Deafening Silence

So, Michael Totten, Christopher Hitchens and Jonathan Foreman are Walking Down the Street...

...and the rest isn't a joke, but is certainly worth reading in full.

Some interesting quotes:

"We were about to face the wrath of a militia whose members can do whatever they want in the streets with impunity. Escalating seemed like the worst possible thing I could do. The time to attack the young man was right at the start, and that moment had passed. This was Beirut, where the law of the jungle can rule with the flip of a switch, and we needed to move."

............................

"But getting in the way of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party can get a man killed, or at least beaten severely. Just a few months ago the SSNP attacked a Sunni journalist on that very street and sent him bleeding and broken to the hospital in front of impotent witnesses. A Lebanese colleague told me he was brutally assaulted merely for filming the crew taking down the SSNP flags as the prime minister ordered. “He didn't do anything to them,” she said. “He just filmed their flag.”

..............................

“Anyway,”[Hitchens]said, “call me old fashioned if you will, but my line is that swastika posters are to be defaced or torn down. I mean, what other choice do you have? I'd like to think I'd have done that if I had known it was being guarded by people who are swastika fanciers. I have done that in my time. I have had fights with people who think that way. But I was surprised first by how violent and immediate their response was, and second by how passive and supine was the response of the police.”

....................................

It's worth pondering how a place that permits this kind of thing can still call itself a sovereign nation.

And worth remembering that we could come to that, ourselves, if we are not vigilant.

And Now for Something Completely Different...

He's a complicated man, and no one understands him like his- ukulele.

Honest.

Now was that Good, Bad or Ugly?

 

OK, I find this amusing.

It's the Day After the Oscars and everyone is blogging about how they'd rather not blog about the Oscars.  They're all describing last nite's ceremony in great detail just so they can prove how worthless it was, and show how effectively they ignored it.

I'm reminded of the many times well-meaning people have asked me, since I eat (mostly) vegetarian, if I've ever tried one of those turkey-shaped tofu things.  To which I always say: if I don't want to eat turkey in the first place, why would I buy something intended to be a fake turkey?

Look, I personally dislike beef, chicken, pork, lamb, turkey- pretty much every type of flesh except deepwater fish.  So I'm not interested in tofu turkeys, soyburgers or any other type of meat stand-in.

If you're really not interested in the Oscars, don't watch them.  If you really dislike the whole ceremony, do something else.  If  you're tuning in so that you can then majesterially ignore it, well- it's like buying that tofu turkey, isn't it?

Unappetizing and pretentious.

I have no problem with people who like meat.  Roast, bake, broil and eat in peace!  It just doesn't happen to appeal to me, so please don't take it amiss when I opt for a salad.  Similarly, if you look forward to watching the Oscars every year, good for you.  Whip out the popcorn and fire up the TV.  I can think of worse things you could be doing.

Just don't pretend you're staring at the ceiling, thinking of the flag.

And no, I won't be joining you.  Not because I especially hate the Oscars- I can take it or leave it- but because I can't stay up that late on a Sunday.  Monday is the start of the work week at our house.

So let me know who gets Best Actress next year, ok?  Just don't pretend you didn't notice.

They Really Have a Point

Opposition to the Obama Administration's mortgage bailout plan continues to snowball.  The latest group to object?  Renters:

All we hear these days is whining from reckless home borrowers and their banks.

But did you know that renters are 32 percent of American households? And that homes in foreclosure are less than 2 percent?

So why is Congress rushing to bailout high-flying borrowers and their lenders with our tax dollars?

Unfortunately, renters aren't as good at politics as the small minority of homeowners (and their bankers) who are in trouble. We don't have lobbyists in Washington, DC. We don't get a tax deduction for our rent and we don't get sweetheart government loans.

Quite simply, we are just Angry Renters. And now it is our time to be heard: no government bailouts!

I must say, this group doesn't have my sympathy; they have my empathy. 

I am 46 and I have owned a home (or rather, held a mortgage) for 11 years.  From the age of 19 onward I was a renter, with no thought of buying a home. I was pretty certain that my educational background and career choice would never earn enough income to support a mortgage, so I continued to rent.

Finding a safe, decent neighborhood to live in is very difficult for a low-income renter.  I would have loved to rent a small place in a modest homeowning neighborhood, but opportunities like that are few and far between.  Homeowners tend to view renters with suspicion; mixed rent-and-own neighborhoods are rare.

I experienced that predjudice anew when my husband and I were looking at houses 10 years ago; after viewing one home, we stepped out on the sidewalk and a family member who had come along sniffed, "But, look!  You'd have to deal with the renters next door!" 

Apparently this person had forgotten that my husband and I were, at that moment, renters ourselves.

This sneering prejudice toward renters has always seemed nonsensical to me.  People rent because they are smart enough to realize that they can't support a mortgage.  Maybe their work forces them to relocate regularly.  Maybe they are just out of school and concentrating on establishing their careers before buying a home.

Maybe they just don't like to mow lawns.

People like to say that "you have nothing to show for all those rent payments."  Balderdash.  If you have a decent landlord, that monthly check buys you plenty of perks:

1.  Repairs.  Broken toilet?  Not your issue.  Call the super.  You don't get the bill, either.

2. Security.  If you live in a well-run apartment building, you are surrounded by neighbors who have as much at stake in building security as you do.  You probably see certain neighbors in the hall or parking lot on a daily basis; you get a feel for the rhythm of each other's lives.  You notice is something is 'off', if that creepy person by the dumpster seems out of place.

3. Mobility and independence.  Don't like the place?  Just got a new job?  Pay up for the month and move, no questions asked.  No heavy property investment hanging around your neck.

Of course, there are bad landlords and they can make your life miserable: never fixing anything (I once went without a toilet for a month before I finally moved out in disgust) or creating such onerous rules that you're afraid to mist a houseplant, let alone ask to paint a wall. 

If you're a low-income renter, the neighbors aren't always a ray of sunshine, either. (The woman who lived next to me was abruptly taken away by Federal agents one time; I never found out why.) 

 And if you are a low-income renter with a crummy landlord, you could come home one day to find your rent suddenly jacked up several dollars- but, really, how different is that from today's ARM loan adjustments?

Being a renter did not make me a fool or irresponsible or a loser.  At least, not at the time.

These days, I can see why renters would feel like losers and fools.

The real estate market needs to right itself.  It has been inflated beyond belief for over a decade.  The little house my husband and I finally bought sold for $60k.  The last time it was appraised- just before the meltdown- it was approaching 100k.  Hey- we like our place, but even we knew that was nonsense.

House prices should be allowed to find a realistic floor.  I'm no economist, but it seems to me that continuing to prop up the more exotic or extravagant mortgage arrangments will only keep housing prices artificially inflated.

You know what happens when you have artificially inflated house prices?  You lock responsible owners out.  Sensible, self-aware renters are going to take one look at the market and say: I could never afford that, just as I once did. 

And who does that leave? Speculators. Or gullible dreamers who can be suckered by predatory lenders.

Maybe if the government wants to help some homeowners they could agree to wipe the bad mortgage off their credit record and give them a voucher for a decent rental unit until they got on their feet again.

And when housing prices have shrunk back to size, maybe they really can afford a home.

Until then, I hope the nation can cultivate a more positive attitude toward renters.  Right now they look like the ones who made the smart choice.

Just sayin'.

Update:

It appears at least one person agrees with me:

"A person paying rent and with the flexibility to move to where there are jobs is better off than one anchored to an underwater mortgage in a town with high unemployment, even if the lender has to go bust in the process.

Prices of housing in the U.S. were driven too high by too much leverage even as supply increased. Let's accept that, allow prices to fall, the banks to fail and start again on a new stable footing."

Read the whole thing.  He says it better than I did.

The Fairness Future: All Our Blogs Are Belong to the Doctrine

Yesterday an audio clip of Camille Paglia complaining about Democratic support for the Fairness Doctrine made the rounds.

You can hear the clip here- at under 5 minutes, it's worth a listen.

Paglia makes the same case against the Fairness Doctrine that many others have been making; I won't repeat it here.  I think her points are valid, but there are other issues looming that I don't see anyone addressing. 

So I will.

1.  Everyone who discusses the Fairness Doctrine frames their argument entirely in terms of 'talk radio.'  But what is talk radio?  It is interviews/discussions of political figures and political issues. The fact that these interviews/discussions are 'unbalanced' and reach a 'mass audience' seems to be the main objection in some minds.  The actual use of a traditional radio device per se is seldom mentioned.

Well, where else can you find partisan interviews/discussions?

Podcasting, that's where.  Podcasting- notice how much it sounds like broadcasting- also reaches a mass audience and is frequently partisan.  If the Fairness Doctrine were reinstated, how long would it be before it was applied to podcasting?

Not long, I'd say.  The initial impact of the doctrine could actually move some of the interviews and discussions to a podcast format, as a kind of loophole.  I suspect it wouldn't be long before podcasting was redefined as 'broadcasting,' and the Fairness Doctrine applied there, too.

2.  And once podcasting is redefined as broadcasting, that means podcasters will have to purchase licenses. This would drive a lot of small bloggers out of podcasting. 

 But it would do more than that.

3. Once podcasting is redefined as broadcasting, larger blogs and group blogs- Instapundit, Pajamas Media, Crooks and Liars, Huffington Post- could in turn be redefined as broadcast networks, little different from ABC, NBC, and CBS.

Suddenly the blogosphere is much more complicated.  Licensing, FCC language standards and other regulations- all those restraints that bloggers have rejoiced in avoiding- would be put in place. 

Thereafter the only 'safe' and 'affordable' blogs would be the most boring ones- "I had waffles for breakfast this morning!"  "Don't you just love Monty Python? LOL!"  "Look at this beautiful pic of my rose garden!"

 Viola! The FaceBooking of the Blogosphere.

Think it can't happen?  When Al Gore compained about 'digital brownshirts' in 2005, he wasn't talking about talk radio.  He was describing his view of the internet.  Since then, the relationship between blogs and broadcasting has only grown blurrier.  Some blogs not only post video clips, they create video of their own.  Large group blogs have begun covering news events- HuffPo was at the recent Obama press conference.  And I have heard plenty of radio/television stories referencing blog chatter on this or that topic.

The internet could become a victim of its own success.  How many bloggers have boasted that one day the blogosphere will replace the MSM?

Be careful what you wish for.

Check Out the Avalon Project!

Frequent readers of Deafening Silence know that I'm always looking to add solid research sites to the blogroll.  Well, I've been remiss for some time now in not drawing attention to a very valuable resource:

The Yale Law School Avalon Project.

Here is their official statement of purpose:

Statement of Purpose and Document Inclusion Policy

The Avalon Project will mount digital documents relevant to the fields of Law, History, Economics, Politics, Diplomacy and Government. We do not intend to mount only static text but rather to add value to the text by linking to supporting documents expressly referred to in the body of the text.

The Avalon Project will no doubt contain controversial documents. Their inclusion does not indicate endorsement of their contents nor sympathy with the ideology, doctrines, or means employed by their authors. They are included for the sake of completeness and balance and because in many cases they are by our definition a supporting document.

If you believe in going straight to the original document, this is the place for you.  I've used it more than once in research work, and it's a treasure trove.  Take a look at some available items:

18th Century Treaties

The Athenian Constitution

Extracts from Early Anglo-Saxon Law

You may have already run across links to the Avalon Project if you were hunting for supporting documents for a post.  If you are a 'history geek,' you might even want to go there just for fun.

Not Even a Lump of Coal in the Stocking

Via Amy Alkon, here is a link to Stimulus Watch, which lists the number of projects and amount of funding $$$ given to various states in today's newly signed Stimulus Bill.

Allow me to draw your attention to this item on the list:

Projects in West Virginia

Below are the "shovel-ready" projects for which the mayors of this state have requested federal stimulus funding. You can click on a project to read (and add to) its description. You can also discuss the project and vote on whether you believe it is critical or not. For a more local view, you can drill down to projects in a particular city. Just choose a city from the following list.

The total of cost of all the projects submitted by West Virginia is $700,000

That's right- 1 project, $700,000.

The nearest competitor in the cheapstakes is Delaware, with 7 projects clocking in at $52,000,000.

The U.S. Census Bureau ranks WV as one of the poorest states, along with Arkanasas and Missippi.

Arkansas has been given $1,059,150,740 to cover 199 projects and Mississippi will receive $2,433,551,064 for 552 projects.

As one Amy Alkon commentor put it:

"I had to wonder who WV pissed off..."

I wondered, too.

Now, to be fair, until quite recently West Virginia had a budget surplus that was the envy of many states- you can read about that here.  West Virginia has not been forced to hit the panic button like other states, such as California, which was asking for a state bailout months ago and is getting ready to lay off state employees and issue 'rainchecks' for state income tax refunds.

West Virginians are both frugal and proud.  But the state's surplus took a hit with the Wall Street meltdown just as many other funds did, and now I'm forced to wonder: is someone angry?

I was uneasy about the Obama campaign's attitude toward the Mountain State during the primaries.  President Obama visited the state only once and very briefly, if memory serves, and his operatives gave the excuse that "he could be assassinated."

West Virginia has no record of attempted assassinations on presidential candidates.

I also noticed some prominent Democratic/"Progessive" blogs arguing that perhaps West Virginia should be temporarily disenfranchised until Mountaineers could "get an eductation."

And then there were Vice-President Biden's campaign statements about coal on the stump.  How even "clean coal" was only fit for China, how the Obama strategy was to run coal out of business.

And of course the now-infamous statements of the Obama campaign about the "Appalachian" region in general.

So I am forced to wonder.  Is this a grudge? 

My instinct is that today's stimulus bill is basically a boondoggle and if WV can get by without any of it, perhaps that's for the best.  My only concern is that this is a harbinger of things to come in the Administration's treatment of the state.

 

TGIF Great Movie Moments Post

Jules Crittenden is linking to a Big Hollywood post of the 5 Greatest Conservative Moments on Film.

This got me thinking about some of my own favorite movie moments, conservative or otherwise.

For example, here's one I think Mr. C and Big Hollywood might've wanted on their list:  From the terrific- and terrifically underrated- movie Miracle:

Here's a good one for everybody who's fed up with the stimulus package, Congress, and President Obama:

That's from Moonstruck, btw.

This next one goes out special to Grim and all the brave men and women-both American and Iraqi- fighting to nurture the fledgling Iraqi democracy:

Here's a brilliant scene from another under-appreciated film: Something Wicked This Way Comes

 Cyrano de Bergerac (in the guise of Gerard Depardieu) gives a presumptious nobleman a lesson in composing verse:

(If you missed this one when it was first released, go pick up a copy for Valentine's Day.  You won't regret it.)

A crafty old king gives a neophyte prince a sharp lesson in negotiating- and then gets a little of his own back: The Lion in Winter

Well, there you are.  Hope I at least inspired a trip to Netflix or the video store.

Brief Update in Arkansas Bombing

Dr. Trent P. Pierce, a family practice physician and member of the Arkansas State Medical Board, was the victim of a car bomb on Wednesday, February 4.

Dr. Pierce remains in critical condition and will undergo additional surgery, according to this AP article:

The chairman of the Arkansas State Medical Board lost his left eye in the blast, suffered burns and was pelted with shrapnel.

Thursday afternoon, Pierce could move his fingers and toes on command, as well as bend his knee, said Scott Ferguson, a West Memphis doctor and family friend. Ferguson said doctors examined Pierce's right eye and believe he will be able to see out of it again.

Doctors placed an oxygen tube in Pierce's throat, which stops him from speaking with detectives, Ferguson said. Pierce is expected to undergo surgery again Friday to repair a broken wrist and insert a plate there. Previous operations cleared away shrapnel blasted into his neck and abdomen.

Doctors are now saying that the burn injuries sustained by Dr. Pierce in the blast may not be as dire as they feared.

Meanwhile, Investigators are examining the remains of the explosive device for clues:

Banks, the ATF agent, said residue and remains from the bomb had been sent to the agency's laboratory in Atlanta. Banks described the bomb as homemade, not manufactured dynamite or a military-style explosive.

The agent said bombs have certain characteristics that make them traceable, much like ballistics tests on bullets.

"The signature of the device ... pretty much identifies ... the maker," Banks said. "That's our job - to put it back together and find out who did it."

(Alert readers will recall that the same procedure is now being used to examine the remains of the Woodburn Bank bomb.)

Attention has also been focused on a spare tire placed in front of the vehicle that Dr. Pierce removed just before the blast.  Officials are also asking neighbors if any person was seen in the driveway of the Doctor's home before the explosion.

Meanwhile, the Arkansas State Medical Board is attempting to conduct its usual business, even as members are pulled aside by authorities for questioning.

There are still no leads in the case.

I found the official website of the Arkansas State Medical Board and was intrigued to discover that they sell the names and addresses of registered doctors online.  The information appears to include home addresses. 

For the sake of the Board I hope this information was not used to locate Dr. Pierce's home.

Dr. Pierce, btw, is listed as an asthma specialist.  Authorities made it clear that he was not an abortion practitioner at the outset of the investigation, ruling that out as a motive.

This photo shows the damage to Dr. Pierce's vehicle.  It is taken from this Fox News page, which has other photos of the investigation.

(The above photo is credited to AP.)

 

 

 

Economic Thought for the Day

Like many U.S. citizens, I have been following the debate on the merits/non-merits of the proposed stimulus bill.  Since everyone seems to be comparing our current situation to the Great Depression, I have a thought:

Common perception holds that the Great Depression was ended by the ramped-up production and employment of World War II.  Some people are even joking that we need a war to repeat that success. 

I don't think that would work, and here's why, in a single word:

Conscription.

When the United States began expanding its army and shipping thousands of men overseas to fight, it got those men by forcibly removing them from other jobs. (Yes, I'm aware that there were volunteers; my own father was one of them.)  Those other jobs then had to be filled- by someone else. 

The men conscripted into the army and shipped overseas were literally erased from the economy.  Their jobs were now up for grabs.

This is not the case now, with our all-volunteer army.  The men and women sent to fight were not employed in the civilian economy to start with.  They won't vacate any jobs.

I realize that there were many other factors in the expanding wartime economy.  I also realize that I'm NOT an economist.

But it does strike me that this is a big difference that nobody talks about.  Any opinions?  I'd be very interested in what you have to say.

Just keep it civilized.

And no, I'm not agitating for a war.