The rule of law and the rule of the jungle, or the no bullshit reason why people don't trust politics

The plain jane, no-bullshit reason why people have never really trusted politics.

Avi Beker makes an excellent argument about the situation between Lebanon and Israel that illustrates it well and really extends far beyond the Middle East.

Lawfare in the Middle East

"FOR SEVERAL Islamist fighting groups and terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Gaza, the humanitarian principles of the Law of Armed Conflict had become the major source of inspiration and guidance. These methods of legal maneuvers in the battlefield are viewed by Islamists as a critical component in their strategic and tactical planning.

They are well aware that Israel and other Western countries are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it, and they exploit it in a very cynical and brutal fashion.

It is wrong to argue, as many legal experts claim, that existing international law is ill-equipped in dealing with the so-called 'non-state' entities. It is true that traditional Law of Combat was built on the assumption of a conflict between two states which are striving for international legitimacy and would, therefore, abide by some measures of legal restraint. However, existing instruments of international law contain ample references which can cover acts of self defense and measures taken in the war against terrorism. The problem lies only with the politicization and selective interpretation of covenants which follow some more fashionable post-modern trends and are often inclined to glorify acts of terrorism.

It becomes worse when a United Nations voting bloc comprised largely of undemocratic member states continues to dictate international human rights norms and can hijack, against the rules of the Charter, the debates and agenda relating to international peace and security.

A fair reading of Hizbullah’s threats against the civilian population in Israel coupled with its brutal abuse of humanitarian rules can be easily recorded as systematic war crimes in their making. In addition the group continues to violate resolution 1701 of the Security Council which forbids the arming of groups outside the Lebanese Army. Thousands of missiles, rockets and huge ammunition are being smuggled to South Lebanon with the full cooperation of Iran and Syria and the blind eye of the government of Lebanon.

The fallacy and the serious omission by diplomats and legal experts lies in their disregard of the explicit responsibility of each party in armed conflict, including the defender, to protect its civilian population and remove it from military targets. The duty of “distinction” goes both ways and article 51.7 of the Geneva First Protocol emphasizes that while civilians are protected by the principle of distinction, no party can use its civilians as shield for its military objectives. It reads: 'The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations.'

Hizbullah, which is today a full-fledged member in the Lebanese government, can no longer hide behind another distorted interpretation of humanitarian law and claim 'non state' status. It should be emphasized: there are no restrictions in article 51 of the United Nations Charter regarding the exercise of the inherent right of self defense against non-state entities.

Last week’s provocation by the Lebanese Army makes it even more responsible to the Hizbullah violations of humanitarian law and will nullify future claims that Israel violates the principle of proportionality in attacking targets inside Lebanon. When the enemy makes it a clear strategy of using civilian shields in its war effort it is permissible to use a large degree of force against multiplied targets, including infrastructure, as long as the force is intended to remove the continuing risk posed by its rockets.

Lawfare has become a major arena for the delegitimization campaign against Israel. In the past Israel had to incorporate a doctrine of pre-emptive or preventive strikes to compensate for its very narrow margins of defense against variety of threats. While Israel should always maintain its high standards of moral and humanitarian behavior in combat it must tell the world that no army can endanger its soldiers in order to avoid hitting targets which are using civilians as shields. Israel must develop a “lawfare” preemptive strategy which will alert the world on the misuse and the moral collapse of international humanitarian law."

The truth is that this strategy of using the law for whatever purposes one desires is not limited to Hizbollah and terrorists. They certainly use it to more brutal ends, as they do with almost every weapon in their arsenal as they rationalize their power claims.

But the truth is that the law has now and always been a political football for people to rationalize whatever sort of power they desire. Good or ill. That's the reason why liberal thinkers have taught us to be so skeptical of power and claims on it. Because it, and the law as a function of that on-going battle for power, is rationalized for almost any purpose.

That is the foolishness of romanticizing law. Like somehow it has always stood for justice. For what was good and right.

Tell African slaves that. Or Jews during the Holocaust. Or Jesus or Socrates. Or the vast majority of people in our history who were oppressed by religious rule or under empire. Many of whom still are today. All under the cover of the rule of law.

It's laughable, really, to have an honest reading of history be one that validates the law as an anything but a tool used for bad as much as for good. Many of the most serious evils in human history have had the cover of the rule of law.

The Holocaust and Nazi rule. Soviet Communism. Chinese Communism. Religious oppression. Empire and the general principle that might makes right. Slavery. The oppression of women and any dominated group. In fact, our notion of minority groups in Western culture is explicitly a function of the dominant power position of majority groups.

We know this. Deep down. But like slave-owners and Nazis and Communists and popes, we also like our power. The benefits it offers. The status is confers. And the ability, at base, to get our way.

That has always been the appeal of power. The ability to get your way. Even when you're wrong. Might makes right has a long and persistent history. It is one of destruction, tragedy, and gross injustice. It is also the most looming history for almost every organized human society. The rule of law is intended to distinguish from the rule of the jungle. But, in reality, it is and always has been used to cover for the rule of the jungle. Even as it has always claimed to be its alternative. Often it is. And just as often it is used for the very same coveting of power that makes us so rightly skeptical of jungle monarchy.

So the notion that this tragic, ugly legacy that humanity has spent almost all of its civilized existence trying to leave behind would somehow consitute progress is really the most foolish and absurd rationalization of all.

And like every other variation on that theme that has ever polluted the heart of humanity, this one will fall apart just like the rest.

Because everyone wants to exercise power over everyone else, at some point, likely. We are a predatory and aggressive species by nature, after all. Noone would have a problem with the rule of the jungle if they could be its king. That is the fantasy that has always animated power. It's just an instinct that persistently betrays us. Because while most people want to exercise power over others, almost noone wants to have power exercised over them. Not really.

And humans are social animals. Enormously intelligent and creative social animals, at that. Who, unlike hyenas and jackles, and lions and tigers and bears (oh my) find any number of ways to escape and challenge the dominance of competing groups and members.

And their history is one long challenge to the dominance of any one group or individual, each one assuming, foolishly, that they can do just that. Only to be leveled by competitors. Every time. Without exception.

If there are rules that humans actually abide by (and there really are not, for the bulk of human experience, except when they so choose), the one rule that is without exception is that every effort to dominate their fellows is challenged. And, in the long run, successfully. Every single time.

And the rule of law is typically a weapon in this battle. But never a final resolution of that battle. Ever. And that will never change. No matter how much we assert it otherwise.

And every effort that has constituted more genuine progress in human history has been a recognition and attempt to account for this fact of human existence.

In fact, the more we assert it otherwise, the more obvious it becomes how little is actually resolved. And how the effort to use the rule of law, and the force inherent in its use, to resolve differences between people, except when real danger is involved and people must be contained to contain that danger, resolves almost nothing. And is the source of much of the conflict, truth be told.

Which is why the long road of progress in human history is now and always has been a road toward greater and greater respect for conscience and the freedom to exercise it by each individual. Because it is the only path that better resolves such conflicts. And makes clearer the tragic consequences of a history obsessed with power, and the pride that animates it, to coerce the conscience of our friends and neighbors.

Lawfare has another name.

It's called politics.

And it is exactly why so many people distrust this enterprise. And should.

Because it is clear to any objective observer not defending any of the participants just how dishonest and ugly and unworthy of trust that enterprise typically is.

Even as power remains necessary for limited and important purposes. But which important purposes are undermined by the mistrust bred by those who would use power to dominate their neighbors.

Rather than appeal to their consciences.

And the cynicism that often circulates about humanity - that no man can be trusted - is often both a function of and a rationalization of power. Divide and conquer, writ large.

The bottom line for humanity is this.

If we choose not to end that legacy, not to end the endless rationalizations of power, the war of humanity on itself, for no productive purpose whatsoever except to acquire and maintain that power, for good and so very often for ill, it is not because we could not do otherwise. It is not because otherwise is not possible. Or naive. Or destined for chaos. Or any of the excuses given for the coveting of power.

It is because we choose not to do otherwise.

And no amount of deception or self-deception will make that not be so. No matter how much we talk our way around that fact.

And the only way genuinely forward is to face and acknowledge that fact. And the ways that our rationalizations - in the liberal and illiberal world - for power feed one another. And the tragedy they are responsible for. Even as we lack the courage to face that tragedy. And our responsibility in it.

Sadly, at some point, we will only be able to look back on the vast majority of this long history of power and its obsession as pointless and tragic folly. A tragedy of the most dominant and predatory of species on Earth determined to dominate and kill and oppress one another. All in the name of their fear of being dominated and killed and oppressed by the other.

And that legacy will and already has begun to slip away from us long before most of us take to time to reflect on its consequences. Some people may rarely if ever reflect on its consequences. But they will be free to not reflect as much as they will be free to reflect.

And that kind of freedom is the essence of any sort of real progress. Take that to the bank.

Or you could ignore all that bullshit and just get the prettier arrangement from Jack.



I like Jack better, personally.

Music they can look up to

When you get a second, you might take a moment, give this song a listen.

I'll be singing this to my wife at my wedding, I think. My cousin Luke and I are practicing it, right now.

Sums up a happy life about as well as I've ever heard.



Everything else is gravy.

Only thing that'd make me happier is being the guy who wrote those lyrics. But I'll take being the guy who gets to listen to 'em, just the same.

That's what I want for my kids.

Music they can look up to.

Maybe they might settle for a father of that variety instead. Plenty of road on that journey.

What a great guy to have along for the ride.

The problem with this world

Yeah. Problem in Washington, and everywhere, really, is too much thinkin', not enough action.

Too much freedom. Not enough fear. Too much understanding. Not enough whoopass. Too much love. Not enough, "Fuck you, neighbor."

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Lost in Race
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Too much Jesus. Not enough nails.

Problem with the world, you see, is too much goodness. Not enough of the rest.

Yeah. That pretty much sums it up, really.

We're just too good, is the truth. Always have been. Hence all the pain. And grief. And tragedy.

Reason we're all hurting so is we're all just too good, you see. Too loving. Too decent. Too much whatever to soothe the ego.

Either that or perhaps we could get a little more honest with ourselves. Something tells me the latter is where real happiness is at. Where I come from, at least.

But you do as you like. It is your life, after all.

Choose well. Or don't. Whatever suits your fancy.

And live with that life.

Either way, pick up from there. I'll love you just the same, at least. Pinkie promise. Swear to God, hope to die.

Refer madness

Michael Moynihan makes plain Beltway celebrity culture and the journalists, activists, and politicians who promote its obsession.

Pretending, all the while, to be above all that. And thus worthy of running the world for the rest of us.

So selfless, makes me wanna cry.

Hollywood Babylon - For Ugly People

"President John F. Kennedy called Washington, D.C., a city 'of Northern charm and Southern efficiency.' This city—the one I reluctantly call home—is indeed inefficient and charmless: The reason for the former should be obvious, though the latter can be blamed on those oleaginous hordes of pompous and self-important politicians, bloggers, and journalists that make D.C. 'Hollywood for ugly people.' (Yes, I am one of these types, but, in my defense, I have a perfectly reasonable understanding of my low-level of influence and importance, and I don't harbor an earnest desire to change the world or score victories for 'my side.' I’ll let the reader decide how physically repulsive I am.)

If you haven’t noticed the recent 'news,' you blissfully missed another week of Beltway navel-gazing, of self-referential media stories, holier-than-thou sermonizing about journalistic ethics, and the usual bipartisan accusations of race-baiting. We have all heard the deeply serious denounce our loathsome celebrity-obsessed media culture, with all of its reporting on Britney, Mel, and Lindsey. Scoff, eye-roll, harrumph—queue the dissident MSNBC anchoring tearing up a Paris Hilton news story on camera, the Solzhenitsyn of the cable news age.

Serious people don’t report on the unserious gossip from Hollywood, though how about the unserious gossip from Ugly Hollywood? Cut to the furrowed brow, finger-wagging panel of experts discussing the firing of Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel, the leaked emails from obnoxious and unfunny liberal journalists, and the outraged discussion on just how a hyperpartisan troglodyte like Andrew Breitbart had snuck into our club. Sure, we bowdlerize quotes and accuse non-racist people of secretly harboring Orval Faubus tendencies, but we do it with élan and a journalism school degree.

So nonsense replaces nonsense, Britney to Breitbart, but it’s the only thing this charming and efficient city is talking about.

First, there was the Journolist leaks, in which members of a listserv inhabited by liberal journalists and academics expressed their desire to see Rush Limbaugh die of a heart attack; to toss their enemies through plate glass windows; to call random conservatives racists; and to rid the country of those 'fucking NASCAR retards.' In other words, a confirmation of preexisting conservative stereotypes about members of the liberal intelligentsia. But was the group of 400 writers—the Learned Elders of the Left—attempting to coordinate news coverage?

Former JournoList members scoff at charges of collusion, that they were members of an all-powerful clique recalibrating White House policy, burying coverage of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and plotting to force Fox News off the air—all from a Google Group. Critics counter that, whether opinion journalists or straight news reporters, the group was attempting to 'organize a media narrative,' to use Atlantic blogger Andrew Sullivan’s phrase.

The whole tedious debate misses one interesting point. While commenters have noted blogger Spencer Ackerman’s sleazy suggestion that liberals start labeling random Republicans 'racist'—pick a conservative, like 'Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists'—few noticed the obsession with accusing opponents not of being misguided or wrong, but motivated by racial animus and Nazi-like hatreds. But more on this in a minute.

The other media-centric obsession was a selectively edited video released by conservative activist Andrew Breitbart, suggesting that a black employee of the Department of Agriculture discriminated against white farmers while working for the Obama administration. A terrified White House forced the employee, Shirley Sherrod, to resign, thus seeming to confirm the charge that the administration had purged the USDA of a dangerous racist, the Angela Davis of the farm lobby.

When the unexpurgated video was released, Sherrod was vindicated, offered an apology from President Barack Obama, the NAACP, Bill O’Reilly, and dozens of others quick to believe the racism charge, and offered her job back. In other words, Sherrod was slimed and maligned because someone falsely accused her of being a racist. But then again, Sherrod, who CNN’s David Gergen compared to Nelson Mandela, doesn’t subscribe to the ghastly views of Karl Rove and Fred Barnes.

Most members of the media, both liberal and conservative, expressed outrage over Sherrod’s sacking and the unfair media coverage that followed. Keith Olbermann denounced the 'political guillotine' of Fox News and Breitbart, and the conservative desire to 'convict the benevolent as racist.' It was important, Olbermann maintained, to remember that facts matter and that hyperbolic bloggers who end up treating their quarry like Danton should be humiliated. And if you thought these pleas for level-headedness, for the media to tone down the rhetoric, were sincere, the MSNBC host employed another analogy from French history, comparing Sherrod to Captain Alfred Dreyfus, the French military officer famously sentenced to life imprisonment on Devil’s Island in an anti-Semitic frame up.

Even Sherrod, having just observed the consequences of sloppily charging people with racism, told CNN that Breitbart 'knew what effect [the video] would have on the conservative, racist people he's dealing with.' And as the scripted media introspection and the rehearsed 'conversations' about race were inaugurated by those who already knew the answers, blogger and former Journolist member Matt Yglesias was falsely accusing libertarian economist Arnold Kling of racism—the second time Kling has had to endure the toxic charge. But Kling, unlike Sherrod, is an enemy.

If all this counted as a teachable moment, it is unclear who the students were...

...This whole 'debate,' if we can charitably call it that, is a mess of straw men, hypocrisy, stupidity, and reflexive defenses of one’s own tribe. It has nothing to do with fairness, journalistic ethics, or the immorality of dragging the reputations of innocents through the mud in an attempt at scoring political points."

Thank God these folks run things. I really have no clue how America would manage without them.

Can you imagine if these folks were not in charge? Or aspiring to be so?

What a mess that world would be.

A Great Recession. Illegal immigration. Gay marriage. Unhealthy health habits. News coverage flush with agenda.

What would the world come to, you wonder?

Refer madness, I think.

Thank God these wise people stand between us and refer madness.

What a cruel, petty, self-absorbed world that would be.

Too much love

For those who are still convinced that our problem in the world is that we are just too damned nice.

Too much love. That's our problem, you see.

Just make sure to tell that to this man on your way out.



Now that that's settled.

Courage and cowardice

Just something to chew on, for those rooting for withdrawal.

Taliban denounce Kabul meeting as sign of failure

"The Taliban denounced this week's international conference on Afghanistan's future, saying the 'vague and terrible agenda' shows that the U.S. and its allies intend to abandon the country and blame their ultimate defeat on the Afghan government."

Sometimes courage needs a reminder. Even from the biggest cowards around.

Love thy neighbor

My mom just sent me this. It's been that kinda summer in my family. Couldn't ask for a better family. It's broken. But it's mine. And they taught me a lot about love this season.



Do my best to return the favor.

As much failure as we need

A dose of humility from Washington

Be nice if values like humility, honesty and compassion were practiced in our nation's capitol. In any capitol. By anyone, really.

But they are often not our first choice. They are often what we choose after we have as much failure as we need.

May we have as much failure as we need.

Getting honest (is the opposite of twisting arms)

"At the same time, one problem with political discourse in our age is that in the heat of debate, we too easily suspend a disinterested search for the truth and advance a more narrow, partisan aim. That leads to hypocrisy and double standards.

Very few of us are completely free of such things. We view the world through a tinted lens. But we ought to at least aspire to intellectual integrity and uphold as models those who embody it."

Be nice, one day, when this is the norm. And not the exception.

Until that day, Lord Acton has the last word.

And that will be true until the rest of us get honest with ourselves. And then, perhaps, with everyone else.

The problem with the world

The problem with the world, you see, is too many folks like this guy.



And Jesus.

Too much Jesus and Jack Johnson in the world.

Remember that the next time your tryin' to figure the world out, kids.

It makes more sense the less you think about it.

The danger of moral equivalence, indeed

Bein' in charge means never havin' to say you're sorry, according to Victor's logic, here. Even when its warranted.

The Danger of Moral Equivalence, or Why(Even a Few) Words Matter

All too clever. That way you can have all the power and use it however you want without any apologies.

That's the way it's supposed to be. Just ask all those dead Jews in Germany. Or Russians under Stalin. Or Chinese under Mao.

The danger of moral equivalence, indeed.

Victor Davis Hanson. Making excuses for assholes since the dawn of assholes.

Anything at all

If you take a step back from most politics, today. In America and all over the world. The clearer it becomes. Living and dying by the sword, and such.

And I think the one thing that most disappoints me, most, today, with the ugliness and mean-spiritedness that has taken the world by storm. And left a wake of reaping from all that sowing.

Is that our pride is, often, so strong that we would rather die by that sword than just choose another.

Some people, that is.

Most people just don't know what to do to make it better, is the truth.

And everyone is afraid that if they were to lay down their sword, then only destruction is in store for them.

And so the justifications for the whole dance of insanity goes.

Why any of us would invest ourselves in this mess of politics and power like it has more honesty to it than it does, I will never know.

Perhaps we shouldn't.

Perhaps that's the most important lesson of all from politics. And power. How rarely, if that, it makes us better.

At anything at all.

Chickens roosting, and such

Stocks skid on renewed fears of global slowdown

Which is exactly why fiscal and economic policy, like individual investments, should be based on their merits and not on the propaganda.

The stimulus and Keynesian economics failed. They were a well-meaning effort to jumpstart the economy and to help people by funding programs that are government sponsored. But it failed. And will continue to fail until we deal with the underlying issues of what government can be trusted to care for more effectively and what matters need to be addressed by peoples' free consciences.

And that will not get unravelled until we choose better policies. Namely ones that affirm more genuinely liberal commitments. And more genuinely liberal economics. And freedom, more broadly.

And if you don't believe that. Keep at it. And keep living with the consequences.

Because the most awesome and undeniable fact of bullshit as policy is that it keeps dragging everyone down until we face up.

And no amount of spin and propaganda will ever be able to make that go away. Ever. No matter how much we cry otherwise.

The chickens are coming home to roost. But someone needs to tell Malcolm that radical isn't on the menu tonight.

Believe that

No matter how spin your way around it.



Who's to say
What's impossible
Well they forgot
This world keeps spinning
And with each new day
I can feel a change in everything
And as the surface breaks reflections fade
But in some ways they remain the same
And as my mind begins to spread its wings
There's no stopping curiosity

I want to turn the whole thing upside down
I'll find the things they say just can't be found
I'll share this love I find with everyone
We'll sing and dance to Mother Nature's songs
I don't want this feeling to go away

Who's to say
I can't do everything
Well I can try
And as I roll along I begin to find
Things aren't always just what they seem

I want to turn the whole thing upside down
I'll find the things they say just can't be found
I'll share this love I find with everyone
We'll sing and dance to Mother Nature's songs
This world keeps spinning and there's no time to waste
Well it all keeps spinning spinning round and round and

Upside down
Who's to say what's impossible and can't be found
I don't want this feeling to go away

Please don't go away
Please don't go away
Please don't go away
Is this how it's supposed to be
Is this how it's supposed to be

Annoying how adorable and happy he is, isn't it?

Sucks to be you, apparently.

Never fear. Plenty o' Jack to go around.

Never forget

McChrystal Told the Truth

A very nice description of the suckerpunch that Stan McChrystal just took. I say let 'em lose the war, Stan. Let all those people die and those Afghanis be reenslaved by those Islamist thugs.

And when Democrats and the press say that it was unwinnable, or it was Bush's fault, or they didn't take their meds that morning, or whatever bullshit excuse they have for losing this war, we'll all call bullshit.

Because you were right, Stan. And Joe Biden was wrong. It wasn't that the war wasn't winnable. It clearly wasn't that Afghanis didn't want our help. They were the loudest voices backing you up.

It was that Democrats and various non-military folks didn't have the courage to fight it. And didn't really give a shit, in the first place.

And so they don't. But we won't let them forget that, either. Ever.

Wave of the future

Amazing and sad how much Washington runs on ego.

The Runaway General

I like Stanley McChrystal is the truth. And Joe Biden is half-baked in most of his ideas about just about everything, these days. Remember dividing Iraq into 3 ethnic conclaves? Right. And you wonder where people get their notions of American imperialism.

But the bigger story, here, is the fact of Washington that everyone's just gotten used to, at this point, apparently. Which is how much ego runs things in this city.

You would think that a city that experienced as much failure as D.C. would be humbler. But, humility, apparently, is for the weak. As is anything more honest in this world.

I do hope we maintain a commitment in Afghanistan as long as Afghanis feel like they need our help. We did start this war, after all. And we still have a certain terrorist and his minions, in this region, that need tracking down.

But it would be refreshing if something as grave and serious as war, with so many peoples' lives on the line, could be engaged with less ego and more humble, honest, serious attention to the matter at hand and a genuine commitment to accomplish the mission successfully. On everyone's part. McChrystal's ego is hardly unique in Washington. The Administration. Congress. The press and activists, especially, whose egos seem to know no bounds.

Be nice to have an America where everyone pitches in to do the heavy lifting. Or maybe we've given up on that idea. Or whatever millionth excuse we have for why we can't face up to just how foolish and dysfunctional Washington has become.

Wave of the future, folks. Progress never looked so promising.

Perhaps a little lovemaking

I find myself wondering, often, most days, whatever invested my heart in people and politics, at all, these days, given the stubborn mess that this stubbornest, messiest of all human affairs has become in America and in the world. FUBAR. As wiser minds than me refer to it.

Jack says it better than me. So I'll let him speak.



I care, is the truth. I really tire watching innocent people die and live in fear and under the thumb of whomever with no other real options. Because of the stubborn power obsession of various partisans. All for very little real purpose, by my lights, tragically.

Politics is the strangest of all enterprises, I think. Because it's the one enterprise where it's participants all assert certainty when they can't possibly know it. Often, no matter the consequences. And they do so all in contradiction, no less. All around the cynical notion that if they deny it long enough, they can access the power that will make everything in the world right again.

Watching what often looks like an impossible tangle of pride and sanctimony and failure, and the curious and nonsensical blame-shifting posing as honest responsibility. The same folks strangely wagging fingers at the world to take responsibililty for their lives. I get a little weary, is the truth.

Like most folks, I really don't have much other choice that to let it all wash over. And live a life I love. Do work I love. Settle down. Make a family. And pay these folks as little mind as possible, I suppose, anymore.

I'm convinced that Jack's musical effort to make peace with the tragedies that various stubborn partisans of a million stripes have made commonplace in the world is about all most people can do, sadly. In a world that will not face its failures honestly.



I do honestly hope, one day, that this will change. That people will get more honest about how far down a road of senseless failure and tragedy we've come. And, though most folks don't see it, the contributions that most of us make to the rationalization of the worst tragedies and abuses in the world, now and as long as homo sapien has roamed the earth. How frequently and reliably our aggressive, predatory natures betray us. And how that includes those who pride themselves as civilized as much as those who claim no such aspiration.

But, alas, I am older and more tired of this game posing as something more honest, today, than I was in my youth. Not less hopeful, necessarily. Just making peace with it. And with the fact that all of us need as much time as we need to face failures and learn the lessons (for those who will learn them, at all) as we need. Including those who would deny that to others.

And the most serious limitation I have in my life to face, in front of me, is the limits of persuading folks to take a humbler, more genuinely open-hearted, open-minded, honest route, if they don't wanna.

If they don't wanna, they don't wanna, is the truth. I wonder, often, if Hobbes and Shakespeare and most folks in an older Europe felt something similar watching Protestants and Catholics playing a very similar, more brutal version of the same tragic game. Or anywhere partisans maintained such an irrational obsession with power. Or people maintained the impulse to aggression to beat whatever problem into submission since the predation of the earliest hominids and homo sapiens.

It's been one of the harder limitations in life for me to face. For someone whose confidence seems boundless, I'm sure, to most of my friends and family.

It's been so difficult because the stakes are so large. And accepting the world as the dysfunctional, aggressive mess that it is just seems unacceptable to me, as it would, I'm sure, for anyone who honestly cares about people. Who doesn't want to see them die, needlessly. Or live in fear. Or be bullied. By anyone.

But there's only so much I can do, as it turns out, to turn that tide. And accepting that is one of the more unexpected turns in my life till this point, is the truth.

When various folks, partisans of any stripe - strong-arming for whichever position they have convinced themselves of, today (often contrary to the very same position that they had convinced themselves of, in another time, and asserted the same need to strong-arm on its behalf, then as now; from someone who's changed his mind, plenty, in my own life as much as me seeing it in the world) - say that there is nothing that anyone else can do about it, if they have the power, there's a grain of truth to that. Absent choosing differently in the future.

That's the cynical calculation of power that has animated its use and abuse since the beginning of civilization. And likely before. And perhaps for as long as humans have a space on this little world.

It's so funny.

Jack's song captures it so sweetly and so well. That we can never know. No matter how much we pretend otherwise. But you wouldn't know it talking politics with most folks, strangely. Certainly not with its most active participants. Especially it's most brutal. But, really, all of us, when most folks are honest.

What I do know, more than anything else, at this point in my life, that this propensity, to want to have it all figured out and to be willing to fight to the death, metaphorically, and, all too tragically, literally, for most of our long tragic history, for that purpose (excepting when that is literally necessarily, obviously) makes a mess of life almost everywhere for almost everyone without exception.

Hence the call to moderation. By Aeschylus and Aristotle. And so many of the wisest minds who have watched this repetition of human folly and tragedy unfold time and time again.

And, sadly, our perpetual propensity to ignore that wisdom. Or, more often, I'm finding, manipulating it. For whatever purposes people see fit for themselves.

It's really hard, is the truth, to you watch all of that, if you care about the people it's happening to, and you have to face the fact that there really is only so much you can do to help.

It weighs on my heart like a heavy burden that is impossible to lift on my own, is the truth. But which so many cannot, will not, see past their own sad, foolish, often counterproductive sanctimony to consider otherwise.

So I'm making my peace with it, tonight. Trying at least. I've been working on it for a couple weeks, now, is the truth. Until folks are willing to consider something more humble and open-hearted.

Perhaps a little lovemaking might be in order. Perhaps some music would set the mood.

Tyranny of the whiny, scared little bitches

Breath of fresh air, today. And a nice reminder that most folks in the American press and political class are really out of their leagues when it comes to the study of power.

“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” ~ Charles de Montesquieu

Or the more apt sentiment, right now.

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

Or my particular favorite.

"The mania for giving the Government power to meddle with the private affairs of cities or citizens is likely to cause endless trouble, through the rivaly of schools and creeds that are anxious to obtain official recognition, and there is great danger that our people will lose our independence of thought and action which is the cause of much of our greatness, and sink into the helplessness of the Frenchman or German who expects his government to feed him when hungry, clothe him when naked, to prescribe when his child may be born and when he may die, and, in time, to regulate every act of humanity from the cradle to the tomb, including the manner in which he may seek future admission to paradise." ~ Mark Twain

Or you could follow the assholes driving this country into a serious shithole.

Don't trip over yourself takin' your pick.

Some much needed time off

'Shame on you': BP exec pilloried by lawmakers

What for? It's an accident, for God's sakes. I suppose we should shame our kids for shittin' in their diapers. Would make as much sense.

The arrogance of the left, right now, like too many of their right-wing counterparts, is stinky and putrid. Which is what elections are for. Which is why they're losing them. And why they'll keep losing them. No matter what excuses they make for their sorry-ass activism. Which has clearly made this situation, like Katrina, more problematic than it ever was originally.

I don't care how arrogant the left gets. Disdainful? Is that the term John Stewart used?

Stewart Calls Joe Barton A 'Disdainful Asshole'



These guys have a point. So does John Stewart, if you watch that video. About the effort to compensate people hurt by this mess. Just noone - left, right, or otherwise - is listening to one another, anymore.

Good example for the kids, there, I suppose.

And the more I watch, the more I really just don't trust any of them all. Which is apparently how most Americans feel about the same folks, if the polls mean anything. And, at this point in the game, it means I'm voting against the assholes doing all the strong-arming. And give two shits about what they have to say about jack shit.

That's called counterproductive, by the way, if you're keeping count. While you're pretending that everything's going hunky-dory. It's also called failure. And seriously mucking everything up, in the meantime. All so folks don't have to ever acknowledge that they might be wrong about any damn thing.

It doesn't matter to me, anymore, if assholes can't get the picture, is the truth. It's just time for them to take some much needed time off.

Backwards (no matter how you bullshit it)

If there is one article I have read in the last year that demonstrates the arrogance of the current period, this is the one.

Ultraorthodox Jews protest school ruling

These parents are jailed because they want to choose which schools their daughters go to. They choose not to send their daughters to an integrated school because they are concerned about the temptations of the modern world (a legitimate concern, even if I disagree with their fears of the modern world).

And this journalist rationalizes their jail sentences as "the ultra-Orthodox minority's refusal to accept the authority of the state" and the "extent the ultra-Orthodox live by their own rules, some of them archaic, while wielding disproportionate power in the modern state of Israel."

It didn't even occur to him that they might have a legitimate concern. And that, more importantly, those children are not his, nor the state's. They are people in their own right. And the responsibility, primarily, of those parents. And jailing parents who want to choose where their daughters go to school is nothing remotely close to anything resembling progress.

Where one educates one's children is among the most intimate and important choices a parent can make. And jailing parents for taking that choice seriously, even when you disagree with the choice, when it is a matter of conscience, as it so clearly is here, is repugnant.

This case is also, sadly, a lesson for social conservatives, like these Jews, who are, tragically, reaping what they sow, as well. If there is any argument for why religious conservatives should back off from efforts to coerce the consciences of others - gay marriage comes immediately to mind - this is the one. Because the other alternative is living with the consequences.

Coercing conscience is not progress. It is the long road of tragedy that has animated the great bulk of human history. What far too many are doing in the liberal democratic world, today (nevertheless the illiberal world) is trying to turn the clock backward. And cynically pretending that with enough force, no one can do anything about it anyway.

This was and is the rationale for Naziism, Communism, Islamism, imperialism, and every serious abuse of power that has ever reared its ugly head in this sad, strange, foolish little world.

It was also what got 70 million killed in WWII. 16 million in WWI.

One thing's for sure. This ain't forward.

This is backward. No bullshitting around it.

No matter who is pulling the strings.

And no matter how we bullshit otherwise.

Thinkin', when the whole world would rather burn

A sign of just how far we've gone off the rails.



"'It was not my intention for anyone to be threatened but they do and I have to take responsibility and I do,' said embattled teacher Catherine Ariemma.

The Dahlonega history appeared on Good Day Xtra Tuesday morning to address a controversial incident that has placed her at the center of a media firestorm.

Ariemma was placed on administrative leave after allowing for students to wear mock Ku Klux Klan outfits as part of a high school history class project. Ariemma says the costumed students were taking part in a reenactment about the history of racism. Some black students in the lunchroom became upset when they saw the students walking through the cafeteria in the outfits.

Ariemma says she was escorting the students [sic] wearing sheets and didn't realize lunch was in session.

'That was the mistake, in that there were a lot of students in there who were not going to hear that this was a class project, so they saw something and took it out of context, and of course they had no way of knowing-- they had no way of knowing,' said Ariemma."

The person being villified, here, is the one person talking any real sense.

Why?

Because she's thinking. When the whole world is reacting. Constantly.

And confusing it with making any damn sense, at all.

What he said

The one market where journalists would scream bloody murder if the government intervened.

Please, Don't Save Us

Least something's still free in America. 'Less you count Betty White and that love muffin.

Suspense, and all that

You know what would really impress me with the President and this whole oil spill, right now?

Obama fried in oil

If he came on televison, leaned against the lecturn, and said something along these lines:

"Howdy folks. My fellow Americans. And all the rest of you scoundrels out there, too.

I don't know if you've heard about this situation we got with oil and the Gulf of Mexico, and all that, right now. But it's a God awful mess, as you may have heard. And I reckoned I might come by and share a few thoughts with you folks about what's happening and what folks are doin' about it.

There's, essentially, two groups of people, right now, you understand, working on cleaning up this mess. BP. Which has really been fixin' on pluggin' this hole pretty much non-stop, since it bust. And me and my people. Who are doin' everything we can to help the folks doin' the fixin'.

Everybody else, for the most part, is engaged in a whole other activity all-together.

It's called bitchin'. You may have heard of it.

Most of these folks are bitchin' about something for which they have about zero plans to actually doing anything that might resemble heavy lifting. But constantly moanin' about how slow the muscle-bound folks are heavin' up the bar.

It's gotten a bit ridiculous, these days, is the truth. On most things. Not just this mess. Because not only are these good, decent Americans not really helping matters. They're kinda in the way, is the truth. Because they're just makin' it that much harder for folks actually doin' the work to concentrate on doing their job. And they could use all the mental energy they could get their hands on, these days, as you can imagine.

So my suggestion for folks is this:

Chill the fuck out. Go watch some Karate Kid.

Let folks doing the heavy lifting do the job. If you have some decent, solid suggestions for things that might do some actual good, send 'em our way. They might come in handy. But, if not. Maybe think about takin' a chill pill and either get out of the way. Or get used to being ignored. Either one will do just fine. But getting out of the way or actually doin' some tangible good, might work better for everyone involved. Including you. And all those delicious gulf shrimpies everyone's concerned about. And anyone who might actually give a hoot about getting things turned around.

Thanks for your attention, folks. And make sure not to kill the suspense and go tellin' me if that kid wins or not, this time around. I'll check it out at the drive-in soon 'nuf. Though I'm pretty sure the kid pulls it out in the end."

But that would be far too sensible for these times, obviously.

So, in lieu of something more sensible, I'm gonna follow some World Cup and hope it all doesn't come crashin' down in the end. The world, that is. I never know how this thing ends. Suspense is killin' me.

Bullshit and messes, and all the rest

Perhaps the professor might consider, that, except when there is real danger involved or when it involves someone else, most people, when they're really honest, would tell ya no. And that they wish they had a million dollars.

Do laws even matter today?

Notice how the same folks who celebrate this law also wanted Lewis Libby freed and Ronald Reagan exempt from prosecution on Iran-Contra? Permanent tax cuts and as much oil as will fill their bellies?

Or how the same folks who want more regulation for BP, Goldman Sachs, and right-wing radio also want to smoke the doobies and let the illegals stay?

Why?

Because most people want the law applied when someone else's ass is in a snag. Or when it's something they already believe in.

Maybe, just maybe, the first reason - real danger - is the only time the law makes sense to get involved. Maybe the rest is what has made the world a goddamned mess.

Especially in societies that take their bullshit more seriously than the likes of us. North Korea comes to mind. Iran makes an appearance.

And maybe where we're headed is no Sodom and Gomorrah, at all, as it turns out. Maybe a world where people don't take the law so goddamn seriously is no serious tragedy, remarkably. Which is where we're headed, by the way, if you're keeping close count.

Maybe where we're headed is a world of less bullshit.

And maybe that's a good thing, ladies and gents.

Because just maybe the bullshit's what's made us such a mess all along.

From someone for whom bullshit is a mother tongue. And English is just something I speak in my free time.

And the law is something I only follow when it's the right thing to do. And, sometimes, not even then.

If the crosswalk is too far down and it's too far to walk. Sometimes, I'll make that walk. Because my consience says so.

Though, sometimes, my conscience can doesn't give a rat's ass.

When I'm speaking English, that is. And decide to give the bullshit a rest.

Making love on lazy weekends

If there is any job opening, whatsoever, for this position, I'm in, at this point. I need a break from the madness of international and domestic politics. And making love is the one thing in the world that I genuinely excel at.

Israel plans to send bill to Palestinians over boycotts

Let me break down the big picture on this one. All of this, the entirety of that conflict, and this most recent detour into the surreal, is so these assholes don't have to admit that killing innocents and taking and attempting to retake land by force is and was wrong and that only a genuine commitment to peace will end all of this.

Israel outlaws boycotting. Because Palestine outlaws working in Israel.

Sounds like two other parties I know. And so many other parties, ideologies, religious groups, and various assholes looking for cover for their ugly impulses. More than I could ever keep count of.

What a sad and foolish species we homo sapiens are. Jesus offers us love and Lord Acton offers us honesty. And we opt for hate and sanctimony. Another name for senseless vanity. All so some other asshole doesn't have more of whatever senseless something we want. In the proud hope that in doing so, we always can get our way. And never have to admit we could ever be wrong about anything of import. Even when we so clearly are.

I would give up faith entirely if would do any good. Sadly, it doesn't. And all we are left with is fucking it up enough that we finally give it up. Same as it ever was. And ever will be. No matter how much we bullshit otherwise.

I'm sure we would have figured out, by now, that when they say pride is deadly, they mean it. Except that we are far too vain for something so humble.

I would say we were doomed, except that foolishness is damned foolish. And eventually we all get tired of it. Or at least of the consequences.

God knows I am. I need good food and a good movie. And a nice girl to make love with for a lazy weekend.

Making love on lazy weekends. Reason #4,589,321 I will never understand people whose greed outsmarts their love.

Some people miss all the good stuff in life. All so they can have plenty of the stuff that really doesn't matter. Sounds like a good song idea. Or a film. Or a book.

Or a life. Speaking of which.

Too goddamned nice

The problem with the American press corps, you see, is that they're too nice, you understand.

Our hard-core, adversarial press corps

And the problem with Lady Gaga is that she's too goddamned reclusive.

Right.

If you believe that shit, I got an arc or two in Paris I'd willing to sell ya.

The humanity that looks at itself, right now, and says that it's problem is that it's too goddamned nice may need some serious correction in their lenses.

Journalists, like the rest of us, are the same selfish pricks who've been inhabiting this world since the dawn of homo sapiens.

And if there is any period in recent human history which should have dispelled the notion that this most predatory and dominant of species on the planet is too nice or too thoughtful, this should be the one.

I'm a dick. Things fall apart. And it's always someone else's fault.

And so it goes.

Jesus says pluck the beam from your own eye before you pluck the splinter from your neighbors'.

And we all sit around and bitch about how the boss has better tweezers.

Same as it ever was.

The problem with the world, you see, is too many folks like Nick Vujicic.



Too few folks like Hamas. Or Nancy Pelosi.

Right.

Silver lining?

No species can go on fucking shit up forever. At some point, people really do want to move forward. Even if it involves a little humble pie.

Make mine vegi, please. I'm famished.

Acknowledging the bad call

Listening to Jim Joyce's acknowledgement of his bad call, upsetting Armando Galarraga's perfect game, it occurs to me how little this happens in life.



That people just admit, openly, when they screw up something big. Especially on the biggest things.

Because we kick the shit out of them when they do, is the truth. And no matter how much doing that undermines peoples' willingness to admit when they screw up, and thus maintains the screwing up, we keep doing it. Especially in those areas of life where it matters most that we admit the mistakes.

And the most tragic mistake of all is our unwillingness to admit that any of this matters to getting things moving in a better direction. Because no matter how much we pretend that it doesn't matter, it very clearly does. And undermines most of the big calls in life.

Like him or not, Jesus was not bullshitting. Forgiveness and creating the space for people to admit when they've screwed up really does matter. For reasons practical more than theological. Some people never face up. And those people have to be dealt with differently. But those people are rarer than not. And what facilitates the lives of good people should not be dictated by our fear of the wicked. As a practical matter, more than anything else. Because it makes our lives less safe and less worthy of living. And that fact of existence will be so whether we acknowledge it or our failures in the matter or not.

Jim Joyce manned up and admitted his failure. 'Bout time we did the same.

Untangling the knot

An analogy occurred to me, today, of how logic generally unravels in real life. Long after wiser heads have gotten hold of it. Like you and I. Knotheads or wise heads. Who knows. You tell me.

It's like a knot. Or an electrical cord. That you have to unravel to make any use of the original cord, or rope, or what not. To organize it. And keep it from getting all tangled again.

At first it's just tangled. And you don't know what to do, exactly. Except for do whatever to get it untangled.

But, eventually, either you understand the knot enough to get it untangled. Or you don't. And if you don't, it becomes quite apparent. To yourself, as much as to anyone else. Because you can't get the knot untangled. No matter how hard you try.

Life works much the same way, I think. Either you understand the knot or you don't. And if you don't, you won't ever be able to get the knot untangled. No matter how frustrated you are with the knot.

This little nugget o' nothin' I've learned from experience. Meaning, screwing it up plenty.

So does everyone, I'm sure. So I'm not saying anything new. And so will the political world, I'm sure. Just as we always have in the past.

In fact, it's becoming crystal clear to me, now, that this is how 99% of our wisdom has been unraveled. I'd say 100%. But then I'd be just too sure of my own.

Because not a damned soul, me especially, has gotten to where we're at with unchallengable genius, that's for sure. Except for Betty White. Who kills small children with her genius. And's got a mean muffin, I hear.

Real men (don't have to pretend)

As honest a description of what's gone wrong with Iran as I've seen. And why noone has the courage to propose something better.

Sleepwalking with Iran

"I can't figure out who is actually directing U.S. policy toward Iran, but what's striking (and depressing) about it is how utterly unimaginative it seems to be. Ever since last year's presidential election, the United States has been stuck with a policy that might be termed 'Bush-lite.' We continue to ramp up sanctions that most people know won't work, and we take steps that are likely to reinforce Iranian suspicions and strengthen the clerical regime's hold on power.

To succeed, a foreign-policy initiative needs to have a clear and achievable objective. The strategy also needs to be internally consistent, so that certain policy steps don't undermine others. The latter requirement is especially important when you are trying to unwind a 'spiral' of exaggerated hostility, which is the problem we face with Iran. Given the deep-seated animosity on both sides, any sign of inconsistency on our part will be viewed in the worst possible light by Iran. Indeed, a combination of friendly and threatening gestures may be worse than the latter alone because tentative acts of accommodation will be seen as a trick and will reinforce the idea that the other side is irredeemably deceitful and can never be trusted.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration's approach to Iran is neither feasible nor consistent. To begin with, our objective -- to persuade Iran to end all nuclear enrichment -- simply isn't achievable. Both the current government and the leaders of the opposition Green Movement are strongly committed to controlling the full nuclear fuel cycle, and the United States will never get the other major powers to impose the sort of 'crippling sanctions' it has been seeking for years now. It's not gonna happen folks, or at least not anytime soon.

We might be able to convince Iran not to develop actual nuclear weapons -- which its leaders claim they don't want to do and have said would be contrary to Islam. I don't know if they really believe this or if an agreement along these lines is possible. I do know that we haven't explored that possibility in any serious way. Instead, the Obama administration has been chasing an impossible dream.

Furthermore, the U.S. approach to Tehran is deeply inconsistent. Obama has made a big play of extending an 'open hand' to Tehran, and he reacted in a fairly measured way to the crackdown on the Greens last summer. But at the same time, the administration has been ratcheting up sanctions and engaging in very public attempt to strengthen security ties in the Gulf region. And earlier this week, we learned that Centcom commander General David Petraeus has authorized more extensive special operations in a number of countries in the region, almost certainly including covert activities in Iran.

Just imagine how this looks to the Iranian government. They may be paranoid, but sometimes paranoids have real (and powerful) enemies, and we are doing our best to look like one. How would we feel if some other country announced that it was infiltrating special operations forces into the United States, in order to gather intelligence, collect targeting information, or maybe even build networks of disgruntled Americans who wanted to overthrow our government or maybe just sabotage a few government installations? We'd definitely view it as a threat or even an act of war, and we'd certainly react harshly against whomever we thought was responsible. So when you wonder why oil- and gas-rich Iran might be interested in some sort of nuclear deterrent (even if only a latent capability), think about what you'd do if you were in their shoes...

...Why is U.S. policy stuck in this particular rut? In part because this is a hard problem; one doesn't unwind three decades of mutual suspicion by making a speech or two or sending a friendly holiday greeting, and sometimes success requires a lot of perseverance. But I think there are two other problems at work.

The first is the mindset that seems to have taken hold in the Obama administration. As near as I can tell, they believe Iran is dead set on acquiring nuclear weapons and that Iran will lie and cheat and prevaricate long enough to get across the nuclear threshold. Given that assumption, there isn't much point in trying to negotiate any sort of 'grand bargain' between Iran and the West, and especially not one that left them with an enrichment capability (even one under strict IAEA safeguards). This view may be correct, but if it is, then our effort to ratchet up sanctions is futile and just makes it more likely that other Iranians will blame us for their sufferings. Here I am in rare (if only partial) agreement with Tom Friedman: Maybe our focus ought to shift from our current obsession with Iran's nuclear program and focus on human rights issues instead (though it is harder for Washington to do that without looking pretty darn hypocritical).

A second explanation is some combination of inside-the-Beltway groupthink and ordinary bureaucratic conservatism. For anyone currently working in Washington, a hard line on Iran and defending our longstanding policy of confrontation is a very safe position to support. No one will accuse you of being a naive appeaser; you'll have plenty of bureaucratic allies, and you'll retain your reputation as a tough and reliable defender of U.S. interests.

By contrast, any government official who proposed taking the threat of force off the table, who publicly admitted that sanctions wouldn't work, who acknowledged that we probably can't stop Iran from getting the bomb if it really wants to, or who recommended a much more far-reaching effort at finding common ground would be taking a significant career risk. And you'd be virtually certain to get smeared by unrepentent neocons and other hawks who favor the use of military force. So there's little incentive for insiders to contemplate -- let alone propose -- a different approach to this issue, even though our current policy is looking more and more like the failed policies of the previous administration.

Although I obviously can't be certain, I don't think there will be an open war with Iran. I think that enough influential people realize just how much trouble this would cause us and that they will continue to resist calls for 'kinetic action.' (Of course, I also thought that about Iraq back in 2001, and look what happened there.) But U.S.-Iranian relations aren't going to improve much either, and we'll end up devoting more time and effort to this problem than it deserves. But who cares? It's not as if the United States has any other problems on its foreign-policy agenda, right?"

You know what occurred to me, this morning?

The irony of the current period is that what motivates so much of our policy, these days, in every arena, is the fear of being outdone by the bad guys. Being Al-Queda lite, as it were. And having the bad guys outdo us in the process.

But the reality is that as long as we go down this sad, failed, foolish path. We are Al-Queda lite. We are exactly what they say we are. We are the pussified version of Al-Queda, Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Robert Mugabe and the Chinese Communist leadership all wrapped up in one.

Our operating logic, right now, is the same. Get your way through fear. We're just bigger pussies than they are about getting our way.

All because we don't have the more honest courage to call bullshit on that operating logic.

It's the logic that operates under all of this. Always has. For everyone. Including Al-Queda.

Because the truth is that underneath all that bravado and macho posturing is the cowardice and fear of looking weak. Which, itself, is what real cowardice and weakness look like. Ask Adolph Hitler. The guy who lost WWII, by the way, if you're keeping count.

Real men don't strut. And they don't bully people to get their way. Real men give a shit about other people. Because it's the right thing to do, that's why.

Everything else is cowardice.

And perhaps cowardice is all we're capable of.

Because real men don't have to pretend.

The punchline

Why is it that given a thorough understanding of human beings' capacity for destruction and self-destruction for no good reason at all, Twain chose to tell jokes?

Why would a man profoundly aware of the ugliest tendencies of human nature choose to laugh at them rather than cry for the poor bastards?

Because the punchline, which is funny as all hell, when you finally get the joke, as much as it ever was tragic, is that if they're not gonna stop, losers, they're not gonna stop.

And there's not a damn thing you can do about a species bound and determined to consume itself in its own foolish pride.

Except for laugh at the jackasses when they fall on their asses. And give 'em an idea and some hope to get back up, when they get around to wiping the snot off their noses and doing just that.

Damned shame, this human race. So much potential. So little to show for it.

But the night's still young, now ain't it?

No love for Grover

That's the word on the street.

It all began when Andrew Sullivan began talking sense again and moving away from the postmodern darkness.

First, Frankl lays bear the foolishness of the current political period.



Why Victor Frankl is the master. The one book my dad remembered from college, the last time I talked with him. And for good reason.

The cynics are wrong. And Victor explains well, here, and as ever single smidgeon of empirical evidence in the world should make perfectly clear to anyone with their eyes open, at this point.

This Harry Reasoner documentary has excellent observations about human nature.



Harry's right. Problem is group sainthood just is how all people operate, too often. All of us. Not just the hippies. In fact, the hippies did their bit to help move us more away from all that. Beams and splinters and all that. Without even a shred of doubt in our wisdom. The sign of true wisdom, apparently. Or perhaps vanity. Same as it ever was.

The cynicism is not only wrong. It makes things worse. As Victor well argues. Because without thinking of how we should be, we cannot be what we could be. Which is exactly what has happened in the last 10 years, in particular. But, really, is, tragically, so much of human history.

And our fate is more of the same. Until we choose differently. Until we choose to be better, for real. The only path to honest progress.

Everything else is a means of frustrating honest progress. For everyone involved.

I like the way Jack said it better, personally.



The path to progress, you wonder. Freedom or repression?

Mark Twain knew. John Stuart Mill did too. So did Lord Acton, Baron de Montesquieu, Voltaire, Mary Wolstonecraft and everyone else who made our free world possible.

Perhaps everyone else has outthunk them?

Perhaps that isn't vanity. Perhaps it's progress. Damn the stinkin' consequences.

Or, perhaps, as it turns out, you, too, are human. As subject to original sin, especially the deadliest of sins - pride - as anyone else. Perhaps there are no saints among us. Perhaps there really is noone without sin.

Perhaps that means you, too, Captain Infallible. Leaping human nature with a single line of bullshit.

It's a bird. It's a plane.

Awwww. It's just lovable old Grover.

And who doesn't love Grover?

Jesus Christ, that's who. And the liberal democratic world, apparently.

Liberal democracies. Hatin' on furry monsters since the dawn of furry monsters.

No love for you, Grover.

Why don't the newscasters cry when they read about people who die?

The best commentary on the news and politics I've ever heard, period.



I've listened to this song at least 20 times, now, on the way up from Wichita.

I made my peace with this song that if people do not want to stop the madness they do not have to. And as long as we all rationalize it, it will never go away. Ever.

Until we choose differently.

And so it goes.

Same as it ever was.

Love (the source of everything great)

Know the difference between good and great?

Courage.

Know the source of that?

Love. No bullshit.

Keep that in mind the next time you're makin' excuses otherwise.

Or keep lying to yourself.

And deal with the life you choose, lover.

The neighbors are beginning to talk

Have you seen this?

Tempers Flare in Textbook Battle

What the hell is wrong with us, for I wonder?

Is there a goddamn thing discussed there I wouldn't teach?

Obviously not. Because it's all true, dagnabbit.

So why the political back and forth?

Because so many of us are crabby little children. Can't just have honest, thoughtful, respectful, discussions about politics. Even when there is zero real debate about anything we're debating.

Oh, and if the state board of education says that I have to teach something, is that the final word on any dang thing I teach?

Obviously not. The point of a liberal education, for anyone who managed to stay awake for it.

My conscience is the final word on everything I teach. Which is exactly as it should be. That's why we get a liberal education. For those who took it seriously.

After a conversation with a friend about perspective and the need for it in the sports and steroids debates, it occurs to me.

That the same is true for all of it.

Every last bit of it.

We are a fucking mess. Humanity. Constantly bickering about every damn thing like somehow our opinions are more infallible than they could ever possibly be. Myself included. Big index finger pointing right in my own direction, right now.

Go watch some baseball, this summer. Stop taking your opinions so seriously, goofball.

I'm talking to myself, there. I do it often. The neighbors are beginning to talk.

What keeps us honest

I spend a lot of time talking with the kids about how decency and honesty pay.

But the truth is that it's not the incentives, and certainly not the punishments, that keep us honest.

A certain Nazarene comes to mind.

Same as it's always been.

Some people are just willing to do what it takes to love thy neighbor, to do good and to be more honest, despite the incentives and punishments otherwise.

And that's what keeps us honest. And always will.

And all of us know that deep in our hearts. No matter how cynical we get.

Same as it ever was.

Honest politics (means no bullying necessary)

Honest politics doesn't have to be an oxymoron.

And Rand Paul offers us a path.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rand's right about this issue.

Private business owners should be able to discriminate against serving or hiring people they don't want to serve or hire. Even if I believe with all my heart and soul that they shouldn't. And not only should they have the right to do it. They do it now, as Rand points out. Law or no law.

You want to turn away paying or better qualified folks out of your stubborn ignorance, Einstein, have at it.

No paying or qualified or even unqualified person of color has a single itsy-bitsy smidgeon to fear from you. Not just because who wants to do business or work for someone who would think like this. But because how in the world could such a person maintain a healthy, reliable, worthy business, at all, long term?

They couldn't is the answer. Bigots might find ways to keep their doors open. But, long term, in a world that recognizes the stupidity of such a notion, they will most assuredly be swallowed up in the great marketplace of common sense.

Civil rights progress occurred with a change in hearts and minds of people, as King argued well, in leadership of that movement. White, black, and all the rest. Not a fact of law. The law was needed for things legal, like voting rights and discrimination by government entities (by the government entity with honest jurisdiction).

The law was the single most oppressive fact in the lives of African Americans in American history. A fact that is patently clear when the left decides to get honest about anything, these days.

The law kept black people in chains. The law kept black people from reading. The law kept black people from owning property. The law kept black people from making a living freely in the world. The law kept black people from voting. The law kept public facilities separate but equal. And the law was what protected anything an ugly majority wanted. Same as it ever was.

And it is that same law that progressives have decided is the Great White Hope today.

The real progress we have made in America and around the world on matters of race has occurred, largely, as a matter of change in hearts and minds.

And most people, and most white people, in particular, since they are still a statistical majority in America, but black folks and brown folks and all folks of all sorts of colors and creeds, will agree, when Rand starts making that argument more plain.

On this issue, I think more people identify with Rand's dilemna than Rachel likely realizes.

And Rand is right about the politics, as well. Painting government regulation of racist speech or behavior, like painting gay marriage, as extreme is dirty politics. It's not honest discussion. Especially when the right side of the question is being bullied.

It's the reason why folks like Rand Paul who try to engage politics more honestly deserve more respect than bullies like Rachel Maddow. Who still deserve to be able to get married. No matter what bullies to her right have to say about the matter.

Americans will likely identify with Rand more than Rachel, on this question. Many Americans may feel that gay marriage is extreme, as well. But, over time, that will not be the case. Because giving people the right to marry who they choose it is the right thing to do.

And the heart of this debate between Rachel and Rand is:

Do Americans (and most people) change for the better because the law tells them so? Or because it's the right thing to do?

Not only is Rand right on the merits of this question.

It's good politics, if he thinks about it for a second.

Because most Americans likely identify with Rand's argument, here. At a personal level. Black folks, too. Even if they, similarly, would be sheepish to articulate it so.

Leftwing and rightwing bullies will lose these battles. Just as religious and imperial bullies lost similar battles over the long term of human history. No matter how many people they murdered and intimidated in their wake.

Because they're wrong about humanity, that's why.

"...all experience hath shewn," as Jefferson wrote, "that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government..."

Cynics thought these words would fail to move a nation, too. But, they were wrong. And that eventually proved to be the case. Because people got tired of being bullied otherwise.

And more Americans are like Rand, tired of being bullied on these matters, than Rachel or most bullies on the right and left appreciate.

Lord Acton was right. And so was Twain.

And there's not a damn thing that bullies on the left or right can do about. They won't even be able to bully, long term.

Because, eventually, no one will trust them, at all.

No matter how they try to bully and spin otherwise.

Take that, tough guys.

Feel the love.

The irony

You know's so funny about this period?

The more activists, journalists, and people in government frantically try to prove just how important they are to every issue they get they get their egos wrapped up in.

And the more they fail, repeatedly, without end, to actually resolve any of those issues.

The more they demonstrate just how irrelevant they are to the lives of most people.

And the less people trust or turn to them to resolve those issues.

And the sad thing is that there are a few things that government really is necessary to address because no other institution literally can address those issues as well. Criminal justice and national security, in particular.

It's ironic, isn't it?

They buzz around like busy little bees. Loudly proclaiming just how important they all really are. And they fail, again and again and again, to do any of the jobs they set before themselves.

And all the rest of the country can conclude, rightly, is just how unimportant they are to most things of importance.

Ego. Big fat, insatiable ego.

I know. I know what comes immediately to mind. Joe Biden. It's true. But it's all the rest of them, too. Believe me.

And all for naught.

Because all Americans can do is look at this enormous and ridiculous spectacle - governing officials taking on every issue that tickles their fancy and failing to really resolving any of them - and come to the quite logical conclusion that these fools can't be trusted to do a damned thing of any import.

Even if most Americans had no clue that was the logical conclusion when they started.

Your English teacher was right, killer. Irony. The world is full of it. It's full of something.

It ain't sense. That's for goddamned sure.

Attention Captain Faintheart

This is what progress looks like, gentlemen. When you aren't apologizing for left-wing totalitarian governments, Captain Faintheart.

Swingers' case tests sexual limits in China

"Eventually, 200 people joined the group, organizing activities 35 times between 2007and 2009, Yao quoted his client as saying. Ma himself participated in 18 sessions. Members decided on their own where to meet, Yao said. Among the 14 men and eight women arrested were white-collar workers, taxi drivers and salesclerks.

His trial highlights the vast social changes that China has undergone in the decades since it embraced economic reform. 'Sex liberation stymied by law,' trumpeted a front-page article in the official China Daily, which ran an in-depth piece that questioned whether China's laws on sexual behavior are lagging behind the times.

Chinese attitudes toward sex have changed dramatically during the last 20 years, said sociologist Li Yinhe, China's most prominent sex expert. Even a generation ago, holding hands and kissing in public were virtually unheard of. These days, studies indicate that 60 to 70 percent of Chinese have had sex before marriage, up from 15 percent in 1989.

'In the past, any sex activity outside marriage was unacceptable among people and could be punished,' said Li, a member of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

China used the so-called charge of 'hooliganism,' a catchall term that criminalized everything from premarital sex to dancing with members of the other sex and listening to Western music. During the early 1980s, a woman was sentenced to death for participating in secret dance parties, according to the China Daily.

But with rising prosperity and an easing of government controls on personal freedoms, China has shifted toward a more progressive view on sex, though attitudes remain much more traditional in the countryside than in urban centers. Sex motels cater to college students who rent by the hour, pornography is widely available on the Internet, and radio and TV shows devoted to sex advice are highly popular.

Even public views on the once-taboo topic of homosexuality have changed, Li said. Sodomy was decriminalized in 1997, while a survey she conducted two years ago found that 91 percent of people believe gays should not face discrimination in the workplace.

The immense growth of the Internet in China has played a factor in giving niche groups a space to operate, she said. The largest online site about group sex, Happy Village, has more than 380,000 registered members.

When Ma's case surfaced publicly, Li, along with other social commentators and academics, came to his defense. Though 'partner-swapping' is against social norms, 'just violating social convention isn't violating the law. As long as activities don't harm anyone else, one has a right to participate in them,' she wrote in one blog post.

A prominent campaigner for sexual rights, Li even drafted a proposal to scrap the crime at the March session of the National People's Congress. It was submitted but no action was taken.

'Most people don't like Ma's activities. But most people also believe Ma should not be sentenced. People are more tolerant and they think that the authorities should not interfere in such things as long as it's not against someone's will,' she said.

Ma has received some public backing. An online survey taken by Phoenix TV showed that 70 percent of 2,000 respondents believe he should be acquitted. A 2006 survey by the Institute on Sexuality and Gender showed that 40 percent of 6,000 respondents believed group sex should not be a crime, while most of the remainder felt it was immoral but that the penalties should not be so severe.

Even some of Ma's students have weighed in, posting their support on the popular Internet forum Tianya.

'We support him,' wrote one student who identified himself as David. 'How about those corrupt officials who secretly have mistresses? There are so many other issues in people's lives. Why don't (government officials) solve those instead of dwelling on this case?'

But others have been equally scathing in their criticism of what they view as a shocking crime. Group sex 'should face a crackdown with a heavy hand. This case proves the law was necessary,' wrote the Jiangsu Legal News, a Nanjing-based newspaper.

Regardless of the outcome, Yao said the case has challenged the government in highlighting the importance of individual privacy.

'I think because of this trial, many more people will realize the privacy issue. The case is about the government's intervention in privacy. It's about the protection of citizens' rights. People have the freedom to decide what to do with their body,' Yao said."

Progress does not mean you're right all the time, genius.

That's the opposite of progress. Otherwise known as willfull ignorance.

Think about it, professor. It's a logical impossibility.

Bullshit comes in all flavors and varieties. But it still stinks when you put in a cone.

Someone might want to tell the guys with the scoops.

Boots and throats, and fashionable notions of responsibility

At some point, as the fashion dictates, these days, you just have to own it.

Robert Gibbs: "We will keep our...boot on the throat of BP to ensure that...they are doing all that is necessary..."



Except noone does. Own it, that is. Nothing that goes wrong, at least. Ever, ever, ever. Unless they can blame it on someone else.

And I'm sure that has nothing to do with boots and throats.

Keep moving. There's nothing to see here.

Fashionable notions of responsibility.

The wave of the future, apparently.

How could it possibly get any better?

A beer wouldn't be a bad start.

Pass the courage, please

Would that Americans - the land of free, mind you - had the kind of courage Mark Steyn demonstrates in this column.

A slow-burn bonfire of liberties

"The other day, upholding the sacking of a black Christian for declining to provide 'sex therapy lessons' to gay couples, Lord Justice Laws ruled that 'law for the protection of a position held purely on religious grounds is irrational, divisive, capricious, arbitrary.' Actually it’s the law of Lord Justice Laws that is increasingly 'irrational, divisive, capricious, arbitrary.' Or as George Orwell, in Animal Farm, formulated it: all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. In the land of Laws, a gay is more equal than a Christian. A Muslim is more equal than anybody. A black man is more equal than a white man, unless the white man is gay and the black man a Christian. An eco-zealot is more equal than an Anglican. Not long before Lord Justice Laws’ decision on the 'irrationality' of legal protection for Christianity, Tim Nicholson, a 'Head of Sustainability' fired for questioning his property management group’s environmental policies, sued for wrongful dismissal under 'Employment Equality (Religion And Beliefs) Regulations.' He wound up with the best part of one hundred thousand pounds after Mr. Justice Burton ruled that Mr. Nicholson’s faith in anthropogenic global warming was a 'philosophical belief' on a par with religion. So the Employment Equality (Religion And Beliefs) Law protects belief in apocalyptic 'climate change' but not in Jesus...

...As for Muslims, in December Tohseef Shah sprayed the words 'KILL GORDON BROWN,' 'OSAMA IS ON HIS WAY' and 'ISLAM WILL DOMINATE THE WORLD' on the war memorial at Burton-upon-Trent. But the Crown Prosecution Service decided his words were not 'religiously motivated.' Phew! Thank goodness for that, eh? So a week or so back he walked out of court a free man, except for £500 in compensation to the municipal council for cleaning off his non-religiously motivated 'ISLAM WILL DOMINATE THE WORLD' graffito.

I am currently slogging my way through a rather stodgy 650-page tome called Extreme Speech And Democracy. On the back is a question from Christopher McCrudden, professor of human rights law at Oxford: 'What are the appropriate limits to freedom of expression in societies that wish to be democratic, multicultural, and committed to the human rights of all?'

Whether or not you regard that as a legitimate query, it’s certainly an irrelevant one. Because whatever you decide are the 'appropriate' limits, by the time they percolate down to the transgendered liaison officer patrolling Workington shopping centre they’ll be reliably inappropriate. As I always point out in retailing the latest idiocy from Canada’s 'human rights' fanatics, none of the above are 'right-wing' in any sense that Steyn or Rumsfeld or Cheney would recognize the term. Mrs. Duffy is a lifelong Labour voter; Mr. Newman is one of those pox-on-all-their-houses types; the property company that fired Mr. Nicholson is so wretchedly politically correct it employed him as 'Head of Sustainability,' a title of near parodic bogusness. Yet all fell afoul of Lord Justice Laws’ 'irrational, divisive, capricious, arbitrary' laws. Because it’s hard not to. Because once you establish the principle that the state has the right to police ideas, sooner or later one of yours will catch their eye. I say 'principle,' but that’s not really the word. The spirit is more aptly caught by a new joint initiative by the Canadian 'Human Rights' Commission, the Manitoba 'Human Rights' Commission and the Treaty Relations Commission of Manitoba to “promote and enhance the learning experience relative to human and treaty rights for all people living in Canada and around the world.' No idea what that means, but, as the CHRC press release says, this is the first time that these three useless taxpayer-funded sinecures have come together to 'further their cause.' Since when do government agencies have ideological 'causes'? And what happens if you disagree with their 'cause'?

As for the 'balancing act' that Professor McCrudden urges between individual rights and broader responsibilities, only a truly free people have the incentive even to seek it. The more you haul nobodies off to the cells for putting up a poster or quoting the Bible, the more a timid conformist populace will keep its head down, mind its own business, and avoid broader social engagement—or at any rate non-alcohol-fuelled engagement. Big Government is dismantling civic identity, and the slow-burn bonfire of liberties in Europe and North America will eventually consume us all."

He's right. The home of the brave, and really the homes of all free peoples, has been cowered into the home of the timid and their frightened little schoolyard bullies.

Fuck that shit, I say.

These colors don't run, bitch. Find somebody else to push around, dicks.

Freedom isn't free, baby.

Pass the courage, please.

A California Cardinal in Theodore Hoskins' Court

The Missouri Legislature lived up to its well-earned reputation of a regular gathering of notorious jackasses, recently, renaming a stretch of Mark McGwire Highway to Mark Twain Highway.

Mark Twain would get a hearty laugh, I'm sure.

Jim Caple says it better than I could in his column ways back in March about the plan.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Mac

"You don't know about me without you have driven on a road by the name the Mark McGwire Highway in St. Louis; but that ain't no matter anymore, on account the Missouri Senate voted to rename it for Mr. Mark Twain this week. They had been talking about this ever since the book "Juiced'' was made by Jose Canseco. He told the truth mainly, but there were some stretchers in his book, like him and me taking a dead cat to the graveyard and running off to be Pittsburgh Pirates and injecting syringes full of steroids into each other in a cave. But that is nothing. I never seen anybody but lied one time or another, without it was Ozzie Guillen.

Anyways, the Missouri legislature named that piece of highway for me after I hit 70 big taters to break the record of 61 made by Roger Maris many years before. When I done it, reporters from all over the country took to following me around from city to city like I was the lost dauphin of France, writing stories about me being almost a god out of scripture just cuz of how I hit so many round-trippers and all. They said my circuit clouts practically saved the game, what with all the fans who been turned off before by the players' affair and the commissioner canceling the 1994 World Series and Ken Burns "Baseball'' series. The way everyone went on, it was like going to your own funeral and standing in the back of the church listening to folks who was no relation all praying and sobbing about what a wonderful soul you was and how lucky they was to have knowed you and how you made everyone everywhere happier. Not that no one could attend their own funeral, without signing with the Pirates.

The thing is, I pretty much whitewashed them all, the reporters and the fans and everybody. I was taking steroids -- just to keep healthy, mind -- but no one never cared a bit at the time. They seen how big me and my acne was and knowed I took androstenedione, but they didn't mind none. All they wanted to talk about was all them round-trippers. Fooling them was easier than an owner getting taxpayers to pay him to build him his own stadium by fibbing how it will create jobs.

Only one day, they all turned against me. All of a sudden, they decided steroids was bad and I was going to hell or jail or Kansas City for taking them. I don't know why; maybe it was the Widow Douglas stirring them up or the U.S. Congress subpoenaing me to testify. All I know is all them people who went on and on about me saving the game in 1998 when they must have knowed I took steroids now said I done ruined it. Well, I was blindsided. It was like afloating on the river, bound for Cooperstown and enjoying a smoke on a corncob pipe and watching the stars in the heavens with your best friend all peaceful like and then having a steamboat run you over and smash up your boat and leave you for dead on the river bank. Or like being a Cubs fan.

Well, I snuck off and lived alone on an island and didn't talk to no one for awhile, not even Congress. I was practically a hermit, sort of like Milton Bradley. But now I am back in baseball with my old manager, Skipper Tony, learning his Cardinals how to hit. But I will take a blood oath (which is different than a blood test) that I won't have nothing to do with those steroids anymore. I learnt my lesson. I just think maybe I can give something back to baseball after all it gived me. And maybe I can make people remember that I wasn't such a bad egg after all. That I was friendly and helped kids and made people feel happy and hit 49 home runs as a rookie before I was on the juice.

I certainly ain't doin' this for the money. Thanks to all them taters I hit, I got more money than a body could tell what to do with, lessun he had a vengeful ex-wife and bad judgment, which was definitely the case with Canseco. That is why he wound up doing time in jail and appearing on reality shows. I don't know which was worse, though if I had to guess I would say boxing one of the ex-"Partridge Family" kids is about as low as a player can sink. Without it was ratting on your teammates in a book.

I also hope the state House votes to not change the highway name. It seems to me that if you name a road for someone, you shouldn't a go and change it without he does something real low down and despicable. I mean, Pete Rose still has a street named after him but that's a story for another book entirely."

The Missouri Legislature has obviously never read any Mark Twain. The man's whole life was dedicated to getting people to accept themselves for their failures, not rub their noses in it.

It's like having a Stone a Prostitute Fundraiser for Jesus. It makes no goddamn sense. Except to anybody with no goddamn sense.

The Missouri Legislature should consider changing the name of the Three Stooges Highway to the Missouri Legislature Highway. It's a more appropriate switch.

And would better acknowledge the Legislature's appreciation for the legacy of their favorite son. Both of them.

And the ever shortening distance between their heads and their posteriors.