In logic, conflation is the error of treating two distinct concepts as if they were one. We witnessed a perfect example of this in the press treatment of the Wesley Clark statement regarding John McCain. Asked on the Sunday morning program Face The Nation, hosted by Bob Sheiffer whether John McCain's military experience qualified him to become president, General Clark (a pro military guy himself) responded that flying jets, getting shot down, being a POW were not necessarily presidential qualifications.
The aghast Sheiffer demanded an explanation, wherein Clark explained the differences between policy setting, planning and administration and following orders. He never disparaged McCain's courage, patriotism, or honesty.
McCain's people were outraged. How could anyone question McCain's military record? By yesterday evening, Obama was distancing himself from Clark.
I am perplexed. Why can't Obama (or some journalist) simply point out that Clark never attacked McCain's patriotism or courage? The comments about the qualifications for president were restricted to whether combat military service was pertinent to the job as commander in chief. (If so, maybe they should have nominated Colin Powell.)
But some conservatives have been very successful in raising conflation to a conversational art. Let anyone utter a word of dissention from the party line and their patriotism is called into question. This flap is proof that the mix of disinformation and moral clarity creates a potent brew.
6/30/2008
Wisdom of Age
Boy, the guy who said, "You should never cook bacon while naked," really knew what he was talking about.
6/29/2008
Rationalizing Happiness
Another birthday has rolled around on the two digit odometer of my life. I do not mention it to make you feel guilty that you didn't send me a card or a gift, honestly. It is not a big birthday, but one of those tweener anniversaries. Last year's birthday (my 65th) is probably the last one I will actually "celebrate" with any sense of party-worthiness. From here on I will simply "observe" the day as a reason to demand bacon for breakfast - with no feeling of celebration, rather a vague sense of doom as I mark one year closer to the ultimate afternoon nap. This is not morbid thinking; this is just Reality 101.
When my friends and I get together for lunch these days, we toast each others' health - and we really mean it! These days some of us are clinking iced tea and soda glasses instead of those heady steins of dark beer or martinis. Alcohol doesn't agree with some of our meds. But we are nonetheless happy to be alive and out in the company of friends to enjoy a meal and some conversation.
Frequently, at lunch the talk turns to politics. We are all tending to be argumentative in our old age (and to hell with anyone who doesn't like it.) Family members call us curmudgeons; we call them ungrateful little snots.
My conservative leaning lunch mates tend to be frustrated with the relentlessness of progress. The mainstream (Communists and anarchists) press reports are full of lies and spin; special interest conservative news outlets warn of perils and slippery slopes. Their gloomy effect is far-reaching - peaked by news of another hapless pregnant girl who elects to end an unwanted pregnancy, another proposed tax measure, or any effort to change things. They want to keep things as they were. Dissent is viewed as treason.
. . .
Conservatives have always seemed grumpy to me. So I was interested in a small piece in the Globe today that cited recent studies that found conservatives tended to think of themselves as happy. In summary:
"The conservative-happiness relationship was not explained by differences in demographics or thoughtfulness but was largely explained by conservatives' greater rationalization of inequality, including belief in a meritocratic world. According to the authors, such beliefs serve a "palliative function" or act as an "emotional buffer" when confronted with inequality."
Now this seems to make sense. If you believe in a meritocracy, you probably have deluded yourself into believing that you've earned everything you've got; you are not simply the beneficiary of a lucky DNA roll that permitted you to be smart, good looking and white.
When my friends and I get together for lunch these days, we toast each others' health - and we really mean it! These days some of us are clinking iced tea and soda glasses instead of those heady steins of dark beer or martinis. Alcohol doesn't agree with some of our meds. But we are nonetheless happy to be alive and out in the company of friends to enjoy a meal and some conversation.
Frequently, at lunch the talk turns to politics. We are all tending to be argumentative in our old age (and to hell with anyone who doesn't like it.) Family members call us curmudgeons; we call them ungrateful little snots.
My conservative leaning lunch mates tend to be frustrated with the relentlessness of progress. The mainstream (Communists and anarchists) press reports are full of lies and spin; special interest conservative news outlets warn of perils and slippery slopes. Their gloomy effect is far-reaching - peaked by news of another hapless pregnant girl who elects to end an unwanted pregnancy, another proposed tax measure, or any effort to change things. They want to keep things as they were. Dissent is viewed as treason.
. . .
Conservatives have always seemed grumpy to me. So I was interested in a small piece in the Globe today that cited recent studies that found conservatives tended to think of themselves as happy. In summary:
"The conservative-happiness relationship was not explained by differences in demographics or thoughtfulness but was largely explained by conservatives' greater rationalization of inequality, including belief in a meritocratic world. According to the authors, such beliefs serve a "palliative function" or act as an "emotional buffer" when confronted with inequality."
Now this seems to make sense. If you believe in a meritocracy, you probably have deluded yourself into believing that you've earned everything you've got; you are not simply the beneficiary of a lucky DNA roll that permitted you to be smart, good looking and white.
6/24/2008
Where's My Check Part 2
Ok, I got an official looking envelope from the US treasury, yesterday. It was addressed to both of us, with the last 4 digits of our taxpayer number, so there was no doubt what it contained.
I had just received the quarterly real estate tax bill the day before, and unexpected auto repairs last week had nearly depleted our discretionary expense account. The timing couldn't be better.
The government envelope had been wedged between sheaves of drenched junk mail, so, despite the torrential rains, it remained relatively dry. I rejoiced in anticipation of the long-awaited economic stimulus bonus check that would help turn our economy around to save our retirement nest egg.
Not that the mail carrier cared. He was one of those bitter, unfriendly civil servants who hate their jobs and spend most of their time on the job calculating the number of days to go until they can retire. Whenever it rains, I noticed that he never makes the slightest effort to keep the mail covered. He just walks a normal pace to each house on the street with the mail held out, unprotected, looking miffed because he was out slogging in the rain, hungry and cold, while we - the affluent residents of his route are probably languishing inside our pricey dry McMansions, not working, making grilled cheese sandwiches and watching The View.
Into each mailbox, he angrily stuffs the clutch of soggy catalogs and bills. Maybe he thinks he is living up to the Post Office credo of reliable, relentless service through rain, sleet, whatever.
Maybe he grudgingly feels he is doing a service, but I would rather wait for a nice day and get dry mail, instead of "[bleep] you - here's your [bleeping] wet mail!" But the excitement of getting my stimulus check wiped out any trivial annoyance over minor aggravations such as wet mail.
When I opened the envelope to find a letter and no check, my high expectations were crushed like a Corvair in a junkyard. Here's what the letter said:
"The check is in the mail" The letter was dated June 23 and it said that the check was scheduled for June 27 - but may take six weeks...don't call until then.
Now, I know most of you have given up trying to figure out why the government does what it does, but I still demand rationality. Was this letter supposed to give me some useful information? Or was it just another waste of taxpayer money?
And, where the hell is my check?
I had just received the quarterly real estate tax bill the day before, and unexpected auto repairs last week had nearly depleted our discretionary expense account. The timing couldn't be better.
The government envelope had been wedged between sheaves of drenched junk mail, so, despite the torrential rains, it remained relatively dry. I rejoiced in anticipation of the long-awaited economic stimulus bonus check that would help turn our economy around to save our retirement nest egg.
Not that the mail carrier cared. He was one of those bitter, unfriendly civil servants who hate their jobs and spend most of their time on the job calculating the number of days to go until they can retire. Whenever it rains, I noticed that he never makes the slightest effort to keep the mail covered. He just walks a normal pace to each house on the street with the mail held out, unprotected, looking miffed because he was out slogging in the rain, hungry and cold, while we - the affluent residents of his route are probably languishing inside our pricey dry McMansions, not working, making grilled cheese sandwiches and watching The View.
Into each mailbox, he angrily stuffs the clutch of soggy catalogs and bills. Maybe he thinks he is living up to the Post Office credo of reliable, relentless service through rain, sleet, whatever.
Maybe he grudgingly feels he is doing a service, but I would rather wait for a nice day and get dry mail, instead of "[bleep] you - here's your [bleeping] wet mail!" But the excitement of getting my stimulus check wiped out any trivial annoyance over minor aggravations such as wet mail.
When I opened the envelope to find a letter and no check, my high expectations were crushed like a Corvair in a junkyard. Here's what the letter said:
"The check is in the mail" The letter was dated June 23 and it said that the check was scheduled for June 27 - but may take six weeks...don't call until then.
Now, I know most of you have given up trying to figure out why the government does what it does, but I still demand rationality. Was this letter supposed to give me some useful information? Or was it just another waste of taxpayer money?
And, where the hell is my check?
6/21/2008
New Brave World
I was moved (again) by Peggy Noonan's recent WSJ essay "Brave New World" which impressed me as an intelligent and honest analysis of the choices we have in the next election. If you read nothing else about politics, you should read this essay. http://www.wsj.com/article/SB121330247663568945.html
In November, Americans will go to the polls with a clear choice. McCain represents Old America; Obama represents New America. The individuals themselves do not matter, so we should not get hung-up on the personalities. The president is not the Emperor. If the congress has any gonads at all, the president cannot do anything that is contrary to the will of the people.
My liberal friends (most of the people I associate with) like to blame everything that has gone wrong in the last 7 years on George Bush. I find this a bit too simplistic. There are many conspiritors afoot.
Bush lied and people died, is a clever reduction, but it does not square with the real situation. The democratic majority could have voted against funding the war in Iraq and it would have been over long ago. But they didn't. They drove the getaway car, and that makes them accessories just as if they had committed the crime with their own hands.
My conservative friends are quick to point out that things are not as bad as they would have been under Al Gore or John Kerry. I am inclined to agree with them, and I will admit that I voted for Bush both times. In retrospect I think my vote for dubya was more against the other guys. I was voting against the guys who had spent their lives working in the Washington machine. I did not trust them to have the intestinal fortitude to stand-up against their powerful special interest sponsors.
Perhaps this is just revisionist. I am acutely aware of the human tendency to justify past choices, even when they turn out to be disasterous.
Back to Peggy's thesis. I think she has nailed it with her description of the issues and choice at stake - New America vs Old America.
Unfortunately for her camp, she has clearly made the case that guarantees an Obama victory. She romantically characterizes what Old America stands for, forgetting the inconvenient truths of Traditional America - which was fine if you were white, good looking, and lucky enough to have Ozzie and Harriet for parents. Most of the people who will be voting in the next election don't identify with that shining vision - or memory.
Do we still have time to impeach Bush for poisoning the tomatoes?
6/15/2008
A License to Annoy
Hmm. I'm reading the AP News bulletin with a distinctly non-newsy headline that shouts: " Companies get OK to annoy polar bears ." The story is a ruling by The Fish and Wildlife Service that allows seven oil companies to drill in the arctic without worrying about harassing lawsuits from tree-huggers that they are disturbing the habitat of a useless species of wild bear.
Such a headline is certainly disturbing because it violates the fundamental assumption that news is about facts. The headline should have said "Ruling allows oil companies to explore near bear populations "
The injection of the reporter's or some special interest spokesman's value judgements into the story (and indeed the lead) is an increasing annoyance to those of us who read newspapers hoping to discern the truth about events. Isn't there a section in the paper for Opinions, where it may be relevant to discuss how one measures the level of annoyance exhibited by bears.
Even more exasperating for neutral-leaning readers is the information:
The seven companies will be required to map out the locations of polar bear dens, train their employees about the bears' habits and take other measures to minimize clashes with them. In exchange, the companies are legally protected if their operations unintentionally harm the bears. Any bear deaths would still warrant an investigation and could result in penalty under the law.
Administration and industry officials said oil companies enjoyed similar status in the Chukchi Sea from 1991 to 1996 and in the Beaufort Sea since 1993 and there was no effect on polar bear populations.
There is no evidence of a polar bear being killed by oil and gas activities in Alaska since 1993, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Since 1960, when the hunt for oil and gas began in Alaska, only two fatalities of polar bears have been linked to oil and gas activities in the state, the service said.
Such a headline is certainly disturbing because it violates the fundamental assumption that news is about facts. The headline should have said "Ruling allows oil companies to explore near bear populations "
The injection of the reporter's or some special interest spokesman's value judgements into the story (and indeed the lead) is an increasing annoyance to those of us who read newspapers hoping to discern the truth about events. Isn't there a section in the paper for Opinions, where it may be relevant to discuss how one measures the level of annoyance exhibited by bears.
Even more exasperating for neutral-leaning readers is the information:
The seven companies will be required to map out the locations of polar bear dens, train their employees about the bears' habits and take other measures to minimize clashes with them. In exchange, the companies are legally protected if their operations unintentionally harm the bears. Any bear deaths would still warrant an investigation and could result in penalty under the law.
Administration and industry officials said oil companies enjoyed similar status in the Chukchi Sea from 1991 to 1996 and in the Beaufort Sea since 1993 and there was no effect on polar bear populations.
There is no evidence of a polar bear being killed by oil and gas activities in Alaska since 1993, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Since 1960, when the hunt for oil and gas began in Alaska, only two fatalities of polar bears have been linked to oil and gas activities in the state, the service said.
Seems to me like a rational approach to minimizing the impact on the indigenous wildlife while moving ahead with progress. Yet the headline shouted the opinion of a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity, who called the ruling "... a blank check to harass the polar bear in the Chukchi Sea."
So, even if the trade-off is between annoying a few bears and $6 a gallon gasoline, I think it should be arcticly clear which side I am on.
6/13/2008
Another Reason to Stay on the Sofa
The recent news that the food services at Fenway Park could be dangerous to your health comes as no surprise to your faithful, germaphobic hellhole escapee. See this link for story.
I just hope the baseball workers (aka: players) dont eat the food that is sold to fans. We wouldn't want yet another reason for them to go on strike.
Your frugal, germaphobic, escapee blogger has been priced-out of the professional entertainment market for many years, not just since becoming a fixed-income pensioner. Not to mention that his widening posterior has been sized-out by the tiny seats in Fenway coach class.
There was an op-ed piece in the paper the other day, calling for a cap on the price of "resold" tickets. The writer thought that scalpers should be prohibited from selling the ticket at more than twice the face value of the ticket. I do not see the logic of such an arbitrary position. Either the price should be enforced exactly at face value or whatever the market will bear. And do we really want the government to nationalize and regulate the resold ticket industry?
If some wealthy moron wants to pay $10,000 for a ticket to watch a bunch of spoiled, overpaid baseball workers, why should we care?
==============
Speaking of the risk of plagues killing multitudes of people, I recently saw the Sci Fi (Will Smith) movie "I Am Legend" which has been out on DVD for a few months.
Based on the book by Richard Matheson, it is an updated remake of the excellent 1971 Charlton Heston movie which was titled "The Omega Man."
The story is about survival and loneliness after a catastrophic man-made plague. In the original story the world population is decimated by the results of a biological warfare conflict. In the updated version, a genetically tweaked virus becomes a cure for cancer, but mutates into a form of human rabies.
Those who survive become light-phobic vampires. OK, I didn't think I would like it either, but I am mentioning it here, because I did like it. And the special effects are stunning. And the fresh prince has come a long way since "Independence Day."
Not that you should give a crap what I think, but I give it four stars.
I just hope the baseball workers (aka: players) dont eat the food that is sold to fans. We wouldn't want yet another reason for them to go on strike.
Your frugal, germaphobic, escapee blogger has been priced-out of the professional entertainment market for many years, not just since becoming a fixed-income pensioner. Not to mention that his widening posterior has been sized-out by the tiny seats in Fenway coach class.
There was an op-ed piece in the paper the other day, calling for a cap on the price of "resold" tickets. The writer thought that scalpers should be prohibited from selling the ticket at more than twice the face value of the ticket. I do not see the logic of such an arbitrary position. Either the price should be enforced exactly at face value or whatever the market will bear. And do we really want the government to nationalize and regulate the resold ticket industry?
If some wealthy moron wants to pay $10,000 for a ticket to watch a bunch of spoiled, overpaid baseball workers, why should we care?
==============
Speaking of the risk of plagues killing multitudes of people, I recently saw the Sci Fi (Will Smith) movie "I Am Legend" which has been out on DVD for a few months.
Based on the book by Richard Matheson, it is an updated remake of the excellent 1971 Charlton Heston movie which was titled "The Omega Man."
The story is about survival and loneliness after a catastrophic man-made plague. In the original story the world population is decimated by the results of a biological warfare conflict. In the updated version, a genetically tweaked virus becomes a cure for cancer, but mutates into a form of human rabies.
Those who survive become light-phobic vampires. OK, I didn't think I would like it either, but I am mentioning it here, because I did like it. And the special effects are stunning. And the fresh prince has come a long way since "Independence Day."
Not that you should give a crap what I think, but I give it four stars.
6/11/2008
More Reasons to 'Grow Your Own'
Killer Tomatoes
The latest assault on our health and wallets is salmonella and tomatoes. Shades of last year's spinach contamination - if everyone is like me, you probably don't feel the same way about spinach since fall of 2006. How would you like to be an ex-spinach farmer who borrowed heavily to shift his crop to cultivation of tomatoes?
Not a Farmers Daughter Joke.
It could be worse: In Afghanistan, many of the poppy farmers are complaining that the recent government crackdown on poppy growing has cost them dearly. With no crop, they have no way to pay back the money they borrowed from the Taliban. The Taliban - much like the Mafia - tells them "It's just business" and makes them an offer that they literally cannot refuse. "Give us your young attractive daughter and we'll call it square." See Opium Brides
The latest assault on our health and wallets is salmonella and tomatoes. Shades of last year's spinach contamination - if everyone is like me, you probably don't feel the same way about spinach since fall of 2006. How would you like to be an ex-spinach farmer who borrowed heavily to shift his crop to cultivation of tomatoes?
Not a Farmers Daughter Joke.
It could be worse: In Afghanistan, many of the poppy farmers are complaining that the recent government crackdown on poppy growing has cost them dearly. With no crop, they have no way to pay back the money they borrowed from the Taliban. The Taliban - much like the Mafia - tells them "It's just business" and makes them an offer that they literally cannot refuse. "Give us your young attractive daughter and we'll call it square." See Opium Brides
6/08/2008
Fathers Day Gift Planning
I am seeing all these absolutely dumbass ideas about what people ought to get for their dads on Fathers day. Most of these are written by staff writers who were told "write something for fathers day" so they came up with "The ten best Fathers day gifts" or "what dad really wants on fathers day." It's all crap and any one who gets their ideas from these lame-assed ads should be embarrassed.
No kids, I do not want "the Beer of The month" for fathers day - nor does anyone who really likes beer. To me, it would be the same as sending dad a pair of socks every month. Don't other dads like to pick out their own socks? I do. And I prefer to select my favorite beer - which is technically an ale - Sierra Nevada. Why would I want randomly selected beers picked by some skinny Gen-X dude who thinks Green Day is a good band? Or worse, some millenium shavetail with a taste for Belgium wheat beers and bleeding heart tattoos snaking up their necks.
No thanks. I spent a lifetime in a costly and far reaching search for the beer that would become my brand. You want to give me beer, give me my favorite brand, not some trendy boutique brew.
No kids, I do not want "the Beer of The month" for fathers day - nor does anyone who really likes beer. To me, it would be the same as sending dad a pair of socks every month. Don't other dads like to pick out their own socks? I do. And I prefer to select my favorite beer - which is technically an ale - Sierra Nevada. Why would I want randomly selected beers picked by some skinny Gen-X dude who thinks Green Day is a good band? Or worse, some millenium shavetail with a taste for Belgium wheat beers and bleeding heart tattoos snaking up their necks.
No thanks. I spent a lifetime in a costly and far reaching search for the beer that would become my brand. You want to give me beer, give me my favorite brand, not some trendy boutique brew.
6/07/2008
A Toast To the Voters
Peggy Noonan doesn't like the Clintons, and figuratively raises her glass to salute the Democrats for rejecting her as the nominee for President in this article which appears in today's WSJ.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121269958227749853.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121269958227749853.html
6/05/2008
Where's My Check?
Here it is the first week in June and I want to know: where's my check?
Has anyone got their so-called economic stimulus money yet? What did you do with it?
I had originally thought I would use the money for a new lawnmower - made in America and all that. I figured it would be a win-win deal.
They say that Gods laughs at our plans. (Meanspirited of him, don't you think?) Perhaps you think it paranoid of me to suggest that God has driven the price of sweet crude to record heights for the sole purpose of thwarting my intention to buy a new lawnmower, but I'm just saying it looks pretty suspicious to me. The cost of almost everything is suddenly higher. (The one bright light: the cost of my favorite product - K-Y Warming Jelly - has stayed stable.)
But you cannot run a Grand Caravan on personal lubricant. And those rip-off artists at the dealer service center have reamed me to the tune of $900.00 (USD) to fix my brakes, a vacuum hose, and to install front-end anti-sway bar bushings. A fill-up now costs $65.00.
I hear some metaphysical chuckle in my inner-ear about my new plan: to use the government money to pay my Visa bill. Now, if the government goes belly-up before I get the check, I will know for sure that God is out to get me.
Has anyone got their so-called economic stimulus money yet? What did you do with it?
I had originally thought I would use the money for a new lawnmower - made in America and all that. I figured it would be a win-win deal.
They say that Gods laughs at our plans. (Meanspirited of him, don't you think?) Perhaps you think it paranoid of me to suggest that God has driven the price of sweet crude to record heights for the sole purpose of thwarting my intention to buy a new lawnmower, but I'm just saying it looks pretty suspicious to me. The cost of almost everything is suddenly higher. (The one bright light: the cost of my favorite product - K-Y Warming Jelly - has stayed stable.)
But you cannot run a Grand Caravan on personal lubricant. And those rip-off artists at the dealer service center have reamed me to the tune of $900.00 (USD) to fix my brakes, a vacuum hose, and to install front-end anti-sway bar bushings. A fill-up now costs $65.00.
I hear some metaphysical chuckle in my inner-ear about my new plan: to use the government money to pay my Visa bill. Now, if the government goes belly-up before I get the check, I will know for sure that God is out to get me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)