#profile-container h2.sidebar-title {display:none;}

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Poverty and Quality of Life in the U.S.


A few tidbits about infant mortality rates

Here is a link to a slightly dated (1998) report from HHS.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/98news/huspr98.htm

Here is a PDF chart of that shows the U.S. and those countries that have lower infant mortality rates.

Here is a link to CDC data by race/ethnicity
Health In America Tied to Income and Education

Here is a link to a United Nations report on global inequality and an article about that report

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/un-hits-back-at-us-in-report-saying-parts-of-america-are-as-poor-as-third-world-505967.html

http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/media%2005/cd-docs/fullreport05.htm


Here is a link to Infant Mortality and Income in 4 World Cities: New York, London, Paris, and Tokyo

A study by the World Cities Project, a joint venture of the Wagner School, New York University, and the International Longevity Center–USA, New York.

Here is a summary of their findings:
Objectives. We investigated the association between average income or deprivation and infant mortality rate across neighborhoods of 4 world cities
Conclusions. In stark contrast to Tokyo, Paris, and London, the association of income and infant mortality rate was strongly evident in Manhattan.

Thursday, June 15, 2006

A Tip of the Hat to Al

A few days ago, the conversation turned to the movie "It's A Wonderful Life."

I mentioned a point that Sarah made about how dark a movie it could have been -- and how it is a testament to the talent of Jimmy Stewart and of Frank Capra that they were able to keep it from overwhelming the audiences.

Without pausing for even a single a beat, Al immediately added that the movie also was constructed so that every one of its characters led a life that was just one event, one piece of bad luck, away from descending into tragedy.

How does Al do that?!

Sunday, June 11, 2006

absurdities & atrocities

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

-- Voltaire

Market fundamentalism

What a wonderful term -- "market fundamentalism."

From an interview of George Soros in today's NYTimes.

Q: You have also been a critic of globalism and what you call in your book "market fundamentalism." Which is what, exactly?

Soros: It is the belief that the common interest is best served by allowing individual participants to pursue their self-interest.


From
Questions for George Soros

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Even a blind pig...

...occasionally finds an acorn.

And, every once in a while, Tom Friedman writes something that is not annoying.

From his column in the NY Times today:

President Bush remarked the other day how agonizingly tough it is for a president to send young Americans to war. Yet, he’s ready to do that, but he’s not ready to look Detroit or Congress in the eye and demand that we put in place the fuel-efficiency legislation that will weaken the forces of theocracy and autocracy that are killing our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan — because it might cost Republicans votes or campaign contributions.

This whole thing is a travesty. We can’t keep asking young Americans to make the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan if we as a society are not ready to make even the most minimal sacrifice to help them.

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Still surprising Zogby Poll of U.S. troops in Iraq

I realize that this poll was done months ago, but I came across it again and found it striking.

From Zogby Poll of U.S. troops in Iraq

...The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure. While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,” said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. “Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.” Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).

Saturday, May 27, 2006

An Affront To American Values

(from the Washington Post, May 27, 2006)

By Alberto J. Mora
Retired Navy general counsel
Excerpted from remarks made upon receiving a 2006 John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award.

...Whatever the ultimate historical judgment, it is established fact that documents justifying and authorizing the abusive treatment of detainees during interrogation were approved and distributed. These authorizations rested on three beliefs: that no law prohibited the application of cruelty; that no law should be adopted that would do so; and that our government could choose to apply the cruelty -- or not -- as a matter of policy depending on the dictates of perceived military necessity.

The fact that we adopted this policy demonstrates that this war has tested more than our nation's ability to defend itself. It has tested our response to our fears and the measure of our courage. It has tested our commitment to our most fundamental values and our constitutional principles.

In this war, we have come to a crossroads -- much as we did in the events that led to Korematsu : Will we continue to regard the protection and promotion of human dignity as the essence of our national character and purpose, or will we bargain away human and national dignity in return for an additional possible measure of physical security?

Vermont & America's first third party

As usual, Vermont politics are a bit more complicated (and more interesting) than I had originally thought.

I am especially intrigued by the vote for the "Anti-Masonic Party" -- described as "the first third party in American national politics."

From the Wikipedia

Vermont Politics

Vermonters are known for their political independence. Vermont is one of the few states that was an independent republic, and has a long history of contrarian voting in national elections. Notably, Vermont is the only state to have voted for a presidential candidate from the Anti-Masonic Party, and Vermont and Maine were the only states to vote against Franklin D. Roosevelt in his second election.

Today, Vermont is known nationally for its liberal political views, although this is perhaps an oversimplification. The Vermont government maintains a proactive stance with regards to the environment, social services and prevention of urbanization. For example, facing severe pressures from out-of-state real estate developers, the state passed the Land Use and Development Law (Act 250) in 1970. The law, which was the first of its kind in the nation, created nine District Environmental Commissions consisting of private citizens who have the power to approve or disapprove land development and subdivision plans that would have a significant impact on the state's environment and many small communities. Another case involves the recent controversy over the adoption of civil unions, an institution which grants same-sex couples nearly all the rights and privileges of marriage. In Baker v. Vermont (1999), the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that, under the Constitution of Vermont, the state must either allow same-sex marriage or provide a separate but equal status for them. The state legislature chose the second option by creating the institution of civil union; the bill was passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Howard Dean. At the same time, Vermont is one of only two states in the Union to allow any adult to carry a concealed firearm without any sort of permit, showing that the state's politics cannot be easily characterized.

Vermont is the home state of the only two current members of the United States Congress who do not associate themselves with a political party: Representative Bernie Sanders and Senator Jim Jeffords.

Attempts by out-of-state candidates (so called "flatlanders") to be elected to office in Vermont have often been thwarted by locals. In 1998, a 79-year-old farmer named Fred Tuttle received national attention by defeating a Massachusetts multimillionaire in the Republican Primary for Senate. With a campaign budget of $201, Tuttle garnered 55% of the primary vote, then promptly announced his support for the Democratic incumbent, Patrick Leahy. This campaign was an example of ostension, as Fred had starred as himself in the Vermont-produced film, "A Man With A Plan", which depicted him winning a shoestring-funded election to Congress.
Republicans dominated Vermont politics from the party's founding in 1854 until the 1980s. In the early 1960s many progressive Vermont Republicans and newcomers to the state helped bolster the state's small Democratic Party. Until 1992, Vermont had supported a Democrat for president only once since the parties founding—in Lyndon Johnson's 1964 landslide victory. In 1992, it supported Democrat Bill Clinton for president and has voted for Democrats in every presidential election since. Vermont gave John Kerry his fourth largest margin of victory in 2004. He won the state's popular vote by 20 percentage points over incumbent George W. Bush, taking almost 59% of the vote. Essex County in the state's northeastern section was the only county to vote for Bush.

The Vermont Progressive Party is a small liberal political party created in the early 1980s. It and has represented a handful of seats in the Vermont legislature for two decades and has run candidates for governor and lieutenant governor. The party has a similar philosophy to Vermont's lone congressman, Bernie Sanders. It has had official recognition as a political party by the state government since 1999.

Vermont's liberal views do not coincide with the general American political stereotype that rural states tend toward conservatism (the red state phenomenon). The contradiction is thrown into great relief when it is observed that Vermont's longtime doppleganger neighbor, New Hampshire, is consistently Republican in its politics (although New Hampshire leans more toward libertarianism than toward standard Republicanism).

Some have attempted to explain away Vermont's contradictory politics by arguing that the state is a haven for affluent vacationers and retirees from strong liberal metropolitan regions such as Boston and New York, and that the financial power of such persons dominate the politics. Vermont average family income though is near the national average. Others argue that Vermont, which borders Canada, is a main thoroughfare of land travel to major Canadian cities such as Montreal and Toronto, and the influence of liberal Canadian thought and Canadian city-dwellers on vacation also affects the political climate.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

DC friends have lunch together...

...like in the old story about Pancho Villa.

From
The Washington friendship

...when you get right down to it, there is often no difference between business and friendship in the nation’s capital—they are two sides of the same coin. The Washington friendship is like the Hollywood friendship, partly sincere and partly self-interested. For a lobbyist like Abramoff, or any glad-handing politician, a well-placed friend is money in the bank.

O'zog, kentsu sehn...

Don't ask how I came across this.

Just enjoy that I did.

Star Spangled Banner

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Would we want Google to be neutral?

A very interesting point about net neutrality:

Google prioritizes search results, based on a secret and tricky technique that only Russian mathematicians can understand. This technique creates an unequal playing field. If ISPs should be requiredy by law to randomly forward packets without any inspection, shouldn't Google also be required to randomly order search results so as not to favor the big sites? It would seem so, so I have to ask: if not, why not?

It also prompts the question:
Is Google's support of net neutrality a way of, in effect, neutralizing other organizations that might cut into Google's strengths?

Quote is from

Is Craig Newmark a big fat lying liar?


Guantanamo mistake

Five completely innocent Chinese Uighurs were kept at Gitmo for three and a half years, charged with nothing, cleared.....and still held for another year.

Guantanamo's Innocents: Newly Released Prisoners Struggle to Find a Home

Even after being cleared of any wrongdoing, five innocent men were kept captive at the detention center at Guantanamo. Today, these men who started out in China and ended up in Cuba are now free and in the Eastern European country of Albania, the only country that would take them. They spoke to the ABC News Law & Justice Unit in their first American interview....

...Q: Was there a hardest day, a moment when you'd most lost hope?

A: After we were handed over to American authorities in Kandahar. We thought it was good, Americans uphold people's rights and protect them. When we realized where we were going -- to Guantanamo -- that was the hardest moment.

Critiquing a critique of global warming

Here is a bit of a critique about a critique in the June 5 issue of the National Review of a Time Magazine cover story about global warming.

It appears that at least one passage in "Scare of the Century" by JASON LEE STEORTS either needs correction or additional explanation.
How much ice has Antarctica gained? In a 2005 study published in Science, Curt Davis used satellite measurements to calculate changes in the ice sheet’s elevation, and found that it gained 45 billion tons of ice per year between 1992 and 2003. Far from flooding the coasts, that’s enough to lower sea levels by roughly 0.12 millimeters annually.
However, according to Curt Davis, whose work Steorts is citing and who is director of the Center for Geospatial Intelligence at the University of Missouri-Columbia:
Growth of the ice sheet was only noted on the interior of the ice sheet and did not include coastal areas. Coastal areas are known to be losing mass, and these losses could offset or even outweigh the gains in the interior areas.
More generally, Davis complains that recent reports are misrepresenting his previous research to back their claims that global warming is not causing ice sheets to shrink in a "deliberate effort to confuse and mislead the public about the global warming debate. They are selectively using only parts of my previous research to support their claims. They are not telling the entire story to the public."

There are more details at the link I have provided.

I have not done so, but it would be interesting to check out whether there are similar issues with other claims in Steorts article.

McCain at New School

In case anyone is interested, here is a link with background info about what happened with McCain at the New School.

It is a piece by the young woman who gave the speech that preceded McCain's.

Why I Spoke Up

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Message from President Al Gore

If you missed last night's Saturday Night Live, you should check out this link to the opening bit, which comes from an alternate universe in which Al Gore won the 2000 election.

Message from President Al Gore

Juggling Bliss

Check out this link.

Chris Bliss

I watched it without the sound the first time, with sound the second.

Either way, its magical.

Bush as Queeg

Brad DeLong points out the strange comments that George Bush made at the beginning of an interview that he gave to Bild magazine:

Before Kai Diekmann has gotten to say more than "[I was in the Oval Office o]nce, a long time ago" and "Yes, [the rug] is very beautiful," Bush has said six hundred words, including:

"...people watch me like a hawk... if I'm going to be [w]ringing my hands and if I'm all worried about the decisions I make are not going to lead to a better tomorrow, they'll figure it out.... I not only strongly believe in the decisions I make, I'm optimistic that they're going to work -- very optimistic... they want me to change -- they being the -- and I'm not changing, you know. You can't make decisions if you don't know who you are, and you flip around with the politics. You've got to stay strong in what you believe and optimistic about that you'll get good results. And so -- the other thing I want you to know about me is that no matter how pressurized it may seem, I'm not changing what I believe. Now, I may change tactics, but I'm not going to change my core beliefs.... I'm not changing. I don't care whether they like me at the cocktail parties, or not. I want to be able to leave this office with my integrity intact..."

Remember: at this point in the interview Bush has not been asked a single question. I wonder who he thinks "they" are...


And the rest of the Bush interview isn't much more coherent.

You can find the full text at Interview of the President by Kai Diekmann of BILD.

By the way, here's one of the responses to DeLong's post:

"Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers..."

I think it's the same "they".

Monday, May 08, 2006

Who’s Crazy Now?

After reading Paul Krugman's Who’s Crazy Now? column today, I found it interesting to go back to mid-2004 and look at this collection of commentary on Gore's speech to MoveOn.org -- and then to look at the speech itself.


Right-wing pundits play doctor; diagnose Gore as "insane"


Remarks by Al Gore - May 26-2004

Friday, May 05, 2006

Unintended consequences

"You cannot have peace unless you are willing to prepare for war, and you cannot have security unless you are willing to take risks."

-- American Enterprise Institute scholar Michael Novak, as quoted in "The frightened European" (Chicago Tribune, April 23, 2006)

Reminds me of George Kennan's wonderful comment that America's effort to use the threat of its nuclear aresenal as a tool for achieving complete security actually resulted in the exact opposite -- It put the entire world on a hair-trigger of total insecuirty.

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Great deeds

No great deed, private or public, had ever been undertaken in a bliss of certainty.

-- Leon Wieseltier, in The New Republic

Colbert links -- updated 5-13-2006

There are updated links (as of 5-13-2006) to the complete video Colbert's speech to the Washington Correspondents' Dinner for part one and part two.

In case anyone is interested, here is a link to the Colbert interview with Bill Kristol.

Amusing quote

"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."

-- John Stuart Mill

Liberal conservative or conservative liberal?

Funny comment on Andrew Sullivan's blog at
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/03/email_of_the_da_1.html

A reader writes:
"I just read on your blog that you're a conservative. I've been reading your blog for months now and I thought you were a liberal with a handful of wrongheaded opinions. I guess now I'll think of you as an amazingly enlightened conservative."

Rough math

Came cross this wonderfully true comment about mathematicians.

"When the going gets tough, the tough change the problem."

Kinda scary just how much the Onion had it right

Wolfe Re-introduction

For reasons not worth recounting at the moment, this passage from Thomas Wolfe's last piece of writing came to mind recently -- from his never-finished "The Hills Beyond."

I find it wonderful.

Hope you enjoy it.




Chapter 9
THE BELL STRIKES THREE

[This passage begins the description of the narrator’s recollection of how the old Confederate veteran, Looky Thar, would greet the narrator’s father by propping himself up on his…]

…wooden leg in an effort to get his balance, catch hold of numerous shoulders to steady himself, and then, with a magnificent show of concentrated purpose, he would bring his arm up slowly to the salute. It was the most florid salute imaginable, the salute of a veteran of the Old Guard acknowledging the presence of the Emperor at Waterloo.

There were times when young Edward was afraid his father was going to strangle the brave veteran. The elder Joyner's face would redden to the hue of a large and very ripe tomato, the veins of his neck and forehead would swell up like whipcording, his big fingers would work convulsively for a moment into his palms while he glared at Looky Thar, then, without a word, he would turn and limp away into the courthouse.

To his son, however, he would unburden himself of his feelings, which, though briefly expressed, were violent and explosive.

"There's one of your famous veterans," he growled. "Four years in war, and he'll spend the next forty years on his hind end! There's a fine old veteran for you!"

"Yes, father," the boy protested, "but the man has got a wooden leg."

His father stopped abruptly and faced him, his square face reddened painfully as he fixed his son with the earnest, boyish look of his blue eyes.

"Listen to me, my boy," he said very quietly, and tapped him on the shoulder with a peculiar and extraordinarily intense gesture of conviction. "Listen to me. His wooden leg has nothing to do with it. He is simply a product of war, an example of what war does to eight men out of ten. Don't drag his wooden leg into it. If you do, it will blind you with false pity and you'll never be able to see the thing straight. Then you'll be as big a sentimental fool as he is."

Young Edward stared at him, too astonished to say anything, and not knowing what reply to make to what seemed to him at the moment one of the most meaningless remarks he had ever heard.

"Just remember what I tell you," his father went on, slowly and impressively. "A wooden leg is no excuse for anything."

Then, his face very red, he turned and limped heavily and rapidly away into his courtroom, leaving his son staring in gap-mouthed astonishment at his broad back, wondering what on earth such an extraordinary statement of opinion could mean.

He was soon to find out.


Chapter 10
THE LOST DAY


[The next, and final, chapter begins with reminiscences from the narrator’s boyhood in the Blue Ridge Mountains after the Civil War, then turns to memories of the changes that began to transform that community.]

…As a sign and symbol of their golden future, the railroad was coming up the mountain. People waited for its coming with eagerness and a buoyant impatience. And at last the great day came. The last rail was laid, the last spike driven, and Edward Joyner would never forget the carnival exhilaration of that day in April, 1884, when old Captain Billy Joslin brought his engine, "Puffing Billy," around the bend and down the rails into the station, its brass bell clanging, its whistle tooting, the whole thing festooned with bright bunting, to be welcomed by every man, woman, and child in town with loud cheers and yelling jubilation.

And young Edward, as he stood beside his father and his mother on the platform, did not know it at the time, but he realized later that with that puffing little engine the world came in.

Not long after this event, and only a few months after his father had spoken so mysteriously about Old Looky Thar, the boy was in the study late one afternoon and his nose was buried in a book. He was reading an account of the Battle of Spotsylvania by one of the Generals in Hancock's command who had been present at the fight. He had finished reading a description of the first two movements of that bloody battle - Hancock's charge upon the Confederate position, and the thrilling countercharge of the Confederate troops - and was now reading about the final movement - the hand-to-hand fighting over the earth embankment, a struggle so savage and prolonged that, in the words of this officer, "almost every foot of earth over which they fought was red with blood." Suddenly he came upon this passage:

There have been other battles of the war in which more troops were engaged, the losses greater, the operations carried on in a more extensive scale, but in my own estimation, there has been no fighting in modem times that was as savage and destructive as was the hand-to-hand fighting that was waged back and forth over the earth embankment there at Spotsylvania in the final hours of the battle. The men of both armies fought toe to toe; the troops of both sides stood on top of the embankment firing point-blank in the faces of the enemy, getting fresh muskets constantly from their comrades down below. When one man fell, another from below sprang up to take his place. No one was spared, from private soldier up to Captain, from Captain to Brigade Commander. I saw general officers fighting in the thick of it, shoulder to shoulder with the men of their own ranks; among others, I saw Joyner among his gallant mountaineers firing and loading until he was himself shot down and borne away by his own men, his right leg so shattered by a minie ball that amputation was imperative….

Something blurred and passed across the eyes of the boy, and suddenly all of the gold and singing had gone out of the day. He got up and walked out of the study, and down the hallway, holding the book open in his hand. When he got to the sitting room he saw his mother there. She glanced up placidly, then looked at him quickly, startled, and got up, putting her sewing things down upon the table as she rose.

"What is it? What's the matter with you?"

He walked over to her, very steadily, but on legs which felt as light and hollow as a cork.

"This book," he mumbled and held the page up to her, pointing at the place - "this book - read what it says here."

She took it quickly, and read. In a moment she handed it back to him, and her fingers shook a little, but she spoke calmly:

"Well?"

"What the books says - is that father?" "Yes," she said.

"Then," he said, staring slowly at her and swallowing hard, "does that mean that father--"

And suddenly, he saw that she was crying; she put her arms around his shoulders, as she answered:

And all at once the boy remembered what his father had once said to him; and knew what he had meant.

"My dear child, your father is so proud, and in some ways a child himself. He wouldn't tell you. He could not bear to have his son think that his father was a cripple."
A cripple!

Fifty years and more have passed since then, but every time the memory returned to Robert Joyner's son, the vision blurred, and something tightened in the throat, and the gold and singing passed out of the sun as it did on that lost day in spring, long, long ago.

A cripple - he, a cripple!

He could see the bald head and red face, the stocky figure limping heavily away to court ... and hear the fast, hard ringing of the bell … and remember Looky Thar, the courthouse loafers, and the people passing … the trials, the lawyers, and the men accused ... the soldiers coming to the house … the things they talked of and the magic that they brought … and his war-young heart boy-drunk with dreams of war and glory ... the splendid Generals, and his father so unwarlike, as he thought ... and the unworthiness of his romantic unbelief ... to see that burly and prosaic figure as it limped away toward court … and tried to vision him with Gordon in the Wilderness ... or charging through the shot-torn fields and woods at Gettysburg ... or wounded, sinking to his knees at Spotsylvania ... and failing miserably to see him so; and, boylike, failing to envision how much of madness or of magic even brick-red faces and bald heads may be familiar with … down the Valley of Virginia more than seventy years ago.

But a cripple? – No! no cripple. One of the strongest, straightest, plainest, most uncrippled men his son would ever know.

Half a century has gone since then, but when Robert Joyner's son would think of that lost day, it would all come back … the memory of each blade, each leaf, each flower … the rustling of each leaf and every light and shade that came and went against the sun … the dusty Square, the hitching posts, the mules, the ox-teams, and the horses, the hay-sweet bedding of the country wagons ... the courthouse loafers … and Old Looky Thar … and Webber's mule teams trotting across the Square … each door that opened ... and each gate that slammed … and everything that passed throughout the town that day ... the women sitting on the latticed porches of their brothels at the edge of "Niggertown" … the whores respiring in warm afternoon, and certain only of one thing - that night would come! … and all things known, as well as things unseen, a part of his whole consciousness ... a little mountain town down South one afternoon in May some fifty years ago ... and time passing like the humming of a bee … time passing like the thrumming in a wood ... time passing as cloud shadows pass above the hill-flanks of the mountain meadows, or like the hard, fast pounding of the courthouse bell ....

And now, his father dead, and long since buried, who limped his way to court and who had been to Gettysburg … another man since dead and buried with the gorilla arm-length of an ape .…

And time still passing … passing like a leaf ... time passing, fading like a flower …time passing like a river flowing ... time passing and remembered suddenly, like the forgotten hoof and wheel…

Time passing as men pass who never will come back again … and leaving us, Great God, with only this ... knowing that this earth, this time, this life, are stranger than a dream.

Hilarious bumper sticker

"George W. -- We will be forever in his debt."

The Rehabilitation of the Cold-War Liberal

Been gone a while. Will try to catch up on the backlog.

For starters, here is a brilliant piece from this weekend's NYTimes.

The Rehabilitation of the Cold-War Liberal

It is definitely worth reading all of it, but it is very long.

In case you do not have the time to read all of it, I have cut-and-pasted the first four paragraphs and the last paragraph below.


The Rehabilitation of the Cold-War Liberal
By PETER BEINART
New York Times
April 30, 2006

This fall, for the third time since 9/11, American voters will choose between Democrats and Republicans while knowing what only one party believes about national security. In 2002, Democratic candidates tried to change the subject, focusing on Social Security and health care instead. In 2004, John Kerry substituted biography for ideology, largely ignoring his own extensive foreign-policy record and stressing his service in Vietnam. In this year's Senate and House races, the party looks set to reprise Michael Dukakis's old theme: competence. Rather than tell Americans what their vision is, Democrats will assure them that they can execute it better than George W. Bush.

Democrats have no shortage of talented foreign-policy practitioners. Indeed, they have no shortage of worthwhile foreign-policy proposals. Even so, they cannot tell a coherent story about the post-9/11 world. And they cannot do so, in large part, because they have not found their usable past. Such stories, after all, are not born in focus groups; they are less invented than inherited. Before Democrats can conquer their ideological weakness, they must first conquer their ideological amnesia.
Consider George W. Bush's story: America represents good in an epic struggle against evil. Liberals, this story goes, try to undermine that moral clarity, reining in American power and sapping our faith in ourselves. But a visionary president will not be constrained, and he wields American might with relentless force, until the walls of oppression crumble and the darkest region on earth is set free.

If this sounds familiar, it should. It was Ronald Reagan's story as well. To a remarkable degree, the right's post-9/11 vision relies on a grand analogy: Bush is Reagan, Tony Blair is Margaret Thatcher, the "axis of evil" is the "evil empire," the truculent French are the truculent French. The most influential conservative foreign-policy essay of the 1990's, written by the Weekly Standard editor William Kristol and Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment, was titled "Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy." And since 9/11, most conservatives have seen Bush as Reaganesque. His adherence to a script conservatives know by heart helps explain their devotion, which held fast through the 2004 election, and has only recently begun to flag, as that script veers more and more disastrously from the real world.

Liberals don't have a script because they don't have a Reagan. Since Vietnam, they've produced two presidents: Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Carter's foreign policy is widely considered a failure. Clinton's foreign policy is not widely considered at all, because he governed at a time when foreign policy was for the most part peripheral to American politics. Ask liberals to describe a Carteresque foreign policy, and they tend to wince. Ask them to describe a Clintonesque one, and you'll most likely get a blank stare.

But before Vietnam, and the disappointment and confusion it spawned, liberals did have a clear story of their own. In the late 1940's and 1950's, intellectuals like Reinhold Niebuhr and policymakers like George F. Kennan described America's cold-war struggle differently from their conservative counterparts: as a struggle not merely for democracy but for economic opportunity as well, in the belief that the former required the latter to survive. Even more important, they described America itself differently. Americans may fight evil, they argued, but that does not make us inherently good. And paradoxically, that very recognition makes national greatness possible. Knowing that we, too, can be corrupted by power, we seek the constraints that empires refuse. And knowing that democracy is something we pursue rather than something we embody, we advance it not merely by exhorting others but by battling the evil in ourselves. The irony of American exceptionalism is that by acknowledging our common fallibility, we inspire the world.....

.....In America, no less than in the Islamic world, the struggle for democracy relies on economic opportunity. To contemporary ears, the phrase "struggle for American democracy" sounds odd. In George W. Bush's Washington, such struggles are for lesser nations. But in the liberal tradition, it is not odd at all. Almost six decades ago, Americans for Democratic Action was born, in the words of its first national director, to wage a "two-front fight for democracy, both at home and abroad," recognizing that the two were ultimately indivisible. That remains true today. America is not a fixed model for a benighted world. It is the democratic struggle here at home, against the evil in our society, that offers a beacon to people in other nations struggling against the evil in theirs. "The fact of the matter," Kennan declared, "is that there is a little bit of the totalitarian buried somewhere, way down deep, in each and every one of us." America can be the greatest nation on earth, as long as Americans remember that they are inherently no better than anyone else.

Peter Beinart is editor at large of The New Republic. This essay is adapted from "The Good Fight: Why Liberals — and Only Liberals — Can Win the War on Terror and Make America Great Again," which will be published in late May by HarperCollins.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

What's the matter with Connecticut?

A companion to Tom Frank's book.

Check out fascinating findings in a paper "Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state: What's the matter with Connecticut?" by Andrew Gelman of Columbia University, Boris Shor of the University of Chicago, Joseph Bafumi of Dartmouth and David Park of Washington University in St. Louis.

One of the more intriguing observations is that
In poor states, rich people are much more likely than poor people to vote for the Republican presidential candidate, but in rich states (such as Connecticut), income has almost no correlation with vote preference. . . . In poor states, rich people are very different from poor people in their political preferences. But in rich states, they are not.
This suggests an interpretation that the U.S. is polarized and divided is a more complex way:
Not only do red and blue states vote differently, but they cast their votes according to different patterns -- and that "red-staters and blue-staters live in two different political universes."

E. J. Dionne Jr. in the Washington Post suggests that this

helps explain why Southern Republicans such as President Bush pursue policies that are hugely beneficial to their wealthy base even as they try to diminish the political impact of class warfare by shifting the argument to other subjects: religion, values or national security.

The Press is getting pushed

I did not see this when it came out a month ago, but it is a terrific description of a key role of today's Press.
So what are we to believe in a book that relies heavily on leaks from disgruntled sources? We are in an age where the consumer of information has to make an educated guess about what percentage of assertions in books like this are true. My own guess is that Risen has earnest sources for everything he reports but that they don't all know the full story, thus resulting in a book that smells like it's 80 percent true. If that sounds deeply flawed, let me add that if he had relied on no anonymous sources and reported instead only the on-the-record line from official spinners, the result would very likely have been only half as true.

In fact, the new way we consume information provides a good argument for the role of an independent press that relies on leakers. Other journalists will and should build on, or debunk, the allegations reported by Risen. This will prompt many of the players to publish their own version of the facts. L. Paul Bremer, the American viceroy in Iraq after the invasion, has just come out with his book pointing fingers at the C.I.A. for giving him flawed intelligence and at Donald Rumsfeld for not giving him the troops he actually wanted. And Tenet, one hopes, will someday cash in on a hefty book contract by clamping cigar in mouth and pen in hand to give evidence that he was not the buffoonish toady Rumsfeld's aides portray him to be. Besides being fun to watch, this process is a boon for future historians.

So welcome to the new age of impressionistic history. Like an Impressionist painting, it relies on dots of varying hues and intensity. Some come from leakers like those who spoke to Risen. Other dots come from the memoirs and comments of the players. Eventually, a picture emerges, slowly getting clearer. It's up to us to connect the dots and find our own meanings in this landscape.

As long as we remember that the truth these days comes not as one pronouncement but as part of a process, we can properly value ''State of War'' for being not only colorful and fascinating, but also one of the ways that facts and historical narratives emerge in an information- age democracy. So let the process begin!
From
Spies and Spymasters
by WALTER ISAACSON
February 5, 2006
NY Times

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Shipshape--Jonathan Winters

If your ship has not come in yet, swim out to meet it!
-- Jonathan Winters

The first of all strategic questions--von Clausewitz

I came across this quote from von Clausewitz and thought it might be of interest.

"First, the supreme, the most far-reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish ... the kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistaking it for, nor trying to turn it into, something that is alien to its true nature. This is the first of all strategic questions and the most comprehensive."

From
On War — Volume 1

Apology

I've gotten out of the habit of posting stuff -- I've been e-mail it instead -- so I'm going to catch up on a lot of things.

This means that the "chronology" of the items is going to be jumbled -- how like life.

Sorry.

Saturday, January 28, 2006

WARNING: Warrior Ethos Can Be Dangerous To National Security

In case you had not seen it, there was a piece in the Washington Post a couple of weeks ago that caught my eye.

Advice from an Ally: Get Past the Warrior Ethos
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/13/AR2006011302305_pf.html

Here is an extended passage at the very end of the piece that I found especially interesting:

Armies reflect the culture of the civil society from which they are drawn. According to [retired Army Col. Don] Snider [a West Point senior lecturer], the Army is characterized, like U.S. domestic society, by an aspiration to achieve quick results. This in turn engenders a command and planning climate that promotes those solutions that appear to favor quick results. In conventional warfighting situations this is likely to be advantageous, but in other operations it often tends to prolong the situation, ironically, as the quick solution turns out to be the wrong one. In COIN terms the most obvious example is the predilection for wide-ranging kinetic options (sweep, search and destroy) in preference to the longer term hearts and minds work and intelligence led operations.

Furthermore, a predilection with technology arguably encourages the search for the quick, convenient solution, often at the expense of the less obvious, but ultimately more enduring one.

The Army's "Warrior Ethos" is also illuminating in this respect. It was introduced in 2001. At its core is the Soldier's Creed. Note that it enjoins the soldier to have just the one type of interaction with his enemy -- "to engage and destroy him": not defeat , which could permit a number of other politically attuned options, but destroy . It is very decidedly a war-fighting creed, which has no doubt served well to promote the much sought conventional warfighting ethos, but cannot be helping soldiers to understand that on many occasions in unconventional situations they have to be soldiers, not warriors.

As important, the Army needs to learn to see itself as others do, particularly its actual or potential opponents and their supporters. They are the ones who need to be persuaded to succumb, because the alternative approach is to kill or capture them all, and that hardly seems practicable, even for the most powerful Army in the world.

He had two, but they were small.

"...of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship...."

"...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
-- Hermann Goering, Nazi Reichsmarshall and Luftwaffe-Chief

from
Nuremberg Diary by Gustave Gilbert
(http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm)

Friday, January 13, 2006

Health care costs and Wal-Mart

This is a very interesting development. Despite some obvious problems, it is an intriguing concept.

From
Maryland Sets a Health Cost for Wal-Mart

The Maryland legislature passed a law Thursday that would require Wal-Mart Stores to increase spending on employee health insurance, a measure that is expected to be a model for other states.

The legislature's move, which overrode a veto by Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich, was a response to growing criticism that Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, has skimped on benefits and shifted health costs to state governments.

The vote came after a furious lobbying battle by Wal-Mart and by labor and liberal groups, and is likely to encourage lawmakers in dozens of other states who are considering similar legislation.

Many state legislatures have looked to Maryland as a test case, as they face fast-rising Medicaid costs, and Wal-Mart's critics say that too many of its employees have been forced to turn to Medicaid.

Under the Maryland law, employers with 10,000 or more workers in the state must spend at least 8 percent of their payrolls on health insurance, or else pay the difference into a state Medicaid fund....

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Just came across this wonderful quote from Frank Zappa
"I have said it many times before, and I will say it again. Like hydrogen, stupidity is one of the building blocks of the universe. As you come to gripswith the splendor of stupidity itself, the process of being alive not only becomes more tolerable, but can even be enjoyable."

Frank Zappa 1980

Pivotal Period For NFL

Selected NFL events in the 1950s and early 1960s

1951
Abraham Watner returned the Baltimore franchise and its player contracts back to the NFL for $50,000.

1952
Ted Collins sold the New York Yanks' franchise back to the NFL, January 19. A new franchise was awarded to a group in Dallas after it purchased the assets of the Yanks, January 24. The new Texans went 1-11, with the owners turning the franchise back to the league in midseason. For the last five games of the season, the commissioner's office operated the Texans as a road team, using Hershey, Pennsylvania, as a home base. At the end of the season the franchise was canceled, the last time an NFL team failed.

1956
CBS became the first network to broadcast some NFL regular-season games to selected television markets across the nation.

1959
Lamar Hunt of Dallas announced his intentions to form a second pro football league. The new league was named the American Football League, August 22. They made plans to begin play in 1960.

NFL Commissioner Bert Bell died of a heart attack suffered at Franklin Field, Philadelphia, during the last two minutes of a game between the Eagles and the Steelers, October 11. Treasurer Austin Gunsel was named president in the office of the commissioner, October 14.

1960
Pete Rozelle was elected NFL Commissioner as a compromise choice on the twenty-third ballot, January 26. Rozelle moved the league offices to New York City.

The AFL signed a five-year television contract with ABC, June 9.

1961
NBC was awarded a two-year contract for radio and television rights to the NFL Championship Game for $615,000 annually, April 5.

A bill legalizing single-network television contracts by professional sports leagues was introduced in Congress by Representative Emanuel Celler. It passed the House and Senate and was signed into law by President John F. Kennedy, September 30.

1962
The NFL entered into a single-network agreement with CBS for telecasting all regular-season games for $4.65 million annually, January 10. ...and the rest is history...

Understanding Katrina: Perspectives from the Social Sciences

In case anyone is interested, here's the link to the Katrina discussion that I mentioned.

Understanding Katrina: Perspectives from the Social Sciences http://understandingkatrina.ssrc.org/

Make sure to look at the items in the column along the left-hand side.

I haven't had a chance to explore this very much, but what I have seen is fascinating -- and a bit overwhelming in quantity.

Torture (and tortured) logic

Link to a terrific piece by Andrew Sullivan about torture.

Also a link to an article by Charles Krauthammer, to which Sullivan is responding.

WINNING THE WAR ON TERRORISM WITHOUT SACRIFICING FREEDOM.
The Abolition of Torture
by Andrew Sullivan


The Truth about Torture It's time to be honest about doing terrible things
by Charles Krauthammer