

“The 2009 Legislature passed two very targeted and modest tax increases that raise the $10 corporate minimum and ask families earning over $250,000 to pay a bit more to help their fellow Oregonians through these rough times. But in the event these measures fail we must be prepared to enact these cuts in the February session."

“The path before Oregonians is as clear as I have ever seen it. Either we uphold these measures and emerge from this recession stronger than before or we plunge down into a cycle of cuts and despair like that facing California and other states."

“We’ve managed to avoid the devastating cuts facing other states because our approach balanced cuts, federal stimulus dollars, state reserve funds and targeted tax increases to protect core services. But it is a very delicate balance and putting too much weight on any one of the four components will lead us down a path that I believe most Oregonians want to avoid – deep cuts to schools, health care and public safety."

“In putting these lists out early, we want people to know what we are considering so there is plenty of opportunity to weigh in. But remember this – cuts of $733 million or more will have to be absorbed by every level of state government if the revenue measures fail. And while we will continue to do our level best to protect core services, remember that 94% of the state’s budget goes for education, health care and public safety services.”

Oregon has been on a frenzy of growth of government for years. We have grown our public sector faster than the private sector's ability to pay for that growth. Talk to a small business owner about that "recovery" thingy. That quarter of GDP growth.

Unless and until we're willing to cut the size and scope of our state government, we're simply on the Highway to Hell. We're like heroin junkies, looking for our next fix. And the fix is in the pocketbook of the Man. And we hate the Man. Taking from the Man is groovy.

This is the economic policy of the Left. Take it from the Man.

Look how well that policy has worked out in Detroit. (Oh, it turns out the Man left town.)

Programs

Thanksgiving. Sons and food.

And football.

So, my oldest and I started talking about Programs. Here's his list of the top 25 programs. You'll notice a couple of names missing. And I asked why. His response was that there is no right to be recognized as a top program if you aren't currently being productive. What was the past will stay in the past.

Which led me to this article. Just scroll down to number 9.

Oregon State, 1971-98 (25 letters)

The Beavs did not have ONE winning season during that time, they went through six head coaches and compiled an appalling 65-238-6 record.

Here's his list:

1. Florida
2. USC
3. Texas
4. Ohio State
5. Boise State
6. LSU
7. Alabama
8. Oklahoma
9. Penn State
10. Virginia Tech
11. Georgia
12. Oregon
13. Utah
14. Brigham Young
15. Oregon State
16. Miami
17. Cincinatti
18. Cal
19. West Virginia
20. Texas Tech
21. Iowa
22. Wisconsin
23. Michigan
24. Oklahoma State
25. Nebraska

And here's a treat for those of you who made it all the way down here! Play it loud, especially when you know there are Ducks around!



h/t to Jason's OSU Beavers Blog.