Monthly Archives: February 2020

Some things don’t change

Posted on by
Reply

          SAID HANRAHAN – John O’Brien (1919)

“We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
In accents most forlorn,
Outside the church, ere Mass began,
One frosty Sunday morn.
The congregation stood about,
And talked of stock, and crops, and drought,
As it had done for years.
“It’s lookin’ crook,” said Daniel Croke;
“For never since the banks went broke
Has seasons been so bad.”

“It’s dry, all right,” said young O’Neil,
With which astute remark
He squatted down upon his heel
And chewed a piece of bark.
And so around the chorus ran
“It’s keepin’ dry, no doubt.”
“We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
“Before the year is out.

“The crops are done; ye’ll have your work
To save one bag of grain;
From here way out to Back-o’-Bourke
They’re singin’ out for rain.
“They’re singin’ out for rain,” he said,
“And all the tanks are dry.”
The congregation scratched its head,
And gazed around the sky.

“There won’t be grass, in any case,
Enough to feed an ass;
“>There’s not a blade on Casey’s place
As I came down to Mass.”
“If rain don’t come this month,” said Dan,
And cleared his throat to speak–
“We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
“If rain don’t come this week.”

A heavy silence seemed to steal
On all at this remark;
“>And each man squatted on his heel,
“>And chewed a piece of bark.
“We want a inch of rain, we do,”
O’Neil observed at last;
But Croke “maintained” we wanted two
To put the danger past.
“If we don’t get three inches, man,
Or four to break this drought,
We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
“Before the year is out.”

In God’s good time down came the rain;
And all the afternoon
On iron roof and window-pane
It drummed a homely tune.
And through the night it pattered still,
And lightsome, gladsome elves
On dripping spout and window-sill
Kept talking to themselves.

It pelted, pelted all day long,
A-singing at its work,
Till every heart took up the song
Way out to Back-o’Bourke.
And every creek a banker ran,
And dams filled overtop;
“We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
“If this rain doesn’t stop.”

And stop it did, in God’s good time;
And spring came in to fold
A mantle o’er the hills sublime
Of green and pink and gold.
And days went by on dancing feet,
With harvest-hopes immense,
And laughing eyes beheld the wheat
Nid-nodding o’er the fence.

And, oh, the smiles on every face,
As happy lad and lass
Through grass knee-deep on Casey’s place
Went riding down to Mass.
While round the church in clothes genteel
Discoursed the men of mark,
And each man squatted on his heel,
And chewed his piece of bark.
“There’ll be bush-fires for sure, me man,
There will, without a doubt;
We’ll all be rooned,” said Hanrahan,
“Before the year is out.”

 

Who will do it if the National Organization of Women doesn’t?

Posted on by
Reply

Liberty Quote
So far as Feminism seeks to adjust the legal position of woman to that of man, so far as it seeks to offer her legal and economic freedom to develop and act in accordance with her inclinations, desires, and economic circumstancesso far it is nothing more than a branch of the great liberal movement, which advocates peaceful and free evolution.
— Ludwig von Mises

Appropriately, this was the Liberty Quote as I came to write. And sorry to be trolling through this again, but this has just come up: A War Over Sex Work is Raging Inside The Nation’s Biggest Feminist Group.

Because of this storied history, when NOW takes a stance on an issue, women around the country listen. This year, the group mounted a nationwide campaign against what it called ”sex trafficking and exploitation.” The campaign aimed to “end the demand” for sex work by criminalizing pimps and johns (or in NOW speak, “purchasers of sex acts” and those who benefit financially from the sale of other people for sex.”) A key component of the campaign was opposing the D.C. decriminalization bill.

The D.C. chapter, however, was not on board. After seeing Van Pelt’s testimony in October, the board fired off a letter to the national organization, blasting the president’s “misleading and dehumanizing language,” and the “breach of autonomy and assertion that this language represents DC NOW’s views.”

“Going forward, we ask that that National NOW modify their language to reflect the terms currently accepted and used in the sex worker community and by progressive organizations that show respect for all women and their choices,” they wrote in the letter, first reported by Gay City News.

In Washington everyone sells themselves to the highest bidder, but jokes aside, legalising prostitution seems a sell-out in any attempt to protect and promote women. Other than we patriarchal men, who will do it if the National Organization of Women doesn’t?

The Israeli peace proposal in the context of Israeli politics

Posted on by
Reply

I cannot say that I pay close attention to Israeli politics and may have been spoiled by not needing to since Benjamin Netanyahu became Prime Minister. There have been quite a few events over the last few months with the peace proposal with the Palestinians occurring simultaneously with the difficulties in creating a stable new government. The  interesting part of the peace proposal is that it is not really for negotiations. So far as I can tell, so far as the Palestinians are concerned, it is a take it as is, make some helpful suggestions, or it will be imposed it on you as it is. What I did not know is that the rival to Netanyahu is yet another fool seeking to accommodate the people who would murder every Israeli if they got the chance. This is the situation reported by Israel National News, which has been edited down by John Hinderaker at Powerline

Without our homeland [Judea and Samaria], we have no existence, we are left hanging – we have no past, we have no future. This is our identity and our legacy, and our future is here. Therefore, our enemies are trying to uproot us from the heart of our homeland. They will not succeed. We are here, and we will always remain here.

After the great euphoria of the Six Day War, a dangerous perspective became entrenched in the left. According to this perspective, Instead of fighting for Judea and Samaria, we need to give them up. They claimed that if we give these lands to our enemies, they will do us a favor and make peace with our existence. They said ‘land for peace’ and we received ‘land for terror’ – buses exploding, restaurants exploding, hotels exploding. The wave of weakness reached a magnitude such that a Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, was willing to give the Western Wall to the Palestnians. The same Olmert, friend and close adviser of [Blue and White Chairman MK] Benny Gantz, is planning to go soon to [Palestinian Authority Chairman] Mahmoud Abbas so that they can work together against President Trump’s ‘deal of the century.’
***
If for years this is what the Jews heard, what will the nations of the world say? They said and say the same thing exactly: Pull back, pull back, pull back. From my first day in public life I rejected this idea outright and I fought against it with all my strength from my first job in the United Nations. … But the demands for Israel to withdraw kept growing, and they reached their peak in the eleven years when I stood with my head held high against two US administrations. They worked against us, with the unending support of the left and Israel’s media, who always demanded that I withdraw and compromise.

I’ll tell you something I haven’t said until now. After the funeral of [former Israeli President] Shimon Peres, a senior US figure sent me a message: ‘If you want such a great funeral, you need to start giving in.’ I told her: ‘I’m not worried about my funeral, I’m worried about preventing the funeral of my country.’

I succeeded in standing up to all of the enormous pressure, because I have the ability to speak before tens of millions in the American public. For dozens of years, I’ve been speaking with them in their language, and they believe me and believe in me. Therefore, I can have an influence for the good of our country. The strongest influence in the US is public opinion, and anyone who cannot influence public opinion there will end up giving in to pressure.

Three years ago, we received a golden opportunity to change the path of history: President Trump was elected – a personal friend of mine for many years, and the greatest friend who Israel has ever had in the White House.

I saw this as an opportunity to move from defensive to offensive, and use a historic opportunity. Our rivals did not understand. When Trump wanted to visit Israel, three of Gantz’s party members signed an appeal calling to boycott Trump’s arrival. Benny Gantz’s senior advisers, Ronen Tzur and Joel Benenson, compared President Trump – the best president ever for Israel – to Hitler. …

For three years we have worked closely with President Trump and his staff. I have spoken with him about leaving the Iran deal, about Jerusalem, about the Golan Heights, about Judea and Samaria, and to my delight the policies did indeed change, thanks to his courage. At first he left the Iran deal, then he recognized Jerusalem, moved the Embassy, recognized our sovereignty over the Golan Heights, and recently agreed to apply Israeli law to Judea and Samaria.

Last week we reached the climax: The deal of the century. It includes a historic revolution. Until now, all the diplomatic plans required Israel to agree to make real concessions. They called it ‘gestures.’ The Palestinians were not required to give anything. Now the exact opposite has happened: Israel is receiving real things, and the Palestinians are required to fulfill a list of demands. Whether or not they fulfill those requirements, Israel will receive US backing to apply Israeli law in the Jordan Valley and Dead Sea areas and over all of the Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria – all of them, without exception.

We’re in the midst of mapping the area that according to the Trump plan will be part of the State of Israel. It’s a lot of land. We will lead this, and President Trump will agree to it. I trust him completely, and I trust myself completely. But I don’t trust [Blue and White Chairman MK] Benny Gantz. If it were up to Gantz – it would not happen.

With Gantz, we will have the loss of the century, instead of the deal of the century. He wants to implement the deal of the century with international backing. Will the United Nations agree? Will the European Union? Will [Blue and White leader MK] Yair Lapid, who wants to expel 80,000-90,000 settlers? Let’s say all of them agree, which will not happen: Even then Gantz will need the agreement of Ahmad Tibi, with whom he almost formed a government and without whom he has no government.

Women as sex objects

Posted on by
Reply

You’ve come a long way, baby etc: J. Lo’s crotch-pride was a studied rebuke of Trump’s America. Weird to find myself back at the Super Bowl half time show, but this article on the back page of today’s Sunday Age reminds me how tribal and ignorant politics is. Feminism was once about pointing out that there was more to a girl’s life than sex appeal and adornment. I find this such sexist trash that it has truly made me angry. Written by someone by name of Jacqueline Maley. Might say that for someone who was interested in the game itself, this is in almost every way a fantastically ignorant piece of writing. Some excerpts:

As all but one of Trump’s Republican colleagues were preparing to vote against his impeachment in the US Senate – abandoning duty for cowardice – two Latina women stood in front of 102 million American viewers and performed a joyous and studied critique of Trump’s America….

It was political, but it was also a shout of joy in a dark time. Sometimes quite literally – the Children’s Chorus of Miami, a troupe of little girls led by J. Lo’s daughter Emme, rose from the darkness to sing the chorus of J. Lo’s 1999 hit Let’s Get Loud.

For a moment we saw a vision of a world where little girls are allowed to get loud, and it was glorious.

Jennifer Lopez upset the tabloid moralists with her performance at the Super Bowl.

The reality that Maley doesn’t seem to get is that this is actually the trashing of women that people such as myself object to. Why Maley doesn’t object is because she is so confused by her tribal membership on the left, that everything that once mattered has become invisible.

So let me bring this up to date. This is the definition of Sexual objectification from Wikipedia:

Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire. Objectification more broadly means treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Objectification is most commonly examined at the level of a society, but can also refer to the behavior of individuals and is a type of dehumanization.

And this is the picture plus text that comes with the definition:

Women in a bikini contest are valued by their body and sexual appeal over other attributes.

Compare and contrast this picture with the one above.

The long march through the institutions stops here

Posted on by
Reply

This is from Pete Buttigieg isn’t going to win. The question for me is, why do I not already know this? And the answer is, no one on the left – ie the media – wants me to know.

Mayor Peter is the openly gay son of the editor and translator of Antonio Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks. Gramsci’s important contribution to the literature of totalitarian tyranny was his idea that Communist dictatorship could only come to free countries by means of a ‘long march through the institutions’, cultural as well as political. The left has pretty well accomplished this with respect to the universities and the elite cultural institutions of the media and the so-called ‘arts community’. Mayor Pete wants to finish the job through such expedients as packing the Supreme Court with six more seats, abolishing the electoral college (it’s ‘undemocratic’, he says), disarming the populace (a precaution tyrants always take), providing a ‘glide path‘ for the government takeover of healthcare, opening up the borders, and forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for college, even for illegal immigrants, whom he also wants to offer amnesty. It’s a start, Comrade.

How does he even get elected as mayor? How dangerously uninformed the American electorate has become.

All forms of Keynesian theory are nonsense but the Milton Keynesians may be the worst

Posted on by
Reply

So earnest, so learned, so stupid. A different kind of Keynesian. That she tries to make the point that living standards have not risen for we normal citizens since incomes have not risen along with rising productivity represents a kind of obliviousness that is truly remarkable. But her views are the views of many. The photo is taken from Powerline where the comments thread is a real treat. The video is from here.

https://youtu.be/-a-Pzqs-gqg

But whatever you might say about her knowledge and depth, she has been an active force in shifting American politics to the screwball left.

I’ve even been to Milton Keynes to a conference. How she would have even heard the name and registered it is as strange as her willingness to pontificate on just about anything.

Is Romney angling for the Democrat nomination for President?

Posted on by
Reply

As we can see the President has their number, the Democrats have nothing and every one of them running for president is an almost certain bust. But Romney. Despicable scum that he might well be, will attract some from the conservative side although absolutely on the left in every way that counts. He almost knocked off Obama in 2012 until he decided to scuttle his own ship.

No idea if it is technically possible, but if it is, this is no doubt on his mind.

AND NOW THIS: From Instapundit.

SEE ALSO: KENNEDY, TED. Media suddenly fall in love with Romney now that his politics align with theirs.

Romney’s vilification by the press in 2012 was a key mile marker on the road to Trump. And as with the late John McCain, his Stockholm Syndrome-levels of seeking the proverbial “strange new respect” from those who clearly hate him is painful to watch.

40.01% odds that Trump will lose

Posted on by
Reply

Saw this the other day and it reminded me how chancy everything is: 2020 odds jump for Trump, 59.99% chance for reelection, 16.7% for Sanders. I realise how infra dig it is to have a president tweeting, or demonstrating that socialism doesn’t work, or creating more peaceful outcomes across the world than we have seen in decades, but you can’t please everyone.

The media and the university-educated are the most bizarre in their opposition to Trump, showing I am not sure I even know what. And what about this?

JOBS SOAR
WAGES ACCELERATE!

We had the best economy in the world and elected Rudd. You just never know what’s in people’s heads. As in:

Yet there are many soft spots in the economy that Democrats can work with, Furman said. For example, a Congressional Budget Office report in December concluded that Trump’s 2017 tax cuts disproportionately benefited wealthy Americans. The CBO, a nonpartisan institution, forecasts that the richest 1% of Americans will enjoy roughly triple the gains in after-tax income compared with the bottom fifth.

Nor has the economy’s growth reversed long-running wealth disparities. Federal Reserve data shows the top 1% owned more than 32% of the nation’s housing and financial wealth, up slightly from when Trump was inaugurated.

Nothing like envy to ruin everything. If you don’t pay tax already you cannot have a tax cut, but so what?

Paul Krugman and the strawman economy

Posted on by
Reply

Got sent the following from Quora yesterday: Paul Krugman, Nobel Laureate economist, NYT op-ed columnist, & author, answered 44 questions. Here are a few, but let me tell you how all of his answers work.

First, he is a Keynesian so believes that government spending inevitably creates jobs.

Second, he invariably uses strawman alternatives as the supposed alternative position. His answer on laissez-faire is so absurd since there is literally no economist anywhere who believes there is no role for government. All of the debate is over what can governments do, which regulations will be effective and how much should be left to the market.

Third, as with his answer on climate change, he immediately shifts the terms of the debate into environmental protection in general. Climate change is a complete con, that uses environmental protection as a cover. No one, but no one, is against protecting the environment as a general proposition, but there is lots of discussion whether we should dismantle our economy to deal with what is to me the phantom problem of global warming.

It is all a con, but he has made quite a career from it.

Is capitalism failing all over the world and what are the economic solutions to the current woes such as rising income inequality, opportunities for all and big players dominance in businesses?

I don’t think “capitalism” is failing. Unregulated laissez-faire leads to extreme inequality and environmental damage. But regulated markets with a strong social safety net…

(more)

What is, in your opinion, the best solution to climate change without destroying the economy?

This “destroying the economy” thing is disinformation. Interest groups always claim that environmental protection will do terrible things, and they’re always wrong.

Econ 101…

(more)

I don’t think we’re going to get away from relying on markets to provide a lot of what we need. But there are some things that government does better than the private secto…

(more)

What is the best alternative to capitalism? Please describe it.

I don’t think we’re going to get away from relying on markets to provide a lot of what we need. But there are some things that government does better than the private secto…

(more)

And then there’s this today from Instapundit.

PAUL KRUGMAN ON ELECTION NIGHT 2016: “If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.”

Today: Dow hits record, joining S&P 500, Nasdaq.

Related: Over Three Years After His Doomsday Prediction, Paul Krugman Makes Reluctant Admission About the Trump Economy.

33Posted at 4:58 pm by Glenn Reynolds 

.
This is from that last article.

Will finish with this, which I agree with as well.

In the year of the rat we have Mitt Romney as Exhibit A

Posted on by
Reply

Between Romney and McCain, conservatives never had a candidate on their side during the two elections against Obama. Not even sure they had an actual Republican. This is Romney defending the indefensible.

And why say that?

If Romney cannot even see that routine arm twisting is part of the way governments work – and that is not even what we saw here anyway – he really is too high minded for politics. I’m sure Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden will provide a higher ethical standard for us to admire.

More here.