BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Friday, July 6, 2018
Thursday, July 5, 2018
THE MENU NOT JUST AFRICA OR MALAYSIA DE BRY BRAZIL 1500s
If you are going to engage in torture for military or strategic reasons, then the logical, evidentiary, and environmentalist, thing to do is to then kill and eat the torture victims.
You help the environment, get rid of the incriminating evidence, and fill your bellies without spending extra government money. It is truly a win win scenario, under the circumstances.
Bobbitt has noted that he is not opposed to torture, but I doubt that even he would go this far, with the liberal aftermath.
Bobbitt has noted that he is not opposed to torture, but I doubt that even he would go this far, with the liberal aftermath.
SPEAKING OF MINIMUM WAGE OR QUANTITATIVE EASING WONKISH
We might just as well try to comparative advantage, tariff, free trade, license, franchise, blockade, dump in foreign immigrant or refugee labor, carrot stick trade strategic diplomacize, embargo, subsidize, PPP, grass roots move, entrepreneur, non tariff bar, import substitute, tax the rich poor or both, fight, pray, dream, or reason ourselves back into prosperity!
None of that stupid shit, or all of it together, is ever going to work, ever again!
At least, not here.
At least, not here.
JOSH BIVENS KRUGMAN FRIEDMAN BIRDS OF A FEATHER
Krugman refers to progressive economists: do not ask governments to even try to do very much, baby!
Does that sound a little familiar?
Oh, that is what Friedman said re why civic coalitions are stepping in to do grass roots programs which governments have failed, at the local, state, and or federal levels, to do....
Krugman: There are better ways to get to a jobs guarantee than a jobs guarantee.
Maybe he is referring to Friedman's grass roots civic coalitions?
Why is a healthcare guarantee a no brainer for an advanced economy, but a job guarantee an apparent economists' impossibility for that same economy?
Why is a healthcare guarantee an economists' no brainer, but a balanced budget a really bad idea for almost all economists, for the same economy?
Let's put it a little differently, for the idea challenged:
If our government, according to Krugman and Bivens, is guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee, why then wouldn't it be guaranteed to queer a healthcare guarantee?
Or:
If we are guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee based on costs overruns, as they admit, then why is a balanced budget a really bad idea?
Have we caught Krugman (and Bivens) in a Morton's Fork? You tell me.
Does that sound a little familiar?
Oh, that is what Friedman said re why civic coalitions are stepping in to do grass roots programs which governments have failed, at the local, state, and or federal levels, to do....
Krugman: There are better ways to get to a jobs guarantee than a jobs guarantee.
Maybe he is referring to Friedman's grass roots civic coalitions?
Why is a healthcare guarantee a no brainer for an advanced economy, but a job guarantee an apparent economists' impossibility for that same economy?
Why is a healthcare guarantee an economists' no brainer, but a balanced budget a really bad idea for almost all economists, for the same economy?
Let's put it a little differently, for the idea challenged:
If our government, according to Krugman and Bivens, is guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee, why then wouldn't it be guaranteed to queer a healthcare guarantee?
Or:
If we are guaranteed to queer a jobs guarantee based on costs overruns, as they admit, then why is a balanced budget a really bad idea?
Have we caught Krugman (and Bivens) in a Morton's Fork? You tell me.
KRUGMAN EVERY ADVANCED COUNTRY EXCEPT AMERICA HAS A GUARANTEED HEALTH PROGRAM
Krugman makes a good seemingly incontrovertible globalist liberal point.
Guess what?
With the march of concomitant global income convergence, these guaranteed health systems, existing fleetingly only in advanced countries, will fade as fast eventually as their citizens' religiosity has already done, and their relative wage levels are now doing...
I call it 'leveling the global survival playing field'.
Advanced countries with high standards of living and guaranteed health programs are already becoming now a thing of the past. Not just here. Everywhere they still exist.
You cannot minimum wage your way to domestic prosperity in a global so called economy.
Re Thomas Friedman: You can't civic coalition grass roots your way into being a redevelopmental state. That is something only our failed government might be considered capable of doing, but only in a perfect world.
You cannot minimum wage your way to domestic prosperity in a global so called economy.
Re Thomas Friedman: You can't civic coalition grass roots your way into being a redevelopmental state. That is something only our failed government might be considered capable of doing, but only in a perfect world.
KRUGMAN SEES THE MINIMUM WAGE FALLACY SEE ALSO THOMAS FRIEDMAN GRASS ROOTS
Minimum wage hikes here don't significantly reduce employment here.
What does that mean? Why?
1. Not all that much employment here anyway....faux employment numbers....
What does that mean? Why?
1. Not all that much employment here anyway....faux employment numbers....
2. Employment here is much more affected by much lower wages elsewhere than by chicken shit increases in the minimum wage of our already higher wage workers, which fewer and fewer workers here can take advantage of anyway. What these workers have really been looking at is the very real and horrific bogey of global wage convergence. That is the topic Krugman dances all around in discussions like this. Piketty, didn't touch it, baby!
Re Thomas Friedman grass roots civic coalitions where government here has failed:
Try grass rooting your ass out of the global flat world situation I have described above, civic coalition grass rooting your way to wage prosperity here in America.
Just to make an important connection they will not:
You could just about as easily minimum wage yourselves to prosperity as you could quantitatively ease yourselves there!
Slavery was a bad, but in North America not all that bad, but it was a guaranteed job. A slave couldn't be fired, and usually had to be fed clothed and sheltered to be worth something.
If you were sold, you had another guaranteed job.
Indentured servants were in very similar conditions, and believe me there were a gadzillion of them too.
Re Thomas Friedman grass roots civic coalitions where government here has failed:
Try grass rooting your ass out of the global flat world situation I have described above, civic coalition grass rooting your way to wage prosperity here in America.
Just to make an important connection they will not:
You could just about as easily minimum wage yourselves to prosperity as you could quantitatively ease yourselves there!
Slavery was a bad, but in North America not all that bad, but it was a guaranteed job. A slave couldn't be fired, and usually had to be fed clothed and sheltered to be worth something.
If you were sold, you had another guaranteed job.
Indentured servants were in very similar conditions, and believe me there were a gadzillion of them too.
KRUGMAN 96% OF ECONOMISTS' THINK BALANCED BUDGET REALLY REALLY BAD IDEA
That is really close to 100% of economists.
That is why I have called them The Doomsday Discipline.
It is not really about simply a balanced budget, per se.
It is all the other dimensions of betrayal that economists have foisted on us that hang together with an unbalanced budget, really since the 18th Century.
Eg Ricardo, adamant for free trade....comparative advantage...
Smith, a byword.
Mill, say no more.
Eg Ricardo, adamant for free trade....comparative advantage...
Smith, a byword.
Mill, say no more.
MR GLOBALIZATION HAVE CIVIC COALITIONS SUCCEEDED WHERE GOVERNMENTS HAVE FAILED?
Not much, almost zero, flat, and not for long, baby.
The grass roots world of Thomas Friedman is also his Flat World.
In the Flat World, almost everything turns flat.
Here's the 800 pound question for Friedman:
Why have globalist flat world governments, which he has tirelessly espoused throughout his career, and which he now admits, confesses really, in this article have failed, why?
Why have they so failed their citizens requiring grass roots ostensible rescue?
Answer: grassroots are flat!
Grassroots movements, when governments fail, are inherently revolutionary. They may be and often are violent. They are fifth columns.
They fill a void abandoned by government. A political spiritual and economic wasteland. The flatland.
Why have they so failed their citizens requiring grass roots ostensible rescue?
Answer: grassroots are flat!
Grassroots movements, when governments fail, are inherently revolutionary. They may be and often are violent. They are fifth columns.
They fill a void abandoned by government. A political spiritual and economic wasteland. The flatland.
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
AMERICAN LIBERALS ARE THE DUMBEST SMART GUYS
Well educated elites, etc etc.
They thought globalist liberalism was going to last forever.
Guess what really lasts forever?
Gangster ism and Civilizationality
Civilizationality may be a new word for a very old reality.
They thought globalist liberalism was going to last forever.
Guess what really lasts forever?
Gangster ism and Civilizationality
Civilizationality may be a new word for a very old reality.
RE KRUGMAN RADICAL DEMOCRATS ARE PRETTY REASONABLE
Do they want to eliminate free trade and associated institutions, impose import substitution, trade embargoes, widen tariffs on everything, introduce subsidies for domestic not foreign onshore production and domestic technology development, prohibition of transfer of technology to foreign companies producers, or governments regardless of the legal formats re licensing, joint venture, foreign percentage participation, whatever, loans for domestic businesses only, reduce immigrant labor, break up MNCs and harness the domestic corporate rumps to domestic production only, harden the currency by reducing or eliminating fractional reserve banking, restoring partnership liability for investment banks, gold and or silver standard, whatever means, forget about foreign human rights affrays, eliminate foreign aid and foreign subsidies, for any reason, reduce foreign military commitments to zero.
This is not the so called radical democrats.
Krugman says they are bold (bullshit) but not crazy.
This is Whig bullshit economics.
Medicare and job guarantees are not very bold at all, baby.
He can't go along with any domestic policy, even these chicken shit ones, that might possibly queer his liberal globalist positions that do not favor working class Americans over foreign working class or business class folks.
It is also not the radical Republicans who could not approach such ideas.
We can't even do socialized healthcare, as even Krugman points out, and it has been pointed out for about 25 or 35 years now.
We are losing, and have long been losing, out to other quite undemocratic regimes, long being economically home towned in our own so called grass roots chicken shit home towns!
Politically, diplomatically, and economically, we are a known piece of shit.
This is not the so called radical democrats.
Krugman says they are bold (bullshit) but not crazy.
This is Whig bullshit economics.
Medicare and job guarantees are not very bold at all, baby.
He can't go along with any domestic policy, even these chicken shit ones, that might possibly queer his liberal globalist positions that do not favor working class Americans over foreign working class or business class folks.
It is also not the radical Republicans who could not approach such ideas.
We can't even do socialized healthcare, as even Krugman points out, and it has been pointed out for about 25 or 35 years now.
We are losing, and have long been losing, out to other quite undemocratic regimes, long being economically home towned in our own so called grass roots chicken shit home towns!
Politically, diplomatically, and economically, we are a known piece of shit.
THE POLITICAL GRIFTERS MENU IMPROV
Let's say you've been out on the Dusty trail all day undermining foreign regimes.......
You get back to your lair, and nothing to eat!
What do you do?
This is what you do:
You get a piece of bread, or some other cooked starch. It can even be canned beans!
You don't have to cook anything, or think about anything really.
Dunk it in olive or other oil, soybean oil is fine for you, seasoned with say Lea & Perrins, or just A1, Mexican hot sauce, and or pepperoncinis and canned olives, or not.
Throw the dishes or cans away!
Remember, you have to make a revolution in another country tomorrow morning!
You get back to your lair, and nothing to eat!
What do you do?
This is what you do:
You get a piece of bread, or some other cooked starch. It can even be canned beans!
You don't have to cook anything, or think about anything really.
Dunk it in olive or other oil, soybean oil is fine for you, seasoned with say Lea & Perrins, or just A1, Mexican hot sauce, and or pepperoncinis and canned olives, or not.
Throw the dishes or cans away!
Remember, you have to make a revolution in another country tomorrow morning!
Friday, December 15, 2017
OLD CELLO QUESTIONS
We have discussed, in the past, the mortized, sharpened and pointed linings running into the corner blocks.
Enough said... a German style.....although copied, apparently, by del Jesu, of all makers!
So, then, when the German maker builds this old cello, he fails to undercut the sides of the f holes, although that was a style, or his style...He flutes the lower wings, an unGerman flourish in the early 19th Century....so what?
He, or someone else, then, or later, places pins near the top and bottom of the back, to throw everyone, off of, or onto, the scent...
Retail, mostly privileged, customers, dilletantes, though very savvy and highly knowledgeable, surely would have smelled a rat, back in the beginning of the 19th Century, without those telltale pins!
Retail, mostly privileged, customers, dilletantes, though very savvy and highly knowledgeable, surely would have smelled a rat, back in the beginning of the 19th Century, without those telltale pins!
ANTIGONE NATURE CONVENTION DRED SCOTT SLAVERY WRITTEN UNWRITTEN LAWS
Dred Scott's owner is Antigone. For her, divine law and natural law are one and the same.
Slavery had always existed, since the beginning of time.
Equality, like Creon's decree prohibiting her mourning her brother, was almost brand new.
Slavery had always existed, since the beginning of time.
Equality, like Creon's decree prohibiting her mourning her brother, was almost brand new.
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS MAKING A COMEBACK CF DK POST
"...I supported abortion rights early in 1973, as I do now, but I was startled in January of that year when the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the Constitution contained an implied right to abortion. This was not the first step towards legalization of the procedure. Both New York and California--then our two largest states--had passed laws legalizing it in recent years, and it was certainly possible that other states might follow. And to find the right to abortion in the Constitution, the Court had to rely on a relatively obscure doctrine of "substantive due process," which allowed it to declare a right that was not enumerated in the Constitution. It was not, in short, immediately obvious to an intelligent lay person--and I continue to think that it is not obvious--that Roe V. Wade was in any sense inevitable given the text of the US Constitution. It is equally clear, in my view, that the Constitution does not ban abortion.
"For proponents of abortion rights, however, the Constitutional issue was secondary from the beginning, while feminist conceptions of rights were primary...." DK
There are so many different things that were not enumerated in the constitution......
Substantive due process, phrased in different terms, was an old and venerable thread in British law and in Canon Law.
What the Constitution had stated was left to the people was part of what substantive due process came later to involve.
The distinctions between law and equity, and that between common law courts and church courts are also implicated in these distinctions.
The term "substantive due process" itself is commonly used in two ways: to identify a particular line of case law and to signify a particular political attitude toward judicial review under the two due process clauses.
"For proponents of abortion rights, however, the Constitutional issue was secondary from the beginning, while feminist conceptions of rights were primary...." DK
There are so many different things that were not enumerated in the constitution......
Substantive due process, phrased in different terms, was an old and venerable thread in British law and in Canon Law.
What the Constitution had stated was left to the people was part of what substantive due process came later to involve.
The distinctions between law and equity, and that between common law courts and church courts are also implicated in these distinctions.
The term "substantive due process" itself is commonly used in two ways: to identify a particular line of case law and to signify a particular political attitude toward judicial review under the two due process clauses.
Procedural due process protects individuals by ensuring that adjudications are fair and impartial.
Substantive due process protects individuals judicially against legislation or executive orders that exceed government authority.
Vested or natural or divine rights, versus the police power, was another prism through which to view the issues.
Nature and convention, or nature versus convention, depending on one's political philosophy....yet another dimension.
Vested or natural or divine rights, versus the police power, was another prism through which to view the issues.
Nature and convention, or nature versus convention, depending on one's political philosophy....yet another dimension.
J.Taney, in Dred Scott, pronounced without elaboration that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional because an "act of Congress that deprived a citizen of his liberty or property merely because he came himself or brought his property into a particular territory of the United States, and who had committed no offence against the laws there, could hardly be dignified with the name of due process of law."
BEFORE 1776
I suggest watching the whole Teaching Company Course.
Professor Allison, Suffolk University, Boston.
Living and working in rather the heart of the beast. great job.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"
For Americans, the American Rebellion really showed them the verdict and judgment of history on the defunct Old European World Order.
Now, the new order of the day was permanent, universal, and violent democratic revolution.
It set the stage for The French Revolution, and then the rise of communism, and then fascism.
Interminable political drift,
or sudden cataclysmic convulsion!
Not World Without End
Revolution Without End
Professor Allison, Suffolk University, Boston.
Living and working in rather the heart of the beast. great job.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"
For Americans, the American Rebellion really showed them the verdict and judgment of history on the defunct Old European World Order.
Now, the new order of the day was permanent, universal, and violent democratic revolution.
It set the stage for The French Revolution, and then the rise of communism, and then fascism.
Interminable political drift,
or sudden cataclysmic convulsion!
Not World Without End
Revolution Without End
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
SOMEONE SAW THIS MENU ITEM
Friday, December 30, 2016
THE MENU TANDOORI CORNISH GAME HENS
This just makes a lot of sense in so many ways.
You have a hen a person. You can barbecue (no one over here has a tandoori oven) them whole on a rotiserie after marinating, or bake on high and partially broil in an oven.
You can even do a version of Cornish Butter Chicken, call it Butter Cornish Game Hen Tandoori.
Butter chicken is a tandoori oven baked dish in which the cooked bird is served in a buttery masala tomato sauce, incorporating elements of the tandoori marinade itself.
Serve with basmati rice and or nan. Substitute buttered pita bread.
Use quail instead, if you can get them.
Serve with basmati rice and or nan. Substitute buttered pita bread.
Use quail instead, if you can get them.
Friday, December 30, 2016
THE LAST TIME THE RUSSIANS WERE INVITED TO ENTER EUROPE WITH TROOPS
WAS BY US, IN WWII.
BUT ONLY THE US AGREED TO LET THEM STAY PERMANENTLY. (YOU CAN CANDY COAT IT, BUT FDR KNEW THE SCORE.) TERMS SEARCH: PATTON, MONTGOMERY, EISENHOWER, FDR, STALIN, TARGET PATTON, MORGENTHAU, THE HAUNTED WOOD
THE SECOND TO LAST TIME WAS BY FRANCE, AGAINST THE GERMANS AND AUSTRIANS, IN WWI.
THE FIRST TIME WAS BY THE BRITISH, AROUND AND BEFORE 1800, AGAINST NAPOLEON AND THE OTHER DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTIONARY REPUBLICS, THEN DOTTING THE LANDSCAPE.
PRIOR TO THAT THERE HAD BEEN THE POLISH PARTITION, WITH AUSTRIA ESSENTIALLY CUTTING THE DEAL WITH RUSSIA.
RE CARD SERVICES ROBOCALLS CALLS I RECOMMEND YOU GET ENFORCERS AND SEEK THESE INDIVIDUALS OUT PERESONALLY
The defendants include: 1) All Us Marketing LLC, f/k/a Payless Solutions, LLC; 2) Global Marketing Enterprises Inc., f/k/a Pay Less Solutions Inc.; 3) Global One Financial Services LLC; 4) Your #1 Savings LLC; 4) Ovadaa LLC; 5) Royal Holdings Of America LLC; 6) Gary Rodriguez; 7) Marbel Rodriguez; 8) Carmen Williams; 9) Jonathan Paulino; 10) Fairiborz Fard; 11) Shirin Imani; and 13) Alex Serna.
I suggest drone strikes. Drones are expensive and illegal, but you can afford it.
I suggest drone strikes. Drones are expensive and illegal, but you can afford it.
TERRY GROSS MICHAEL MCFAUL RHODES SCHOLAR INTERVIEW
Terry: You were a Rhodes Scholar, right?
McFaul: Yes.
Terry: That must have been amazing!
McFaul: It was, Terry. I learned so much.
Terry: Where are you now?
McFaul: Stanford.
Terry: That's wonderful for you, Michael.
McFaul: Thank you, Terry.
Terry: Are you happy there?
McFaul: Yes, Terry.
Terry: Well it was a pleasure to speak with you.
McFaul: You didn't ask me about Russia.
Terry: Oh, I forgot! It doesn't matter, Michael. My listeners can't understand it anyway!
Michael McFaul: That's a better job than Russian Ambassador!
Terry: Thank you for that Michael. Best of luck at Stanford.
He wrote his thesis on U.S. and Soviet intervention in revolutionary movements in southern Africa.
It would be hard to imagine a more useless, puerile, or obscure, topic for a dissertation. You would have to look long and hard to find something more irrelevant in international relations going forward.
Sergei Markov, his close friend... say no more....
McFaul is a kind of Russian version of Michael Pillsbury.
He wrote his thesis on U.S. and Soviet intervention in revolutionary movements in southern Africa.
It would be hard to imagine a more useless, puerile, or obscure, topic for a dissertation. You would have to look long and hard to find something more irrelevant in international relations going forward.
Sergei Markov, his close friend... say no more....
McFaul is a kind of Russian version of Michael Pillsbury.
TANGLED UP IN BLUE BROOKS GOLDBERG
They don't know why we're so messed up.
They been queered....
Terms search: you been queered
They been queered....
Terms search: you been queered
I SHOULD POST THIS ONE EVERY DAY ENLIGHTENMENT FALLACY
Saturday, June 9, 2018
MAJOR PUNDITS WHO FLIPPED ON GLOBALIZATION THE LIBERAL PUNDITS' ZERO SUM GAME
MAJOR PUNDITS WHO FLIPPED ON GLOBALIZATION
It would be great for pundits like Friedman, Krugman, or Brooks, now to explain, in detail, to all, how these other now flipped pundits have blundered!
Let Glaser show, for example, how Pillsbury is flatly wrong, for example... how we should either let China in or keep China out of the G-7. It doesn't matter which she chooses, for my argument.
This is called jamming the flipped pundits up the unflippable pundits' asses!
Guess what? Folks like Ms Glaser, Friedman, Brooks, got no where left to turn.
Take Glaser:
Do we disengage from China, exclude them from G 7? Most of your shit is made there.
OR:
Do we engage with, include China, admit global defeat?
Folks like Glaser are in a no win, heads they win tails you lose scenario of our own long term making.
My favorite examples are the ones who insist that we just haven't globalized quite enough yet!
Let's just call it
The Liberal Pundits' Zero Sum Game!
or
The Conservative Pundits' Zero Sum game!
SAME LAME TAME BLAME GAME
Take Brooks: How did our meritocracy Brooks crowed about then suddenly let us all down?
They are like cornered rats on a derelict ship with a hungry cat on board.
Guess what? Folks like Ms Glaser, Friedman, Brooks, got no where left to turn.
Take Glaser:
Do we disengage from China, exclude them from G 7? Most of your shit is made there.
OR:
Do we engage with, include China, admit global defeat?
Folks like Glaser are in a no win, heads they win tails you lose scenario of our own long term making.
My favorite examples are the ones who insist that we just haven't globalized quite enough yet!
Let's just call it
The Liberal Pundits' Zero Sum Game!
or
The Conservative Pundits' Zero Sum game!
SAME LAME TAME BLAME GAME
Take Brooks: How did our meritocracy Brooks crowed about then suddenly let us all down?
They are like cornered rats on a derelict ship with a hungry cat on board.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
RE HACKING THE MENU IMPERATIVE
RE PUTIN US HACK CLAIMS INDECENT SHOW HOW WE KNOW LEOPARD MAN HACKING DIALOGUE
Putin: "So they hacked our Embassy for hacking! So what?"
Lieutenant: "Don't we hack them too?"
Putin: "No. Soon Trump lets us hack all we want!"
Lieutenant: "Why?"
Putin: "He's a Leopard Man too!"
Lieutenant: "Why?"
Putin: "He's a Leopard Man too!"
Lieutenant: "I get cooking pots!"
Putin: "We eat journalists. Too many of them: Jungle Forces."
Putin: "We eat journalists. Too many of them: Jungle Forces."
RUSSIA CAN TAKEOVER EUROPE NOW ANY DAY OF THE WEEK DUMB AND DUMBER
The responsibility, in the end, after WWII, rested with us.
1. We not only failed to support, but opposed, the still barely limping along European Empires.
2. We not only failed to support European political integrity itself, but made a deal with Stalin to carve up Europe in his favor, not only against Europe's interests, but also very strongly against our own.
Now they need to go under the Russian heel.
Why?
Because in the fullness, the judgment of history, the verdict of history, as Professor Kaiser likes to phrase it, like the American South after the Civil War, that is what they have brought on themselves and now deserve.
Now they need to go under the Russian heel.
Why?
Because in the fullness, the judgment of history, the verdict of history, as Professor Kaiser likes to phrase it, like the American South after the Civil War, that is what they have brought on themselves and now deserve.
Friday, June 7, 2013
THE EU NEEDS TO DISINTEGRATE RATHER THAN ENLARGE
These are generally not good candidates, with the exception perhaps of Iceland, even for nationalism, much less EU ism.
Call it Austro Hungarian Empire ism. We all know how that turned out, EVEN THOUGH, AS KENNAN POINTED OUT, it was nevertheless better than anything that has come after......
DK CURRENT POST EXCERPT WOMENS RIGHTS
One might subtitle this excerpt:
"How the Womens' Movement queered the Democratic Party, and gave the government to the Republicans"
See Brooks, Goldberg, NYT, today...
See Brooks, Goldberg, NYT, today...
"...But although some of these decisions also fueled Republican rhetoric, they cannot be compared in their political impact either to Brown or to the court's next big move Roe v. Wade in 1973.
"I supported abortion rights early in 1973, as I do now, but I was startled in January of that year when the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the Constitution contained an implied right to abortion. This was not the first step towards legalization of the procedure. Both New York and California--then our two largest states--had passed laws legalizing it in recent years, and it was certainly possible that other states might follow. And to find the right to abortion in the Constitution, the Court had to rely on a relatively obscure doctrine of "substantive due process," which allowed it to declare a right that was not enumerated in the Constitution. It was not, in short, immediately obvious to an intelligent lay person--and I continue to think that it is not obvious--that Roe V. Wade was in any sense inevitable given the text of the US Constitution. It is equally clear, in my view, that the Constitution does not ban abortion.
"For proponents of abortion rights, however, the Constitutional issue was secondary from the beginning, while feminist conceptions of rights were primary. 1970s feminism refused to allow women to be defined by their role as mothers and insisted, in effect, that the choice to become a mother should be theirs alone. No less an authority than Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her confirmation hearing, declared that without the right to abortion, women could not be equal to men--presumably because men did not have to face pregnancy. And as tribalism (including tribalism based on gender) has taken over our politics, liberal women have become more and more insistent that the right to abortion is as fundamental as any right in the Constitution, whether it can specifically be found there or not. Yet that view, obviously, has never won the assent of many millions of Americans who reject abortion on religious and other grounds--including millions of women. That presumably is why the language of the abortion rights supporters has continually evolved, from pro-abortion to pro-choice to, now, "reproductive rights." Perhaps some ambivalence even among supporters of abortion has also played a role in this.
"A vehement anti-abortion movement became a pillar of the Republican coalition in the 1970s, as the Republican Party successfully created a new majority in the 1980s. Many on the left undoubtedly believed that opposition to abortion would fade with the passage of time, but that has not happened...."DK
Of course the Civil Rights Movement came first, and made the Democratic Party the Party of blacks. This was what really sent them in droves to the Republicans. Professor Kaiser fails to mention that in his current post, but he has referred to this important point in the past.
Once the Womens Movement got under way, it was the wedge for other fringe movements, LGBT, etc, which only further queered the Party.
Of course the Civil Rights Movement came first, and made the Democratic Party the Party of blacks. This was what really sent them in droves to the Republicans. Professor Kaiser fails to mention that in his current post, but he has referred to this important point in the past.
Once the Womens Movement got under way, it was the wedge for other fringe movements, LGBT, etc, which only further queered the Party.
Monday, July 2, 2018
Saturday, December 10, 2016
RACIST UNIRACIALISM UNIRELIGIONISM GLOBALISM MELTINGPOTISM
Civilizationalism has become a racial slur under modern American uniracialism, which goes well beyond even the old American multiculturalism, to a whole other unheard of level, and is itself a form of racism, although still well disguised, in that it defines all racial distinctions, for whatever reasons, be they civilizational, national, religious, traditional, historical, ethnic, cultural, political, or social, other than uniracialism as racist.
That is also why uniracialism is also racist, but in a new way, and is an important implication: uniracialism actively discriminates, both religiously, socially and politically, against each and every distinct race, either now in being, or ever in being in the past.
Liberty, equality, fraternity, unirace, unitarianism, meltingpot ism"
Call it radical globalism, radical uniracialism, scientific humanism, it goes by many names, many more than this, glibalist liberalism, multiculturalism, atheism, etc., democratic globalism, a myriad of descriptive terms spring to mind, unitarian universalism, etc, Enlightenment Humanism.
Soros had called it, criticizing Popper, with reference to freedom of the press and speech, The Enlightenment Fallacy. Here's an old post also referencing DK:
Call it radical globalism, radical uniracialism, scientific humanism, it goes by many names, many more than this, glibalist liberalism, multiculturalism, atheism, etc., democratic globalism, a myriad of descriptive terms spring to mind, unitarian universalism, etc, Enlightenment Humanism.
Soros had called it, criticizing Popper, with reference to freedom of the press and speech, The Enlightenment Fallacy. Here's an old post also referencing DK:
Saturday, June 8, 2013
See A kindred spirit
David Kaiser's post, some time ago, re Soros, etc.
This was my favorite quote from Soros (in Kaiser's post):
"Popper’s hidden assumption that freedom of speech and thought will produce a better understanding of reality is valid only for the study of natural phenomena. Extending it to human affairs is part of what I have called the 'Enlightenment fallacy.'"
A great insight. Commenting on Kaiser's current post, one might also call it the Free Press Fallacy, or even, say, The Drew Pearson Fallacy.
I would just call it The Karl Popper Fallacy, and let people wonder how far I mean to go on that.
I would add, to the elements of Soros' Enlightenment Fallacy, a faith in free, open, Smithian, (and eventually global), markets.
Yet, this addition sets me off from Soros and his, otherwise, and in other contexts, quite globalist tendencies.
Most liberals are not nationalists, deep down, but rather anti nationalist globalists, nowadays. It was not always so.
Let's put it this way, the Nazis gave nationalism an unnecessarily ugly rap.
(The Bolsheviks somehow avoided this type of bad rap, largely because of the gross ignorance and naivete of Western regimes, and their conservatives, and their liberals.)
I would just advert, momentarily, to a great small book by Butterfield, in the enlightenment context, The Whig Interpretation Of History. (Maybe I'm just stuck, Tory like, on Regius Professors of History, or just stuck on Regius anything.)
In a similar vein, the ideas of the Founding Fathers, as Bailyn has pointed out, owed more to radical Protestantism, and the common law, (one could also add commercial self interests, including, preponderantly, smuggling, tax evasion, and slavery) than to enlightenment ideas per se.
Term search, if so inclined eg: Popper, Lorch
This was my favorite quote from Soros (in Kaiser's post):
"Popper’s hidden assumption that freedom of speech and thought will produce a better understanding of reality is valid only for the study of natural phenomena. Extending it to human affairs is part of what I have called the 'Enlightenment fallacy.'"
A great insight. Commenting on Kaiser's current post, one might also call it the Free Press Fallacy, or even, say, The Drew Pearson Fallacy.
I would just call it The Karl Popper Fallacy, and let people wonder how far I mean to go on that.
I would add, to the elements of Soros' Enlightenment Fallacy, a faith in free, open, Smithian, (and eventually global), markets.
Yet, this addition sets me off from Soros and his, otherwise, and in other contexts, quite globalist tendencies.
Most liberals are not nationalists, deep down, but rather anti nationalist globalists, nowadays. It was not always so.
Let's put it this way, the Nazis gave nationalism an unnecessarily ugly rap.
(The Bolsheviks somehow avoided this type of bad rap, largely because of the gross ignorance and naivete of Western regimes, and their conservatives, and their liberals.)
I would just advert, momentarily, to a great small book by Butterfield, in the enlightenment context, The Whig Interpretation Of History. (Maybe I'm just stuck, Tory like, on Regius Professors of History, or just stuck on Regius anything.)
In a similar vein, the ideas of the Founding Fathers, as Bailyn has pointed out, owed more to radical Protestantism, and the common law, (one could also add commercial self interests, including, preponderantly, smuggling, tax evasion, and slavery) than to enlightenment ideas per se.
Term search, if so inclined eg: Popper, Lorch
GREAT STUFF THE OLD CURMUDGEON COMMENT DK
As you have said here, “returning the Supreme Court to a lesser place in our system might make for a healthier democracy.” However, this is not what the so-called “conservative movement” has in mind. Instead, the goal is to revive the version of substantive due process embodied in Locher v. New York, whereby the Supreme Court struck down laws infringing on “economic liberty” or “private contract rights.” Lochnerism reigned from 1897 to 1937, during which it was used to strike down labor laws and much of the early New Deal. Once thoroughly discredited, Locherism has been enjoying a comeback. In 2012, four justices voted to strike down the Affordable Care Act, which Justice Goldberg rightly characterized as Lochnerism.
The “conservative movement” – let’s call it what it really is, a radical movement underwritten by plutocrats with no sense of social obligation – can see the writing on the wall. The influence of older white voters is fading, so power needs to be held by undemocratic means. The first bulwark is the Senate. Because the Constitution awards two votes per state without regard to population, the Senate was controlled in 2015 by 54 Republican Senators who received 20 million fewer votes than their 46 Democratic colleagues. The second bulwark is gerrymandering, which tilts the field in the House. The third bulwark is voter ID laws, the "cleansing" of voter registration roles, and other voting barriers targeted at Democratic voters. The fourth bulwark is unlimited dark money which, in the name of free speech, permits plutocrats to buy elections. The fifth bulwark is, or soon will be, the Supreme Court, standing ready to invalidate any liberal proposals that manage to be enacted into law despite the other impediments. The Court has already opened the door to unlimited dark money and indicated its indifference to gerrymandering and voting barriers.
Sunday, April 27, 2014
RE PROFESSOR HOWARD 2008 DISCUSSION
http://www.oxfordchabad.org/templates/articlecco_cdo/aid/630648/jewish/Prof-Sir-Michael-Howard.htm
..."The first problem that I myself face is, why was it the Germans who did this ? Here again I must explain where I am coming from. My mother transmitted to me not only Jewish blood, but the German culture imbibed and loved by her own parents. I feel at home with the German language (though I can barely speak it), with German poetry and German music, as I do with no other. So for me, even after I have explained it, it remains something of a mystery. After all, the Jews were no more unpopular in 19th century Germany than they were anywhere else in Europe. If one had been told , say in 1900, that the Holocaust would occur forty years later and asked to guess where it would happen, Germany would certainly not have been the first choice. That would probably have been Russia, where the pogroms, admittedly on a small if brutal scale, gave some indication of the intensity of racial prejudice in at least some regions of the Tsarist Empire. But Russia, it was generally admitted, was still semi-barbaric.. When she had caught up with the West, as she seemed rapidly to be doing, incidents like these would surely sink back into her troubled history. But next on the list would probably have been France, where at the turn of the century violent and endemic anti-Semitism was finding expression, not only in such works as Edouard Drumont’s La France juive and the circulation of the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but in the official victimisation of Captain Alfred Dreyfus with the consent of the entire French establishment and half the electorate....."
It contains a more well considered treatment than his brief remarks on this subject in "Structure and Process In History".
..."The first problem that I myself face is, why was it the Germans who did this ? Here again I must explain where I am coming from. My mother transmitted to me not only Jewish blood, but the German culture imbibed and loved by her own parents. I feel at home with the German language (though I can barely speak it), with German poetry and German music, as I do with no other. So for me, even after I have explained it, it remains something of a mystery. After all, the Jews were no more unpopular in 19th century Germany than they were anywhere else in Europe. If one had been told , say in 1900, that the Holocaust would occur forty years later and asked to guess where it would happen, Germany would certainly not have been the first choice. That would probably have been Russia, where the pogroms, admittedly on a small if brutal scale, gave some indication of the intensity of racial prejudice in at least some regions of the Tsarist Empire. But Russia, it was generally admitted, was still semi-barbaric.. When she had caught up with the West, as she seemed rapidly to be doing, incidents like these would surely sink back into her troubled history. But next on the list would probably have been France, where at the turn of the century violent and endemic anti-Semitism was finding expression, not only in such works as Edouard Drumont’s La France juive and the circulation of the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion, but in the official victimisation of Captain Alfred Dreyfus with the consent of the entire French establishment and half the electorate....."
It contains a more well considered treatment than his brief remarks on this subject in "Structure and Process In History".
LIBERACE COLLINS SUBSTANCE APPEARANCE (NOT SUBSTANCE PROCEDURE)
Jefferson:
"We hold these truths to be self evident": appearance.
"These are not truths at all, and are not at all self evident": substance.
"We hold these truths to be self evident": appearance.
"These are not truths at all, and are not at all self evident": substance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
I think your argument is completely ahistorical. It was the victory of the colonists on a democratic platform that gave democracy a long-term push in Europe. Without that victory Britain certainly wouldn't have reformed Parliament any earlier than they did. Nor is it clear that Canada would have benefited from the Durham report or the British North America Act. in any case--great historians don't argue with hsitory.