Funmurphys: the Blog

Haditha

There are two kinds of news stories I lack confidence in (just two?). There is the anonymously sourced story, and there is the "local people tell us" stories. The first is a staple of political reporting - and the shortcoming is that an anonymous source always has an agenda, and the anonymity hides the agenda. I'm not talking about the "some people say" or "experts say" without providing an actual person which is the way reporters simply inject their own opinions into a story, I'm talking were the reporter is relying on a source for information but just not telling us who that is all the while pretending that we are getting the whole story. We're not.

The "local people tell us" is a staple of international reporting, but it doesn't have to be international. The whole Katrina reporting debacle - yes, Virginia, pretty much everything the press reported about New Orleans following Katrina was wrong, and wrong because it was "local people tell us". The press didn't make up these stories out of whole cloth, they simply reported rumor as fact (and they thought that if multiple people told them the same rumor, why it must be fact). Think about how bad the press got it during Katrina, when the sources by and large had no agenda but were simply repeating what they had heard in good faith. Then think about all those stories where an intrepid reporter discounts the "official" version of events in a foriegn land because he's talked to the locals and found out what they know (or in reality, what they think they know). Now the reporter isn't just running with rumor dressed up in it's Sunday best, but is often relaying whatever agenda the locals have as well.

This brings me to the story of a possible deliberate killing of civilians by Marines in Iraq. I have no idea what happened, and to my mind both the worst and the best may have occured. But the story is being driven by leaks to the New York Times. Maybe the leaker just wants to get the story out a month or two sooner - or far more likely the leaker has an agenda and wants to shape the story by getting his or her version out there first. And the story of a massecre is also supported by local witnesses -- who may be right, but who may be wrong or even lying. And what do we know about eyewitnesses testimony? It's unreliable, and it can be influenced into error after the fact.

Maybe the lurid storiy of a Marine unit shooting innocents is completely accurate. I don't know. It wouldn't be the first time American soldiers have done terrible things. I don't want to confuse my hopes with reality, but I prefer to wait to more facts are in - what's really in the report, what is the physical evidence, and even what local eyewitness have to say in detail.

What Is A Feminist?

Who died and put Nora Ephron in charge?:

And by the way, Laura Bush isn't a feminist. You can't be a feminist if you don't believe in a woman's right to choose."

Um, why not? What exactly is feminism about? I've said it before, I don't consider myself a Feminist, but a feminist. I find Feminism both dreary and alarming - dreary because it is so humorless, so dogmatic, so past its prime, and alarming because as a Man, I'm the enemy. I find feminism sensible and always relevant. The biggest difference to me is that Feminism is all about women being just like the stereotype of manly men at the birth of feminism - career first, sexual predator, all that nonsense, while feminism is about women being free to pursue happiness without gender restrictions (which means we need a healthy dose of masculinism as well). While I oppose abortion, it doesn't enter into feminism because of the physical reality that reproduction is gender asymetrical, and there is nothing law or culture can do about that. Women are no more or less equal than men due to abortion law because are men not subject to it and there is no equivalent for men. So I'm happy to be a feminist, just don't call me a Feminist.

Bad Government, or Praise for Bureaucracy

Oddly enough, both meanings of "bad" work when applied to government - bad in the sense of immoral and in the sense of poorly run. When I look around, I see a lot of bad government - it's bad government that is the root cause of most of the problems worldwide. Bad government leads to the famine, chaos, and war in Africa; leads to the horrible suffering of North Koreans and Cubans (among sadly too many others), and leads to the instability and turmoil in South America.

But we're seeing good government in action in Washington. No, not the clueless band of politicians that currently inhabit Congress; but the continuing demonstration that we are a nation ruled by laws, not men. Yes, problems are looming like Medicare and Social Security, we are fighting a war with a nation divided, members of Congress are behaving not just irresponsibly, but criminally -- yet the economy is booming, people from the world over are trying to live here, life is good in general because governement doesn't "run" the nation, and the government itself continues to function well enough because it isn't "run" by the politicians. Come what may, we have confidence in our government to function adequately.

No Bias Here

The official figure of economic growth was revised upwards to 5.3% for last quarter - a blistering pace. And where was this tidbit of information - why, on page 3 of the business section in the St. Louis Post Dispatch. Any guess about where it would have been if a Democrat was President? Mine is above the fold front page.

The Showdown That Wasn't

Remember when President Bush nominated Gen Hayden to be head of the CIA, replacing the resigning Porter Goss? We were told how Congress was sharpening their knives over this one, with even Republicans questioning the nomination. Senator Arlen Spector claimed he would use the hearings to delve into the NSA's programs for eavesdropping and collecting call information. Well, the whole intellegence committee got a full briefing, and a funny thing happened on the way to the big showdown -- he was voted out of committee 12-3, and he was confirmed by the full senate 78-15. Some showdown. And it points up once again, the more you know about the NSA programs, the more in favor of it you are.

My Favorite Bond Reparte

One thing the Bond movies are known for, besides his women, is his wit. My favorite Bond movie, Thunderball, has my favorite example:

Bond: That gun, it looks more fitting for a woman.
Largo: You know much about guns, Mr. Bond?
Bond: No, but I know a little about women.

Dennis "Haymaker" Hastert

The Congressional Search kerfufle has taken a couple of new twists: First, President Bush ordered the material seized to be sealed for 45 days. For some reason, this sparked wonderment in some quarters, although not in others. I'm firmly in the camp that this makes sense, for a couple of reasons: one is that the President has to work with Congress, so it doesn't make sense to get into a public shouting match with the leadership he wants to work with over something that really is the pervue of low level government (IOW the President and Congress really shouldn't get involved in a routine police matter). The other is that this allows the President to have a series quiet, private chats with the House leadership that has gone bonkers and allow the whole matter to drift off to oblivion, with the announcement of the resolution time to coincide with something of far more interest to the news media, like another disappearence of an attractive young white woman. And really the President is giving anything up - he made it clear that the evidence would not be returned, and a 45 day delay in a case like this is nothing - the FBI already waited 8 months to seize the material after serving a subpeona.

Another bizare twist is that Hastert has fired a shot across ABCs bow for their repeated claims that he's somehow under investigation (or in their odd phrase, "in the mix" - I never knew investigating Congress was like baking a cake) after the Justice Department has officially stated he isn't. ABC has revealed enought for it to be clear that in fact there is nothing new here. Will the obvious questions this raises be persued? Hell no. We won't go asking about the propriety of an investigator or investigators making these leaks (short answer is that whoever leaked it should be investitgated and fired), nor will we be asking why this leak, now? Speaker Hastert obviously feels that it is retaliation for his complaint over the search of William Jefferson's Congressional Office. Is there another motive? I just hope Denny shows as much fire and tenacity in going after ABC, which they so richly deserve, as he as in going after the FBI over the search (which they don't deserve).

And what's getting lost in all the subsequent plot twists? That all the evidence points to William Jefferson being a crook.

Guess The Neo-Con

Synchronicity happens. I'm reading a blog post with a quote from a well known person, and then I read an article and bam, you have a Reece's Peanut Butter Cups. Some writer for the Washington Post writes another attack on Neo-cons, which has become short hand for someone a lefty doesn't like (being Jewish doesn't hurt), and so I respond. See if you can guess the well known author of the following quotes.

For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three-quarters ago. The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

Sure sounds like a neo-con, nattering on about God and the rights of man.

In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reduction in 1954 has borne this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.

Sheesh, he's a supply sider too. Doesn't he know this is trickle down, voodoo economics, the kind that didn't work for Ronald Reagan or GW Bush?

Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.

Typical neo-con going on about freedom but not the important stuff like universal healthcare. No doubt he wants the US to go stick its nose in other people's business and force them to be like America.

The 1930's taught us a clear lesson: aggressive conduct, if allowed to go unchecked and unchallenged, ultimately leads to war. This nation is opposed to war.

Can't neo-cons get over WWII? That isn't the only war you know. What about the lessons of Vietnam?

My fellow citizens, let no one doubt that this is a difficult and dangerous effort on which we have set out. No one can foresee precisely what course it will take or what costs or casualties will be incurred. Many months of sacrifice and self-discipline lie ahead -- months in which both our patience and our will will be tested, months in which many threats and denunciations will keep us aware of our dangers. But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing.

The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are; but it is the one most consistent with our character and courage as a nation and our commitments around the world. The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission.

Our goal is not the victory of might, but the vindication of right; not peace at the expense of freedom, but both peace and freedom, here in this hemisphere, and, we hope, around the world. God willing, that goal will be achieved.

There he goes again, dragging God into it. And what's this guy going on and on about the difficulties for -- where's the exit strategy, where's the clear communication of a plan for total victory? All I hear is somebody who's in over his head, and doesn't know how to get out.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans -- born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage, and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge -- and more.

To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided there is little we can do -- for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

More of that imperialist talk about not permitting other countries not being up to our standards. And what's this talk about divided there is little we can do -- sounds like he doesn't value dissent. Although, something sounds familiar - haven't I heard that pay any price, bear any burden talk before? Hmm, I don't recall Wolfie or Perle saying that stuff.

Yep, that neo-con I've quoted here is none other than John Fitzgerald Kennedy -- JFK. Gosh, who knew that he was the father of neo-conservatism foreign policy, not Irving Kristol?

Not only is the tone strikingly like the neo-conservative of today (lending credence to their claim that they didn't leave the Democrats, but the Democrats left them) but a shocker is the committment to do hard things. Today the left is consumed with always taking the easy way on foreign policy. Don't rock the boat. Stability is a greater good than liberty for all.

In place of "support any friend, oppose any foe" we have apply pressure to our friends' butts, apply lips to our enemies' butts.

Bear any burden is replaced with the only fruit worth picking is the low hanging variety.

This is the rhetoric of Democrats and the left before Vietnam. They sound quite different today -- still suffering from a culture of defeatism over 30 years later.

I read the quote on economics at Steve Verdon's and was intrigued enough to follow the link to American Rhetoric where I found a bunch of JFK speeches. Reading them, I'm struck by how much the idealism in them is the same as in GWB (and the famous neo-con movement). Now of course I got to pick the excerpts I wanted, but I don't think I distorted JFKs views. And I'm not arguing that if JFK were alive today he would be considered a neo-con because I have no idea what the intervening 40 years would have done to his thinking; but the JFK who was President was far more like Reagan or GW Bush than any current Democrat (except possibly Lieberman).

Dana Milbank Sucks

Yes, my title is an ad hominem. But I claim truth as a defense. The sad thing, Dana is just another in a sea of terrible reporters who can't tell where their opinion leaves off and reality begins.

Easy Bake Movies

Dirty Harry at Libertas has another spot on post about Hollywood: Must We Destroy Hollywood In Order To Save It?:

The reason I want certain films to fail is because it might facilitate actual change. Sequels, remakes, old TV shows, and comic book films can all crash and burn. I’m sick of them. Sick to death. And I’m sick of them because they all share one common trait: We know the story before the lights dim. We know the characters, we know the world they inhabit, and we know how it’s gonna end. I want to meet new people, see new places, and not know what happens next. But that requires originality. It requires talent. It requires risk-taking. And Hollywood hasn’t met those requirements since the peak of maverick (and liberal) film making in the 1970’s.

Amen, brother Dirty. Easy filmmaking isn't good filmmaking, and that's all we're getting these days. We've seen time and again, make a good, original film and fannies will flood the theater. Make another lousy remake, and you'll go down like The Poseidon.

Video Games Of My Lamented Youth

Mark is offering a walk down video game memory lane and he's focusing on the console. Poor benighted soul that I am, I've never owned a video game console - although Father's Day is coming up.

I have played plenty of video games, especially in my youth, when they had game parlours -- the forerunners of places like Dave & Busters. So my trip will be a bit different, and I'll start off with my senior year in college, because I lived off campus (across the street is still off campus) at 555 B Stanford Ave. (which I see from the magic of the internet needed repairs for dry rot in 1998) and spent my lunch time playing video games downstairs at Tresidder - I imagine the games and bowling alley are both long gone by now. That was when we had games like Tempest which was just amazing when it first came out. Coin ops give a completely different feel than the home console - in part because having a good game could lead to free games - I still remember the day I kept playing Tempest on one quarter because I kept winning free games. By that time Pinball was on the way out, and the machines were kept segregated although I often crossed over and took a walk on the Pinball side.

But my favorite game, and that of my brother too, was Beserk which we had to go to some place in Menlo Park to play, which was followed by it's successor Frenzy, which was just a way cool game and if I remember right was available in Tresidder only after I graduated.

William Jefferson and Denny Hastert

Politicians serve as a constant source of total amazement for me, even more than the blaze of stars in the sky at night away from city lights which leaves me slackjawed in astonishment. William Jefferson is a member of the House of Represenatives who looks to have taken bribes and is under investigation by the FBI. As part of that investigation, the FBI searched with a warrant Jefferson's congressional office and the US residence of the Vice-President of Nigeria. Oddly enough, it was the search of the congressional office, not the foriegn official's residence, that has raised a stink. Of all the hills to pick to die on, why the Republican leadership in Congress picked this one is beyond me, what with Denny Hastert demanding the FBI turn over any documents it seized as part of the raid, along with the comment "They took the wrong path."

I suppose I should be happy that the Republican congressional leadership is not playing politics, because clearly the political response would be to help carry the boxes the FBI seized and make a statement to the press with boxes in hand that it's a darn shame the Democrats tolerate a criminal in their midst. Instead they make a boneheaded claim that Congressional offices should be sanctuaries for illegal activity. Most people are going to wonder what's in your office, Denny. If a sitting President has to testify before a grand jury, then a Congressional office can be searched by the FBI.

Look, I understand the idea behind the separation of powers, so my question is what would be the correct path here? Congress has passed the laws which the executive branch is trying to enforce, and the FBI executed a search warrant duly authorized by a judge - in other words, the branches of government are doing their separate jobs. The FBI subpeoned the documents it searched for in September of last year, which subpeona Congressman Jefferson and Congress itself ignored alike. And in that eight month period, has Congress opened its own investigation into Congressmen Jefferson, or taken any action at all? Of course not. Back when they had a chance to act, they did nothing. Now they are up hopping on their hind legs bellowing about principle. But what's clear here is that the executive branch isn't trying to intimidate or influence the legislative branch -- a case which would warrant all the bellowing and in which case I would gladly bellow right along -- but a case where the executive branch and judicial branches are going about their constitutional and legislatively mandated roles of law enforcement.

I don't like the FBI raiding congressional offices, but then I like criminals even less and think they should be investigated, prosecuted, and incarcerated whether the criminal is a member of Congress or not -- especially if the criminal is a member of Congress.

More, More, More

Here's a bit of good news: More than 565 people were arrested in Europe and the US in a sweep targeting marketing fraud using the internet. So far, 61 convictions. Keep it up, we need to cut down on all the fraud. I'm tired of my inbox bulging with criminal intent all the time.

Missouri the Beautiful

I love Missouri. There, I said it, and I'm not ashamed. The countryside is beautiful, the people are friendly and helpful, and our government is, OK, two out of three ain't bad. I know a lot of people must think of Missouri as dull flat country with nothing but farms, but that's Northern Illinois, not Missouri. Missouri is actually quite varied, and while the scenery isn't dramatic (no deserts or mountains), it's much more inviting and bursting with life.

I know what you're thinking, what the heck brought this on? Our Boy Scout Troop floated 16 miles on the glorious Jack's Fork river this past weekend. The National Park Service campground at Alley Spring's was a rare treat for our troop because it had a large fire pit, plenty of picnic tables, and best of all, flush toilets. Our canoe outfitter was Windy's, and we were more than satisfied with them. The area is really very pretty although a bit hard to get to. I'd put up pictures, but the batteries were dead in the digital camera and I didn't bring the flim camera.

The Real Story of Katrina

Not only is most of what you know about Katrina not true, but you've never heard the real story of Katrina: the National Guard (with lots of help from the Coast Guard, and the Lousiana Fish and Wildlife Department), supposedly overstretched and worn out from Iraq, saved tens of thousands of lives in New Orleans. Why? Quiet competence never gets media attention:

The procedure ran under a system known as EMACs (Emergency Management Assistance Compacts), a mutual aid pact among states. The conference call became a daily routine that was New Orleans' primary lifeline to outside aid. It bypassed local officials and the fouled-up federal chain of command that led to much publicized infighting among the Governor, FEMA and the White House. According to the Senate Select Committee on Katrina, "This process quickly resulted in the largest National Guard deployment in U.S. history, with 50,000 troops and supporting equipment arriving from 49 states and four territories within two weeks. These forces participated in every aspect of emergency response, from medical care to law enforcement and debris removal..." the report said. All from the Superdome.

Meanwhile, late Monday, Louisiana National Guard HQ moved its high tech "unified command suite" and tents to the upper parking deck of the Superdome. This degraded communications for about four hours but ultimately gave them satellite dishes for phone and Internet connections to the outside world, Wi-fi, plus radios that were the only talk of the town. Helicopters and boats, as we noted, were already bringing in survivors there. About fifty men and women, black and white, worked per shift, equipped with maps, laptops, phone and radios to coordinate the rescue operation. The rescuers called it the "eagles' nest".

The operation was impossible to hide or ignore and some news outlets may have mentioned it in passing. Still, I haven't seen anything reported that sounded like what the two Majors described Tuesday morning: helicopters landing every minute; big ones, like the National Guard Chinooks, literally shaking the decking of the rooftop parking lot; little ones like the ubiquitous Coast Guard Dolphins; Black Hawks everywhere, many with their regular seats torn out so they could accommodate more passengers, standing. Private air ambulance services evacuating patients from flood-threatened hospitals. Owners of private helicopters who showed up to volunteer, and were sent on their way with impromptu briefings on basic rescue needs. Overhead, helicopters stacked in a holding pattern.
...
In all this time, Dressler said, "We didn't see a single camera crew or reporter on the scene. Maybe someone was there with a cell phone or a digital camera but I didn't see anyone." This was in the headquarters area. Maj. Ed Bush, meanwhile, did start seeing reporters on Tuesday and Wednesday, but inside the Dome, most were interested in confirming the stacks of bodies in the freezers, interviews with rape victims, he said, and other mayhem that never happened. He pitched the rescue angle and no one was interested. A few reporters and film crews did hitch rides on helicopters, came back, and produced stories of people stuck on rooftops, not stories about rescues, he said.

Neither Maj. Bush nor Dressler saw TV until the end of the week. They were aghast. Apart from sporadic mentions, the most significant note taken of this gigantic operation was widespread reporting of the rumor that a sniper had fired on a helicopter. What were termed evacuations in some cases, rescue operations in others, were said to have been halted as a result. "I never knew how badly we were being killed in the media," Maj. Ed Bush says. In reality, the only shots fired at the Guard were purely metaphorical and originated with the media. Rescues continued 24/7 at a furious pace.

I'm reminded time and time again just how badly the press, which always holds others up to such high standards, does in getting stories right.

Bored With Chicks

I'm bored with the Dixie Chicks. I don't care for country music to begin with, so they never had any musical appeal for me. But most of the attention they get now is because they don't like President Bush. So they are on the cover of Time as far as I can tell because they are so mad at the President they don't care about their careers and they're gratuitously insulting other country music people: "I'd rather have a small following of really cool people who get it, who will grow with us as we grow and are fans for life, than people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith," Maguire said. "We don't want those kinds of fans. They limit what you can do." OK, like companies that want better customers, the Chicks want better fans. Don't worry, my five-disc changer won't contaminate your CDs with Reba's or Toby's, and that's because I want those kinds of musicians because I don't want to limit myself to their kind of crappy music.

Kevin Looks At The News

I'm scanning Google News just in case the left's dream comes true. Nothing on the Fitz Front, but plenty of other interesting stuff:

The UN Comittee Against Torture called on the US to close its detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. And while we're at it, "The state party should take immediate measures to eradicate all forms of torture and ill-treatment of detainees by its military or civilian personnel, in any territory under its jurisdiction". The U.S delegation noted that there have been about 800 investigations into allegations of mistreatment in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Defense Department found misconduct and took action against more than 250 service personnel; there have been 103 courts martial and 89 service members were convicted, of whom 19 received sentences of one year or more. No word on any calls for Cuba to stop torturing its own people or how many Cuban prison guards have been disciplined.

Symantec is suing Microsoft to stop the release of Vista over licensing issues. I wonder which will move faster - the courts in ruling, or Microsoft in releasing Vista. Both move at a glacial creep.

Lawsuits are all the rage, so Apple is countersuing Creative Labs claiming that Creative has infringed on Apple patents -- Creative sued Apple for the very same thing (different patents, of course). I should have become a lawyer, because no matter the outcome of any suit, the lawyers always win. Always.

And I was shocked, shocked to read that Gen. Hayden thinks that the NSA's programs to eavesdrop on international calls or collecting phone call records is legal. I think they are, but what did the headline writer think the Gen. was going to say, lock me up now before I break the law at the CIA?

I wonder at this headline at Reuters: Tensions rise after Hamas aide caught with cash. Um, weren't they already shooting at each other?. And some guy smuggling money is the culprit for "rising tensions". Maybe we ought to let go all the headline writers so we can get some new cliches.

Congress is upset that the Oil companies are taking American's hard earned money -- that's their job. So they've decided to put the oil companies to work for them to the tune of 10 billion dollars.

And once again Congress has decided that their are more important things than energy for America. Take it away, Gateway Pundit.

Scientists have no idea if multivitamins do any good. I say they're a lot easier to take than cod liver oil (yes, I've was forced to take cod liver oil briefly as a child).

The reviews of the Da Vinci Code movie aren't good. I read the book and enjoyed it as a mystery, although despite the authors claims that it is based on fact, it is fantasy start to finish. A note to Hollywood - exciting trash sells, dull trash languishes. Real scholars are happy that at least people are interested in their arcane fields, even if the facts are wrong.

And finally, here's a headline I never thought I'd read in Forbes: Britney Spears Stumbles, Nearly Drops Baby. Now there's an important news story. Just think of the coverage if she acutally had dropped the little nipper.

Reality Catches Up

The easiest promise to make is the one you don't think you'll have to keep. A few years back the government issued accounting rules that made corporations put future retiree healthcare costs on their books. It wasn't pretty. Now governments will have to do the same, and it won't be any prettier. And of course the cry will go up to nationalize healthcare, which won't lower the cost, but shift it to the federales, who are already looking at (I sure hope it's a misprint) 33.4 trillion dollar unfunded liability for Medicare. I guess the state and locals will figure that any increase from their liability won't be noticed in that eye popping figure.

Via Winterspeak at Asymetrical Information.

Hug A Mom Today

The Stanford Magazine, which the Alumni Association so thoughtfully sends to me despite the fact I haven't paid to join (if you don't count the thousands of dollars in tuition, which I don't since my father paid that), has a section called One Question. They ask one question, and well known members of the Stanford community (i.e. not me) answer that one question. Last months edition (i.e. the one I'm currently reading) had an interesting juxtaposition of two answers. First up is a condescending piece of snot by a professor (who else?):

Marjorie Perloff is the Sadie Dernham Patek Professor of Humanities, emerita: Until recently, I honestly believed that the feminist revolution was irreversible. I took it for granted that women could now have real careers and be independent people. But as I read my daughter Carey’s 25th-reunion class book or the New York Times, I learn that little has changed. Indeed, in some ways, the situation has deteriorated as the “soccer mom,” the mom who “uses her SUV as her office,” is valorized. Moms in my day (late ’50s-early ’60s) who didn’t work outside the home used their spare time to work in the community and the arts, take courses, and so on. We would have been ashamed to be soccer moms and spend our afternoons chauffeuring kids around. So I regard the current scene with dismay but also with bemusement: it will change again just as everything does.

I suppose I could read this with a detached bemusement too if it wasn't coming from a professor, so I'm forced to have nothing but dismay. This is the chief reason I have come to disdain capital F Feminism while I consider myself a small f feminism -- I'm all for throwing open the doors of opportunity to all people regardless of gender (or sex) or race or pretty much anything other than criminal behavior, but where I'm also in favor of people deciding on their own what opportunities to persue, the Feminists are not open at all and only consider particular choices the right ones. I, too, am amazed when I read my reunion books how many of the women chose to stop persuing careers, and I'm talking about high paying, prestigous careers, to be full time mothers. But I don't think they've made the wrong choice, just as I don't think those women who continued with their careers made the wrong choice, because it's their choice to make, not mine. On a side note (what, not in parentheses for a change?), I was shocked to read this from a professor; perhaps the instaprofessor wouldn't be so shocked since he comes in contact to such disdain on a far more regular basis.

But the truly wonderful thing is immediately following they have the perfect rejoinder:

Jim Collins, ’80, MBA ’83, founded a management research laboratory in Boulder, Colo., and is the author of Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap . . . And Others Don’t: I used to believe that the critical questions in life were about “what”—what decisions to make, what goals to pursue, what answers to give, what mountains to climb. I’ve come to see that the most important decisions are not about what, but about who. The primary question is not what mountains to climb, but who should be your climbing partner. If you want to have a great life, the most important question is not what you spend your time doing, but who you spend your time with. First who, then what—life is people.

Apparently there are plenty of women (and men too!) who have also made it past what to who and have decided that spouses and children are the who, or at least the most signficant who, when it comes to answering who do you spend your time with. Amen, brother Jim.

Cutting Off Your Nose To Spite Your Face

I keep hearing talk by conservative bloggers about sitting out the 2006 elections to punish the GOP. Does the GOP deserve punishment? Boy, and how. But who exactly would we be punishing, and who would we be rewarding? Do you think Bush is bad on immigration for not being strict enough, why would you let the Democrats, who are far less strict, take over? If you think the Republicans are spending too much, why would you let the Democrats, who would both spend more and tax more, take over? If you don't care for Frist and Hastert, why do you think Reid and Pelosi would be an improvement. Yes, I would like to cast my vote for somebody, but believe me, if I need to I will cast it against somebody.

As far as punishment goes, you'll be punishing the whole nation, and yourselves especially. Yes, some congresspeople would be out of a job, for about half a nano-second until they joined K-Street and made real money for a change.

And what makes you think the message would be that the GOP needs to be more conservative? The Democrats could win in a walk if they moved to the center, but they have chosen (so far) to move to the left. Why do you think the GOP will be any better at reading the tea leaves after the fact then before the fact?

President Bush's Immigration Speech

I didn't see the President's speech last night as I was at my daughter's orchestra concert. And then picking up my son from scouts. And then walking the dog. In the rain. Uphill. Both ways.

I have read the speech, and I think it is a dandy. Because it does everything it should, it will be condemned by extremists on both sides, plus the usual Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers. I'm not an immigration extremist - I don't think we should just let everybody in who wants to be an American, nor can I find it in my heart to condemn people who have yes, broken the law by coming here, but not done anything wrong (IMHO) because they have come here because yes, Virginia, this is the best country in the world. And doubly so when we did next to nothing once they made it here.

I have only one question for President Bush: I know you're plates been full, but what took so long?

The next question is what will Congress do? My prediction - not much slowly.

Referer Logs

I assume most bloggers are like me: Forty, Fat, wait, no, that's the start of who's at risk for gallbladder problems, let's try this again: check our traffic and referrer logs obsessively. It's not all vanity, it's a way of figuring out what people find interesting and finding new blogs, as well has how many people actually come here (so to speak). The Danish cartoons brought me my largest traffic, and the Duke Lacross team is still interesting to a lot of people. Women in various states of undress are perennial favorites. I even had three people come here in the last 24 hours looking for "Monday Humor". And I discovered a brand spanking new blog Bridget's Random Thoughts.

United 93

This weekend the funWife and I celebrated our wedding anniversary by seeing United 93. It isn't the typical date movie, and I was worried about seeing it since I'm going to be on some long plane flights this summer, but we went ahead anyway and we were glad we saw it.

It is an amazing movie. Normally Hollywood takes a great story and tries to improve upon it but rarely succeeds. Thankfully, there was none of that for this movie, and instead it was told in a documentary style that let the events speak for themselves. The power of the movie comes from the power of the events themselves, and not from any artificial additions (compare Saving Private Ryan with its miserable phony framing device to Schindler's List which (by and large) just told the story). This is the second movie I've seen where it simply starts - no previews, no title sequence, just the lights go out and the movie starts. It makes for a better experience, IMHO.

The movie starts with the hijackers getting ready in the morning and then the attack of 9/11 is recreated through the story of United 93 - the airtraffic controllers, the military, the passangers and hijackers on the flight. No backstory, no flashbacks, nobody is introduced except through the details of the exposition itself. It's a hard movie to watch because it brings back all the horror and confusion of 9/11, and sitting through the final scenes of the passangers, scared, confused, and yet ultimately fighting back is especially difficult. And that's why this is filmaking at its finest - an unflinching look at events very few people really want to look at, but you want to during the movie.

It must have been very hard for the actors who portrayed the hijackers. I know a lot of big stars love playing the villain in a movie, but that really is play acting as those villains aren't real, and the byzantine plans of mayhem and distruction are pure screen writer fantasy. Not so in this case, where the villains, the mayhem and the destruction were all too real.

The only thing I found odd was that the movie has some European passanger counseling do nothing and even tries to tell the terrorists the passangers are plotting to attack them. Is there some basis for this?

Libertas liked the movie;
A student at Cal Poly didn't ;
And the final word(s) goes to the ladies of the cotillion.

Current Obsessions Over Nothing

Gas prices seem to be like the weather these days: Everybody complains about it, but nobody does anything about it. Have you noticed anybody slowing down on the road these days? Driving less? How about bitching about it like somehow we're all entitled to nice weather and cheap gas all the time? The first two, nothing. The third, plenty.

Yesterday I came across the USA Today story about NSA gathering information from three out of four telephone companies with mild boredom. I didn't even bother blogging about it because it seemed so trivial. Now the government has a trifle of the info that private companies already have and I'm supposed to care? This is what kills me about so much of the privacy paranoia - the information has already been gathered by one entity, but if the federal governement gets its hands on it, watch out, dictatorship is around the corner (or already here). Thankfully, most of my fellow Americans agree with me, and those who don't (in the story, anyway) turn out to have a full blown case of Bush Derangement Syndrome. At least there is more ot this story than the Bush Fishing Kerfuffle.

A Letter To The Editor

I do so enjoy a good letter to the editor. And today the Post served up a good one:

Paradoxical Post

In light of the May 4 editorial opposing use of the term "Christmas holidays break" by the Francis Howell School District, the May 5 edition is a fascinating example of paradoxes.

On May 4, the Post-Dispatch told us the issue is of no practical impact at all, but on May 5, the story was on Page 1, above the fold. On May 4, the Post-Dispatch decried the emotional content of the issue, but on May 5 published a letter from a lady who does not live in the Francis Howell district but who most emphatically does not want Christmas shoved down her throat. (I suppose she avoids all shopping malls from October on each year.) On May 4, the Post-Dispatch told us Americans are free to call the holiday whatever we want, but on May 5 repeated warnings the district may face lawsuits.

On May 4, the Post-Dispatch warned us of how emotions can be whipped up, and on May 5 demonstrated its willingness to be one of the whips.

Roger W. Collins

Roger, Roger, Roger, you need to remember a foolish consistancy is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Good Parenting, Then and Now

Baby Blues has been running a series of comics this week on Good Parenting, then and now. Not only are they funny, they are sadly true. Childrearing has changed a lot since I was a kid, and I'm not sure it's all for the better.

Of course, even with our foibles, it's better than this craziness in Iran (via No Watermelons Allowed). I guess that answers the question, who could do this to a child.

All Mouth, No Stomach

Sudan is a killing field. No question about it, whatever you decide to call it. Well, now some people have discovered it - like George Clooney. No problem with that, and welcome. I have no doubt Mr. Clooney et al are sincere. But I do have a few questions.

First off, what's the difference between Sudan/Darfur now and Iraq pre-2003? Other than more dead Iraqi's and the prospect of neverending death and destruction? So if you didn't like the intervention in Iraq, why are you urging it in Sudan? Just because you personally visited one region and not the other? Why not go talk to survivors of Hussein's reign of terror then? What will happen when the only way to stop the slaughter now is to give up on the UN and act unilaterally, or at best with the same circle of trusted allies (like the British)? Will you be out cheering President Bush then? What will happen when US forces kill Africans in Africa? What will happen when the US takes casualties in Sudan? Will you stand firm for what you urged, or will you question why we are intervening in someone else's civil war? Will you stand firm, or will you question why the US, stained by slavery, is killing innocent black people in Africa? Will you stand firm, or will you start in with American boys are paying with life and limb for Sudanese Oil?

What I'm asking is, when the going gets rough as most surely it will -- the only way to stop the killing will be to intervene militarily, and we will take casualties, and we will kill innocents and bad guys alike because that is the very nature of a civil war -- will you stay the course, remember how and why we got involved, and rally support in difficult circumstances, or will you cut and run? Because I've got to tell you, the track record of you and your mates on this aren't good. You breath fire when the talk is about putting pressure on somebody else, but when some real pressure is put on you, you cut and run. In the past, you've been all mouth, no stomach. Are we going to see another sequel, or will it be something orginal for a change?

Immigration In a Nut Shell

For me, the whole immigration imbroglio boils down to three simple questions:

(1) how many people should be allowed to immigrate to the United States,
(2) what methods should be used to control immigration, and
(3) what should be done about immigrants who have already arrived here illegally.

Immigration has become a hot topic because it seems that we've had no official answers to these questions; because we've done basically nothing about those who came here illegally and have taken only the most rudimentary steps to control immigration, our de facto position on how many people should be allowed to immigrate is the combination of how many we are willing to allow in plus how many immigrants are willing to take whatever steps they have to in order to get inside the United States.

Now we can have a nice rational discussion about how many people should be admitted based on such factors as what that means to wages, what that means for demographics, what that means for social services, what that means for the countries the immigrants are coming from, how well immigrants are assimilating and the like. What that also means is that slogans such as "America is a nation of immigrants" don't provide any meaningful insight. Hard data on the factors I've raised would be far more helpful than mass rallies or man in the street interviews by the press.

Once we've decided how the numbers compare between how many people we are willing to admit and how many are trying to get here, the proper control methods can be decided on. A big fence with regular patrols would be overkill if there is only a slight imbalance but may be the right solution if the imbalance is large. While its wrong to keep citizens from emigrating to a country of their choice and is willing to take them, there is nothing wrong in keeping out immigrants if the nation is unwilling to take them in.

The question about what to do about those who are already here is somewhat unrelated to the other two, although certainly we've experienced that lax enforcement leads only to greater numbers of people willing to flout the law to enter the US illegally. Should we simply round people up and expel them back over the border or should be they be punished before they are expelled? How many resources should be devoted to looking for illegals? Should employers be sanctioned for hiring illegals, and should it punishment apply or be greater if they employer does so deliberately and not accidentally?

The reason these issues have become front burner is that immigration has been large enough long enough that it has affected most every American in some way.

The Tragedy of Declining Births

The Tragedy of the Commons is the classic illustration of why private property works and communal property doesn't.

I see the tragedy repeating itself in most government run old age support/pension systems in the developed world. In the original example, it was grazing land that was held in common. In the developed world, it is children who are held in common, or more accuately, their productivity. Not that long ago, children were not only cheap to raise, but a source of labor in their youth and support in a parent's old age. Children were a modest investment with a large payout. That's one reason families were larger - large families made economic sense. That is no longer the case - as children cost on the order of $250,000 and provide very little labor and support directly back to their parents. Large families no longer make economic sense; in fact children no longer make economic sense at all anymore for most parents in the developed world.

Where does the money come from for the government to support retired/old people? Taxpayers. And who are these taxpayers? The children and the grandchildren of the retired/old people. But the support a government pensioner receives is not related to how many children that person raised.

Let's dispose of one objection right away - that government saves the contributions of individuals, invests it wisely, and then returns the principle and interest after retirement. Social Security, and other defined benefit plans that do not include some form of individual accounts, are all pay as you go systems - today's retirees are paid by today's workers. Our own government has skimmed money off the top by setting the tax rate higher than it needs to be, setting up a "trust fund" which it immediately takes all the money out of the trust fund and spends but leaves an IOU behind. The amazing thing is how this bit of theft manages to fool so many people (maybe not so amazing when you consider how many people still fall for the Nigerian money transfer fraud) in this country.

So the tragedy is that we have developed a system that removes the clear link (OK, the system doesn't just hide the link, it tries to substitute a fraud in its place) between where a government payment comes from and where it goes. Parents might be too proud or too caring to take money from their own children, but are perfectly fine with taking the money from everybodies children. So each recipient expects a comfortable retirement but has no incentive to provide for it; in fact, the recipient pays a penalty through the high cost of raising a child to provide for it. Is it any wonder than that societies that set up such government funded retirement schemes face collapsing birthrates and unsustainable finances?

Around The Web

Steyn on Europe:

It’s true that no other G8 member runs its democracy according to a document from the quill pen era. On the Continent, you’re hard pressed to find anything pre-Day-Glo Hi-Liter. The US Constitution is not only older than the French, German, Italian, Belgian and Spanish constitutions, it’s older than all of them put together. In political terms, the “Old World” and “New World” labels are misapplied. Americans are brash noisy novelty junkies when it comes to going into Starbucks and ordering a decaf hazelnut-pepperoni-Eurasian-milfoil macchiato, but not when it comes to the organizing principles of the state. Europeans have some fetching oil cathedrals and cobbled streets, but when it comes to political order they’re the novelty junkies with ADD.

Will Hutton insists that “all western democracies subscribe to a broad family of ideas that are liberal or leftist”. Given that New Hampshire, for example, has been a continuous democracy for two centuries longer than Germany, this seems a doubtful proposition. It would be more accurate to say that almost all European nations subscribe to a broad family of ideas that are statist. Or, as Hutton has it, “the European tradition is much more mindful that men and women are social animals and that individual liberty is only one of a spectrum of values that generate a good society.” Precisely. And it’s the willingness to subordinate individual liberty to what Hutton calls “the primacy of society” that’s blighted the Continent for over a century: Statism – or “the primacy of society” - is what Fascism, Nazism, Communism and European Union all have in common. The curse of the Continent is big ideas, each wacky notion a response to the last flop: the pre-war German middle classes put their hopes in Hitler as a bulwark against the Bolsheviks; likewise, the post-war German middle classes put their faith in European integration as a bulwark against a resurgence of Nazism.

McQ on drilling for oil:

The fact that Cuba has leased 59 areas within the Florida straits should finally drive home the fact that the policies we have followed since the 1980s are self-defeating. It is possible, given advances in technology, to safely drill offshore. If Katrina taught us nothing else, it should taught us that. And with Cuba planning on drilling in the Florida straits it should become equally clear that if we don't safely exploit those resources, someone will (and perhaps in not as environmentally friendly way as we might).

Jim Kouri on Patrick Kennedy:

This particular scandal has more to do with whom a story involving drug abuse is about. If the "perp" is a conservative -- such as Rush Limbaugh -- the ladies and gentlemen of the press have a million questions about Limbaugh's drug use and exposure to arrest and prosecution. If the "perp" is a liberal, then the story becomes the effects of Ambian, the types of drugs not to mix with Ambian, and should Americans beware of using prescription sleep medications such as Ambian.

Dirty Harry of Libertas on Hollywood's Politics -- It's Only Courageous When It's Liberal:

Again, that may well be true, but when other stars make fools of themselves and make divisive statements, I don’t recall this being blamed on any subsequent box office woes. They trash America, conservatives, and Christians with zeal and no one calls them heartless. So, why is Cruise being singled out? Simple: his religion.

Jeff Goldstein on Patrick Fitzgerald:

Personally, I’m not following along as closely as I should be—and I’ve been derelict in my reading of Tom Maguire’s recent posts on the subject—but then, I have trouble with the indictment of a man for charges stemming from an alleged lie (some insist it is but a failure of memory) that is meant to cover for the failure of a prolonged investigation to find evidence of the original accusations: that Ms Plame was “outed” by the White House to punish Joe Wilson for, uh, lying about what he told reporters (a fact that would soon be exposed, and one that falls under the category of inevitable discovery, as far as I’m concerned). Call it an avoidance response brought about by despair.

Finally, Al Qaida on Iraq:

At the same time, the Americans and the Government were able to absorb our painful blows, sustain them, compensate their losses with new replacements, and follow strategic plans which allowed them in the past few years to take control of Baghdad as well as other areas one after the other. That is why every year is worse than the previous year as far as the Mujahidin’s control and influence over Baghdad.

Blogs Vs. MSM

I wrote this in response to the Don Surber post The Truth About Newspaper Circulation

Don,

Why does blog vs. MSM have to be binary either or? They both have strengths and weaknesses. Do I have to read only one and not the other?

Why make a comparison between the hits the top 770 newspapers get and those one top blogger gets? Shouldn't you be comparing either the hits of the top newspaper to the top blogger or the top 770 newspapers with the top 770 bloggers? If 770 newspapers get more than 365 time the hits one blogger gets, does that mean the top blogger gets more than twice the hits of the average top 770 newspapers? Wouldn't that be an amazing statistic?

Don, what's with "blogs have no credibility"? With whom? You? Do you have any data (the plural of anecdote isn't data) to base this on? Frankly, there are blogs that have no credibility with me, and there are those who have a great deal of credibility. There are a few MSM outlets left that have a great deal of credibility with me, but most have little to none. Can I generalize from my opinion to what the general public thinks? Not without data. For what it's worth, my memory of the last survey I saw on this subject said that only 19% of people surveyed thought that newspapers were usually reliable.

There are some blogs out there doing far better analysis than most of what I read in the newspapers. Not opinion in the sense that most opinion pieces are written: I present only the facts that support my position, but a real exploration of what's going on and an honest attempt to make sense of all the messiness of the real world.

There are blogs out there doing original reporting - who's provided better basic eyewitness reporting in Iraq than Michael Yon (or Michael Totten in the middle east)? We get better basic eyewitness reporting of protest demonstrations in blogs all the time. Blogs finally got Dan Rather off the air, and Captain Ed brought down a government. The sad truth is that at the moment the best blogs are bringing clarity and the best newspapers are bringing FUD (and the worst bloggers are far worse than the worst papers).

For me, there are certain structural problems with the MSM (what is news, the news cycle, that sort of thing), but they pale in significance to what I would consider the real problems of the MSM today: bias, arrogance, poor judgement, and quite frankly just lousy quality. These are quite fixable problems if the MSM can just realize what the problems are - and I fully expect with the MSM moving to the net the outfits that correct them will thrive and those that don't will disappear.

I want a reliable press who can report the facts, provide the context,and help me understand what's happening in the world. I'm not getting that today, and I'm unhappy about it.

Boy Scout Leader Training

I'm now a trained Boy Scout Leader. A weekend ago I spent 9 and a half hours in classroom instruction on Saturday; this past weekend I was in outdoor training from 5:30PM Friday until 1:00PM Sunday. The classroom training wasn't that much fun, since it was straight through with only a couple of bathroom breaks - even lunch was a working one as each patrol had to plan for the upcoming camping trip. The weekend outdoor training, however, was a blast, as we got to be Boy Scouts for a weekend and learn by doing. I especially enjoyed the knots, hitches, and lashings training. My district, New Horizons, had 10 patrols of 6-7 trainees (I was in the Picnic Rats), and several other districts in the St. Louis Council were also represented.

I've learned through experience the secret to a good camping experience consists of three things - good earplugs so the noises in the night (mainly snorring) don't keep you awake, a good mattress/cot to get a good night's sleep on, and a good grubmaster so that you eat and drink well. And good weather always helps, although all you can do about it is to prepare for bad weather.

One of the things that struck me during training is what great shape Beaumont Scout Reservation (where the training took place) is in despite decades of year round use by the Boy Scouts. During the summer months the use is nearly non-stop as it is the site of summer camps for cub scouts and boy scouts, and it is used by packs, troops, and crews throughout the year. You won't see litter, but you will find plenty of animal life - and not just of the misquito, tick, and chigger variety. The BSA really does a good job of teaching its members how to be responsible and leave no trace.

Another part of Boy Scouts I enjoy is the adults. It's a cross section in one sense - the adults come from all walks of life, male and female, rich and poor, white collar and blue collar - but in another way its not as its a great group of people, always ready to pitch in, to help out, and to have fun and above all dedicated to the youth.

Eggers Resigns At The Post-Dispatch

Terrance Eggers, the publisher of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, is leaving the newspaper effective May 19th. Last November, Ellen Soeteber resigned as Editor-in-Chief. It seems that Mr. Eggers is leaving for the same reasons Ms. Soeteber left - the Post has money problems, or as they described it, the paper faces a "choppy advertising market that prevented Egger from meeting modest revenue targets during his last year of a decade-long run in St. Louis."

I have to feel sorry for newspaper people these days - its the best of times as the internet beckons, and it is the worst of times, as the current advertising base dries up. Here we are in a robust expansion, and the ad revenue isn't coming back -- which means it isn't going to come back. I think this accounts for the generally unhappy outlook on the economy by the press -- their economy isn't good, so they assume nobody else's is, either.

Bill McClellan wrote about Mr. Egger's departure. Bill get's his facts right but his interpretation is way off: "An odd but endearing quality of newspaper folk is that we profess to know a lot about everybody else's business but know almost nothing of our own." It isn't odd but endearing - it's thoroughly annoying. And then he notes the big bucks Mr. Eggers has been paid ($3 million when Pulitzer was bought out, $675,000 retention bonus, and $1 million severance package) -- all the while his editorial page has been blasting other execs for similar excess. The press can't stand the same scrutiny and standards they hold everyone else to.

I Shall Return (In a Little While)

I'm still alive, just busier than usual, which means I don't have time for a reflective, in depth post. I'm also unexcited by the topics of the day (who cares if a comedian bombed or not, and how do I even communicate with someone who thinks Colbert was devasting but the media is in bed with Bush other than to say he did and they aren't), so that means I haven't been posting. And the forecast is busy for a while, so the gruel will be thin for a while yet.

Your Favorites From Funmurphys

I've taken the ruminations of Mark at Kaedrin blog about Weblog usability to heart. I've already made some changes before I read it, but I could do more. To that end, I'd like to have a Best of Funmurphys in the side bar with links to my best stuff. I have a few ideas, but it would be nice if we few, we happy few, we band of brothers who actually read this blog on a somewhat regular basis (i.e. more than once) would let me know what you think as well. So go ahead, and pick your favorite posts in the comments.

Thanks for your help.

And please, please, don't leave me hanging with nobody leaving comments. Because then I would have to destroy all evidence that this post ever existed.