Mike's Noise

Dollars, disorder, and death

Monday morning's top news story will undoubtedly be the volume of cumulative sales generated by American Christmas shoppers this weekend, as financial analysts argue over whether or not it was "enough."  But this year's "Black Friday" take-away story is undoubtedly the senseless death of a Wal-Mart employee in Valley Stream, NJ, who was trampled to death by an unruly mob of bargain hunters.

And those shoppers didn't just trample Jdimytai Damour to death; they continued to rush into the store, past his lifeless body, shoving paramedics out of the way until the agitated mob was finally pushed back by police.  Then they fumed when authorities cleared the store and closed it down.

What does it say about us, when the value we place on cheap video games and DVD players overwhelms our ability to do even the simplest of decent things, to step back and allow paramedics to try to save an injured man's life? 

It's easy to come up with a lengthy list of "-isms," to whose surface we can easily affix blame -- Americanism, capitalism, materialism, consumerism, racism, etc.  But the root cause is far more complex, and dare I say, far more painful.  Please consider this excellent analysis by The Anchoress:

I once actually saw two women quarrel over an item, just like in the movies, while Christmas shopping. I was very young, and knew everything at the time, so I blamed it on American materialism and its corruptive influence on the soul. Materialism CAN corrupt the soul, of course - as can capitalism untempered by compassion - but as I’ve matured, I’ve come to reject the easy and cynical course that finds “America” and its values to be at the core of every negative situation I encounter. Instead, I have decided to think of the aggression of the battling shoppers to be rooted in vulnerability. They’ve decided they want to purchase a particular item for someone they love. Perhaps this is how they express love. Perhaps they believe, subconsciously, that this is the only way they can be loved back. Perhaps this is a budgeted item and the only way they can afford to purchase it is at a heavily reduced price and - because they love - they’re willing to fight for it.

Looked at in this way, the “crassness” of all of this consumer excess seems less clear, and one finds oneself - as one does all too often, if one is paying attention - in the middle of yet another Holy Mystery. Love is the highest human aspiration, but when it lacks anchoring in something bigger than itself, it tends to drift a bit and take on some detritus (doubt, hurt, anger, self-hate) that gets into the workings and distorts the navigation, a little; in that case, suddenly love can lead us away from, and not toward, our best selves. And then where are you? You’re tugging on a toy with another shopper and sending all sorts of messages to your family and to the world-at-large, that you never intended to send. About yourself and your values, about your society, even about your nation.

There was an early episode of CSI, "Unfriendly Skies," that dealt with a similar ordeal.  A passenger on a transcontinental flight is suffering from undiagnosed encephalitis, or swelling of the brain.  This causes extreme discomfort and eventually leads to psychotic behavior.  A group of five fellow passengers fears for their lives, and what begins as an attempt to restrain the victim soon escalates into a violent attack that leaves the man dead.

Although this fictional story dealt with a much more serious issue (the taking of a life in order to subdue an unknown threat and thus save one's own life) the underlying premise is the same one faced by the mob of Wal-Mart shoppers --to what extent do we ignore our conscience in order to get what we want, particularly in a situation where we assume (or dictate) that responsibility is "shared," and therefore we are somehow allowed to abdicate our normal moral boundaries?

In fact, another essay linked by The Anchoress in an earlier post noted that those who commit or inspire the greatest acts of evil (think Cromwell or Robespierre or Mugabe or Hitler) often do so because they ultimately desire to accomplish something good (religious freedom, or equality, or security).  To satisfy this end, evil often masquerades as morality, imparting heavy doses of guilt and conviction to those who are judged to be less than fully committed to "the new way".

I'm sure that most of the people in that out-of-control Wal-Mart mob love other people greatly --  parents, children, neighbors, family -- and would make great sacrifices in order to impart happiness, even shallow, fleeting happiness, upon their loved ones.  Yet as we have seen, even these people are capable of commiting great evil through the disordered way in which they attempted to achieve a good end.  That disorder led to the death of an innocent man.  The Wal-Mart incident is simply a local representation of a global problem; a problem, I believe, that is beyond the capabiliy of mankind to solve on its own.

Thanksgiving revisited

In an article that first appeared in The Free Market in 1985, Richard J. Maybury explains:

The official story has the pilgrims boarding the Mayflower, coming to America and establishing the Plymouth colony in the winter of 1620-21. This first winter is hard, and half the colonists die. But the survivors are hard working and tenacious, and they learn new farming techniques from the Indians. The harvest of 1621 is bountiful. The Pilgrims hold a celebration, and give thanks to God. They are grateful for the wonderful new abundant land He has given them.

The official story then has the Pilgrims living more or less happily ever after, each year repeating the first Thanksgiving. Other early colonies also have hard times at first, but they soon prosper and adopt the annual tradition of giving thanks for this prosperous new land called America.

The problem with this official story is that the harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves.

Yikes.  If the "official story" is that wrong, then what really happened?

Fortunately for us, William Bradford, who was to become the second Governor of Plymouth Colony, kept a detailed journal of events from those early years.  Regarding the year 1621, this is what he wrote:

They began now to gather in the small harvest they had, and to fit up their houses and dwellings against winter, being all well recovered in health and strength and had all things in good plenty. For as some were thus employed in affairs abroad, others were exercised in fishing, about cod and bass and other fish, of which they took good store, of which every family had their portion. All the summer there was no want; and now began to come in store of fowl, as winter approached, of which this place did abound when they came first (but afterward decreased by degrees). And besides waterfowl there was a great store of wild turkeys, of which they took many, besides venison, etc. Besides they had about a peck a meal a week to a person, or now since harvest, Indian corn to the proportion. Which made many afterwards write so largely of their plenty here to their friends in England, which were not feigned but true reports.

There was no bountiful "harvest," but apparently enough wild game to keep the people fed (even though they seem to have over-hunted waterfowl to the point of noticeably depleting them).  The "small harvest" was mostly Indian corn, a commodity provided to them by Squanto, an erstwhile captive native American who was able to speak broken English due to the time he had spent with other Englishmen (mostly fishermen) years earlier in Newfoundland.  Bradford writes of Squanto:

... Squanto continued with them and was their interpreter and was a special instrument sent of God for their good beyond their expectation. He directed them how to set their corn, where to take fish, and to procure other commodities, and was also their pilot to bring them to unknown places for their profit, and never left them till he died.

The colonists did have much to be thankful for near the end of 1621, namely the fact that just over half of them were still alive.  They had also signed a peace treaty with the Pokanoket people; thus their fear of extinction at the hands of Native Americans was greatly alleviated.  They celebrated their first Thanksgiving that year with a harvest feast, but even though there was food to eat, the colonists grew weary, and disease and discontent blanketed the colony.  William Bradford had been chosen as the colony's second governor after the first, John Carver, collapsed and died due to heat exhaustion in April. 

Now here is where the story gets interesting.  The colonists soon realized that there would be little or no provision arriving by ship from England for them, so they began to rethink some of the communal structure of their colony.  Originally, Plymouth Colony was structured as a literal "commonwealth," a community of individuals entering into a mutual covenant, whose laws were designed to benefit the common good, rather than an elite ruling class.  To this end, private property was limited to the personal possessions of each individual.  The economy, including land, dwellings, agriculture, and commerce, was placed under the control of the colony; each settler was "to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock," wrote Bradford, which meant that "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed in that common stock, not kept by individuals.

This early experiment in communism was disastrous.  Bradford continues:

For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labor and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labors and victuals, clothes etc., with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignity and disrespect unto them. And for men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands well brook it.

Few settlers made the required contributions to the common stock.  Many feigned illness in order to escape mandated work quotas; others simply refused to work.  Many colonists hoarded commodities, and some colonists stole from the common stock outright.  (It should be noted that most -- though not all -- of the Plymouth settlers were devout Separatist/Congregationalist Christian men and women.  Also, each male head of household signed the Mayflower Compact, which acknowledged the right of everyone who signed it to share in the making and administering of laws and the right of the majority to rule.)

After two years, faced with the situation at hand, Governor Bradford proposed a solution:

At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other thing to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance) and ranged all boys and youth under some family. This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.

Fascinating, isn't it?  Nearly four hundred years later, the defenders of the poor among us still cry "oppression" and "exploitation" when an organization offers homeless people simple jobs (like delivering newspapers), or when it is suggested that the poor perform some kind of community service in exchange for government benefits.  And Bradford straightforwardly admits that the colony's government could never have coaxed the colonists into such hard work simply by appealing to "the common good."  Yet this drastic turnaround required the modification of no other laws, save for the apportionment of land and seed and tools to each family, and the guarantee that each family would be allowed to provide for their own security first, rather than to give the entire sum of their labors to a common stock.

William Bradford was a wise man, and noted in his journal that the assumption of equality, "if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least much diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them."  When all the settlers were "equal," they soon became equally bitter and equally miserable.  Bradford concluded:

Let none object this is men's corruption, and nothing to the course itself. I answer, seeing all men have this corruption in them, God in His wisdom saw another course fitter for them. (emphasis added)

...

It has been a habit of conservatives to re-write the story of the Plymouth Colony as a story illustrating the triumphs of free-marked capitalism.  Of course the story is much more complicated than that.  Abandoning the "common stock" economy proved to be an absolute gain for the colony, but at the same time, the colonists had established their community and had finally adjusted to life in Massachusetts.  They signed peace treaties with the Native Americans (but did not always honor them), they learned how to plant, harvest, and cook corn; they became proficient hunters and fishermen, explored vast areas of land, and eventually began to trade with other Englishmen and natives.  Proficiency in all of these areas led to the eventual success of the colony.

And rather than the bold experiment in absolute laissez-faire touted by free market proponents, the inspiration for the assignment of land to the Plymouth colonists seems to actually be inspired by the plan for inheritance of land given to the nation of Israel by God in Numbers 33: "You shall inherit the land by lot according to your clans.  To a large tribe you shall give a large inheritance, and to a small tribe you shall give a small inheritance. Wherever the lot falls for anyone, that shall be his. According to the tribes of your fathers you shall inherit."  Land was not taken from the Plymouth community in a free-for-all competition where colonists outsmarted or outbid each other; rather, it was given to each family according to their needs, with the expectation that, after each family's immediate needs were met, the bounty would still be available to the community, either through sales, trade, or charity.

If there is an honest lesson to be learned from the Pilgrims, it is probably the simple truth that each of us desires a measure of recognized individual success, and consequently, a community will not be secure until its individual members feel that they have been able to secure themselves through the fruits of their own labor.  Then, and only then, will there be an abundance that can be sold, traded, or given to others.  Until mankind's basic nature changes, he can flourish only within systems based on that truth.  Those of us who are fortunate enough to live in lands that are generally free from state-imposed tyranny certainly have much to be thankful for.

ADDED: The Pilgrims were of course Congregationalists, not Puritans.  I have corrected this above.

Stuff from my desktop - Nov. 24, 2008

Will Barack Obama try to introduce a "New" New Deal? -- Amity Shales notes that the Great Depression gave Democrats a platform from which they could launch a variety of progressive "reforms," many of which had been pet agenda items for over a decade and had little or nothing to do with economic stimulus.  Supporters of more government intervention in the economy should also read this report from UCLA, which states that many of FDR's New Deal programs (specifically artificial wage and price controlls) actually served to lengthen the Great Depression.

And now The New York Times is riffing on the same theme... But wait a minute - are these stories honest conclusions drawn from historical research, or are we seeing further proof that the media is attempting to soften criticism of the Obama administration if they can't keep their promises of tax cuts and prosperity?

...

Big 3 bailout on hold for now -- The Senate has decided to postpone any government financial aid for the Big Three automakers.  The fact that their CEO's flew to Washington DC aboard mega-expensive luxury charter jets in order to plead en forma pauperis before Congress didn't help.  And president-elect Obama is staying far away from the issue.

Powerline blog notes an eerie similarity between the current financial woes of the Big Three, and a coming financial disaster for our own government:

The real story is the frightening extent to which Detroit is just the New Deal U.S. in microcosm...the Big 3 became essentially private versions of the middle class welfare state...social agencies for providing non-market validated income, health and retirement benefits, with a sideline of making cars....and now the model is unsustainable. In part it is because of the burden of the retired UAW workforce, which now vastly outnumbers the actual working members. As of 2007, the UAW represented 180,681 members at Chrysler, Ford and General Motors; it also represented 419,621 retired members and 120,723 surviving spouses.

This is not dissimilar to Social Security and Medicare for the U.S. economy as a whole. Both of these entitlement programs are unfunded liabilities of the U.S. government, politically, if not legally, and, on a current basis, consume almost 50% of the $3 trillion federal budget. They were viable on a pay-as-you-go basis only at inception and as long as the ratio of workers to beneficiaries is high. Neither condition obtains today. So it becomes an interesting question and rather soon I think: when the U.S. government becomes like Detroit...who does the bailing out?

...

Sign of the apocalypse? -- Religious extremists often view the election of one political candidate or another as a choice that will bring either blessings or punishment from God.  But did you know that Shia Islam might be reserving a very special place for Barack Obama?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a devoted follower of Shia Islam and an ardent believer in the end times teaching of Shia (yes, Virginia, there are other "end times" teachings besides The Revelation) which revolves around the appearance of the Mahdi, a Messianic figure who will deliver the entire world into the kingdom of Islam.  Noted Muslim author Amir Taheri pointed out a curious chain of events a few weeks ago that is linked directly to the Obama presidency:

Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?

The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.

According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet's cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a "tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West." Commanding "the strongest army on earth," the new ruler in the West will carry "a clear sign" from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: "Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us."

In a curious coincidence Obama's first and second names--Barack Hussein--mean "the blessing of Hussein" in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means "he is with us," the magic formula in Majlisi's tradition.

Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama's rise as another sign of the West's decline and the triumph of Islam. Obama's promise to seek unconditional talks with the Islamic Republic is cited as a sign that the U.S. is ready to admit defeat.

Liberals enjoy making fun of Christian evangelicals and their "Left Behind" mania.  Let's see how they respond to the politicization of eschatological teachings from another major religious tradition, particularly one that involves their own Savior.

...

The planet has cooled since George W. Bush took office -- It's true, so deal with it.  If you're still not convinced, then here is much more. 

Of course George W. Bush had nothing to do with the current cooling trend, just like Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the warming trend of the 1990's.  But Bush does deserve credit for slyly robbing the environmental Chicken Littles of any opportunity to credit the Kyoto Protocol with the current global temperature decline. 

Truthfully, there are no current human initiatives that can be credited with any sort of global temperature offset.  That's fantastic news, because the last thing we need is a bunch of loony Gaia worshipers thinking that they have successfully appeased their Goddess.

That's not to say they won't keep trying however.  Two weeks ago, NASA's GISS team, lead by Al Gore's chief environmental high priest Dr. James Hanson, announced that October 2008 was the warmest month ever measured.  Their claim was immediately debunked after investigators discovered that much of their data from Russia and elsewhere were not real measurement data at all, but estimates derived from carrying over previous month's temperatures.

And in real scientific news, scientists working in Antarctica believe that they have detected special electron-positron particle pairs that can only emerge from weak interactions between massive particles of so-called "dark matter."  Dark matter is thought to comprise up to 25% of the known universe, but it has been virtually impossible to detect because it has zero interactivity with light.

...

Here's your 'well duh!' blood-boiler of the day -- If you thought that selling bonds comprised of shares in risky mortgages was bad, then you should read this account of "tobacco bonds," municipal bonds sold by states to raise money in lieu of tobacco settlement cash; but with the current economic downturn, and the steadily shrinking supply of smokers, the tobacco companies can't pay out the money to cover the bond debts.  And if that's not bad enough, only one third of the tobacco settlement money was spent by states on health issues and tobacco control programs.  Arrrgh!

Iraq - it's over, WE WON

All the recent election clamor and media worship of our messianic President-elect might have obscured one of the major news stories of 2008 -- the stunning victory of US and Allied forces over the remains of Saddam loyalists and evil Al-Quaeda interlopers in Iraq.  That's right -- VICTORY.

You haven't read much about Iraq because there has been little to read.  Casualties have been extremely low.  Terror attacks are rare.  In fact, the murder rate in Chicago this summer was double the number of US casualties in Iraq.  When the media loathes the US military, and when the Democrats invest all their political capital in losing our military efforts, then that kind of news is incredibly bad news, and it simply isn't reported.

A few weeks ago, intrepid Iraq reporter Michael Yon told Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds:

"There's nothing going on. I'm with the 10th Mountain Division, and about half of the guys I'm with haven't fired their weapons on this tour and they've been here eight months. And the place we're at, South Baghdad, used to be one of the worst places in Iraq. And now there's nothing going on. I've been walking my feet off and haven't seen anything. I've been asking Iraqis, 'do you think the violence will kick up again,' but even the Iraqi journalists are sounding optimistic now and they're usually dour."

Wow.  Just ... wow.

Everything you need to know about the Iraq victory is here, courtesy of Zombietime.

A final prediction -- look for 2009 to be filled with compassionate, humanitarian stories about the US military presence in Iraq; how they are building roads and schools, how they are training civil engineers, how they are providing electricity and clean water, how they are loved by the people, and maybe we shouldn't completely pull out ... just yet.

But remember the time line.  The war is essentially over NOW.  What remains in Iraq is infrastructure building, and a final mop up of Al-Qaeda remnants and Iranian infiltrators.  And not a single Democrat elected in Nov. 2008 has been sworn in.  Democrats -- especially Barack Obama and his worshiping throngs -- simply cannot claim this victory.

However, if you must peg a turning point, pick November 2006.  The Congressional shake-up forced the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld and the installation of a new SecDef, William Gates.  And Gates was responsible for appointing General Petraeus to oversee operations in Iraq.  And General Petraeus made the "surge" happen.  You know, the "surge," predicted by every major partisan Democrat and every Left-wing wag to end in utter failure?  If we must give the Democrats credit for something, give them credit for how shockingly, embarrassingly wrong they have been during the last four years.

So congratulations to all the US and Allied servicemen and civilian contractors who won.  You did it.  God bless you all.

Babe-blogging - I heartily agree!

Over at RightWingNews/Conservative Grapevine, blogger John Hawkins notes,

Perhaps because there are a lot of new people hitting CG for the first time because of the election surge, I've been getting questions about the bikini pics on CG in my email every few days. Here's an example,

"Hello John, my name is Andrew, and I have a quick question for you. I believe I read in one of your pieces on Right Wing News that you are a Christian. Is that true? If so, then why does it look like you post bikini pictures on Conservative Grapevine as well as RWN? e.g., Sarah Palin at the pool.

Do you think that it's OK to do that as a Christian?" -- Andrew Bell

... I grew up Baptist and still go to church every week -- but, perhaps I missed the sermon where we were told Christians aren't supposed to admire the female form or are supposed to be horrified by women in bikinis. Maybe they just leave that part out because I live at the beach.

I'd also like to add that you see women in bikinis on TV, in advertisements, in video games -- just about everywhere in our society. So, if they help traffic on CG -- and they definitely do (I think it's entirely possible CG may be bigger than RWN by the end of 2009), then why wouldn't I want them on there?

Robert Stacy McCain agrees:

Most blog readers are guys, and guys like eye candy. What's weird is that chicks like celebrity eye candy, too. It's true. Go pick up Us Weekly or People and what do you see? Paparazzi shots of starlets in bikinis. And who reads those magazines? Chicks. Same thing with fashion magazines -- lots of shots of barely-dressed models, especially in the ads. For some reason, completely hetero women like looking at beautiful women.

Blogging is (or ought to be) a capitalist enterprise, the object being to draw more visitors and thereby generate more revenue. If there is one thing that conservatives agree on, it's that capitalism is better than socialism, so if you don't want me running to Congress asking for a blogger bailout, then a bit of eye candy is a small price to pay. And as a greedy capitalist blogger, it makes no difference to me whether you come for the Anne Hathaway cleavage shots and stay for the politics, or vice-versa.

I've done a bit of babe-blogging over the years.  (example)  (example)  And I wholeheartedly agree - it is a guaranteed traffic generator.

So in the spirit of things, I decided to once again do my part, and share some nice, super hi-res images of some of my favorite celeb-crushes.  Images below the fold.  Nothing scandalous, but if you are "the weaker brother," then you have been warned:

Stuff from my desktop - Nov. 18, 2008

Should we bail out the UAW ... er, GM, Ford, and Chrysler? -- John Hinderaker at Powerline says no, and notes that the $25 billion that GM wants is probably more than the market value of all Big Three auto makers combined.  He also provides a nice graph that succinctly illustrates the problem:

And writing for the Wall Street Journal, Michael Levine says that GM should not be bailed out; rather, they should file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.  He writes, "The social and political costs would be very large, but if GM fails after getting $50 billion or $100 billion in bailout money, it'll be just as large and there will be less money to soften the blow and even more blame to go around."  Under Chapter 11, GM would be forced to renegotiate vendor contracts, dealer obligations, pension and health care benefits, property leasing and municipal bond agreements, and labor contracts. 

Foreign automakers like Toyota and Nissan who build cars in the US are not burdened by these obligations, many of them dating back 30, 40, 50, and even 60 years.  I agree with Mr. Levine.  Unless GM undergoes a major restructuring, there is no way it will ever be able to dig itself out from under these massive legacy expenditures.  Over the years, GM has promised more pieces of pie than it can now cut out of the pan.  Bankruptcy is probably the only way to force anyone to give up their piece of GM's pie.

...

Well, knock me over with a feather, again -- "ACLU calls on governor to create privacy protections".  Ohio's governor, that is.  Seems that the roughshod treatment of "Joe The Plumber" Wurzelbacher even ruffled the feathers of the ACLU, known for its routine dismissal of civil rights cases that do not advance the radical liberal/progressive agenda.  But now even they are concerned.  Will wonders ever cease?

...

"We seem to have crossed a cultural line into myth-making" -- writes Howard Kurtz, regarding the media's maniacal obsession with Barack Obama.  Unfortunately the honeymoon can't last forever.  "But what happens," Kurtz writes, "when adulation gives way to the messy, incremental process of governing?"

I think we are already seeing the beginning of a very cautious attempt by some of the more wizened members of the press to begin lowering the public's expectations of Obama, if perhaps only down to the upper levels of human achievement.  The LA Times' Dan Morain recently reviewed Obama's unimpressively thin legal resume and came away...well...less than impressed.  Naturally no one in the MSM was interested in this before the election, but now they are looking for anything with which to make a soft landing pad, in anticipation of The One's first major policy stumble. 

ADDED: Jonah Goldberg, NRO, 11/21/08 -

In an attempt to dial down expectations for his administration, President-elect Barack Obama’s supporters have dropped much of the “messiah” talk.  No more talk of him being The One (Oprah), or a Jedi Knight (George Lucas), or a “Lightworker” (the San Francisco Chronicle), or a “quantum leap in American consciousness” (Deepak Chopra). Instead we have more humble and circumspect conversation about the man. Now he’s merely Abraham Lincoln and FDR and Martin Luther King, combined.

Heh.  Exactly.

You should also check out John Ziegler's new website How Obama Got Elected.  Of course Ziegler doesn't "prove" that ignorance among the general electorate led to Obama's victory.  That's probably not true; people will often vote for a candidate they like or trust, regardless of the behavior of that candidate -- witness the re-election of William "Cold Cash" Jefferson in Louisiana and Jack "Col. Porky McABSCAM" Murtha in Pennsylvania.  But Ziegler does show, both through interviews and a poll carried out by the Zogby organization, that Obama voters generally knew very little negative information about Obama, compared to a tremendous amount of negative -- sometimes even fictional -- information about Sarah Palin.  This can be attributed to nothing short of full-blown news media bias.

...

Can't take my eyes off of you ... -- It seems that the folks who put together the satirical OKC blog The Lost Ogle really do know their ogling; last week they posted a hilarious video of News 5 anchorman Paul Folger paying a curious amount of close attention to newsbabe Jessica Schambach:

By the way, The Lost Ogle is really named after Kent Ogle, Kelly Ogle, Kevin Ogle, and their father Jack Ogle, who together have infested OKC's broadcast television airwaves for fifty years.

Mike's Rant (audio podcast) - the first

Okay, so a year ago I said that I was going to add some audio "podcast" segments to my blog, and finally ... I'm ready!  I've already done several "Futuristic Rhythm" audio shows for my Virtual Victrola, but on Mike's Noise I'll be mostly talking, with some occasional music thrown in to break the tension.

____________________________________________

PART ONE  Download Mike's Rant Part 1.mp3 (14:27)

I discuss the screed recently published by disgraced former Oklahoma governor David Walters, in which he laments the racist, redneck tendencies of Oklahomans, since we were the only state in the nation where McCain-Palin carried every county.  I look at voter trends (increased Republican support vs. increased Democrat support) and I explain to the governor and others on the Left why we rednecks often look at the east coast Ivy League cocktail party crowd with a slightly jaundiced eye.

Music: "Marie" - Tommy Dorsey and his Orchestra, featuring Bunny Berigan on trumpet.  November 2008 is the 100th anniversary of Bunny Berigan's birth.  I'm blogging about Bunny over at the Virtual Victrola.

PART TWO  Download Mike's Rant Part 2.mp3 (12:11)

I discuss the fact that poor and minority voters did not elect Barack Obama -- he made his biggest gains among voters earning over $100,000 per year.  And I also discuss why this group, the very people Obama has promised to tax heavier, still supported him.

Music: "I Can't Get Started" - Bunny Berigan and his Orchestra, vocal chorus and trumpet solo by Bunny Berigan.

PART THREE  Download Mike's Rant Part 3.mp3 (14:54)

I expound further on voter trends, and explain why Barack Obama's prophetic vision had such broad appeal, yet fell flat in the South and among fundamentalist/evangelical Christians.

Music: "I Cried For You" - Bunny Berigan and his Orchestra

Stuff from my desktop - Nov. 14, 2008

This headline says it all -- "Bailout Lacks Oversight Despite Billions Pledged"  As many bloggers including myself warned, we essentially gave Henry Paulson $700 billion with no real system for accountability:

In the six weeks since lawmakers approved the Treasury's massive bailout of financial firms, the government has poured money into the country's largest banks, recruited smaller banks into the program and repeatedly widened its scope to cover yet other types of businesses, from insurers to consumer lenders.

Along the way, the Bush administration has committed $290 billion of the $700 billion rescue package.

Yet for all this activity, no formal action has been taken to fill the independent oversight posts established by Congress when it approved the bailout to prevent corruption and government waste. Nor has the first monitoring report required by lawmakers been completed, though the initial deadline has passed.

Michelle Malkin notes:

The pulled-out-of-the-posterior “$700 billion” price tag has ballooned into the trillions. The “mortgage industry rescue” has expanded to banks, insurance companies, automakers, credit card companies, and possibly the entire national volume of consumer lending. Oh, and that vaunted “TARP” component, Paulson admitted this week, is nothing but a four-letter-word that rhymes with TRAP ... “Our assessment at this time is that this is not the most effective way to use TARP funds,” he sheepishly told the nation Wednesday. 

For what it's worth, Senators Tom Coburn, Richard Burr, and David Vitter (all Republicans) have sent a letter to the Treasury Department highlighting Paulson's naked bait and switch:

We are writing to express our deep concern over your announcement this morning that the Department of the Treasury will halt all plans to purchase trouble mortgage assets through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). We are concerned that the program has been fundamentally changed from its original intent and worry that continued changes may erode the structures of accountability put in to protect taxpayers.

... Although the legislation was passed on October 3, the program was never implemented and now has been officially abandoned in favor of alternative plans after little more than a month. Such a rapid reversal raises questions about the TARP’s original design as well as the propriety of future plans.

Congress never intended for the TARP to be a blank check that could be spent with unlimited discretion. To ensure proper boundaries are in place to protect the taxpayer, we hope and expect that congressional approval will be sought by the administration before further changes are made.

Apparently the Democrats have been too busy preparing for their Presidential coronation and subsequent power grabs to notice.

The Federal Reserve is also refusing to disclose the recipients of nearly $2 trillion in emergency loans, or to disclose the specific assets that they are accepting as collateral.  Lovely.

...

Interesting -- "Not So Green - Voters Nix Most Environmental State Ballot Measures" -- but maybe ordinary folks understand the high cost of "alternative energy" a bit more than we realize.

...

Well, knock me over with a feather -- "Teens who watch Sex In The City more likely to get pregnant"

...

Knock me over with a feather pt. 2 -- "Obama likely to escape campaign audit"  It seems that the potenially massive donation fraud enabled by the Obama campaign will not be investigated by the FEC, simply because Obama took no public campaign funds.  On the other hand, John McCain will be forced to spend upwards on $10 million on manditory FEC audits because he accepted public campaign funds.  If you recall, Obama originally pledged to accept public money, but then reneged on his pledge.  One has to wonder if this is because he knew he could then accept unlimited donations without fear of an audit.  And of course our feckless, in-the-tank news media could care less.

...

If you love numbers -- "The List: Which presidential polls were most accurate?"  Rasmussen and The Pew research center topped the list.  

...

Maybe Sally Kern was on to something -- "Palm Springs Rally Turns Violent"  The post-Proposition 8 unhinged gay meltdown continues in California.  Witness angry gays attack a pro-Prop8 protester, wrestle her cross away, and stomp on it.  Then imagine the maniacal screaming fit national gay activists would have if a Christian protester ever ripped down a rainbow flag and stomped it into the ground:

Interestingly, Proposition 8 (which defined marriage specifically between a man and a woman) passed by a 52% - 48% margin, similar to the national Presidential election spread.  If liberals are willing to proclaim 52% as "America united" and a "mandate" for their party, what does that say about Proposition 8's 52% majority?

GayPatriot asks, "Where are the grownups?"

...

Actually I prefer "Car Commisar" -- "What To Look for In A Federal 'Car Czar'":

If the proposed auto industry rescue is going to happen, and that should become clear next week as industry executives and union leaders testify before Congress, it makes sense for the government to name a "car czar" to watch over the Detroit Three as they spend $25 billion in taxpayer money.

Inescapable fact - the United Auto Workers is one of the nation's most powerful unions.  Big Labor spent in excess of $300 million during the 2008 election cycle, 90% of which went to Democrats.  It seems highly improbable to me that any Democrat-led "reform" of the auto industry will be able to address one of the biggest financial sinkholes plaguing the Big 3: the shocking compensation demands of UAW contracts.

As for me, I'm not holding my breath waiting for Detroit to produce Uncle Sam's version of the Trabant. Neither is blogger Orin Kerr.  Here is his concept of the new "US Government Model One:"

...

A different world ... but then again, not so much -- "'Child-Witches' of Nigeria Seek Refuge"

Mary was found by a British charity worker and today lives at a refuge in Akwa Ibom province with 150 other children who have been branded witches, blamed for all their family's woes, and abandoned. Before being pushed out of their homes many were beaten or slashed with knives, thrown onto fires, or had acid poured over them as a punishment or in an attempt to make them "confess" to being possessed. In one horrific case, a young girl called Uma had a three-inch nail driven into her skull.

Yet Mary and the others at the shelter are the lucky ones for they, at least, are alive. Many of those branded "child-witches" are murdered - hacked to death with machetes, poisoned, drowned, or buried alive in an attempt to drive Satan out of their soul.

The devil's children are "identified" by powerful religious leaders at extremist churches where Christianity and traditional beliefs have combined to produce a deep-rooted belief in, and fear of, witchcraft. The priests spread the message that child-witches bring destruction, disease and death to their families. And they say that, once possessed, children can cast spells and contaminate others.

The religious leaders offer help to the families whose children are named as witches, but at a price. The churches run exorcism, or "deliverance", evenings where the pastors attempt to drive out the evil spirits. Only they have the power to cleanse the child of evil spirits, they say. The exorcism costs the families up to a year's income.(emphasis added)

Well, that explains it, doesn't it?  There is, I believe, a special place in Hell for those who would deceive the innocent and prey on their fears, using distorted religion and doing it all for money.  Then of course they can claim that God has "blessed them" for their good works.  Bastards.

2000 words I didn't have to write

(h/t WizBang)

(h/t Right Wing News)

A decision about blogging

This past weekend, I thought quite a bit about how to blog the Barack Obama presidency.  There were several ideas -- a news blog with snarky commentary about everything he does; a satire blog dedicated to "Our Messiah," etc.  But to tell you the truth, right now I don't feel very adversarial.  I know too many good people who voted for the guy.  And the last thing that I want to see is a repeat of the last 8 years of vulgar, unhinged hatred like that which has been given to President Bush.  I don't want to suffer from Obama Derangement Syndrome, comparing him to Hitler or Stalin on a daily basis, accusing him of murder and bloodlust, threatening impeachment at the drop of a hat, and denouncing half of the country as vile, terminally stupid cretins.  I have a life to live, and that level of hating takes way too much effort.

On the other hand, our nation is desperately in deed of guardians, people who are willing to look at Obama's ideas with a critical eye and offer opinions about them, rather than blindly accepting everything and filling the airwaves and cyberspace with propaganda.  Sadly, the mainstream news media in this country is no longer capable of fulfilling that role.

The mainstream media's bold uncuriosity about Obama's past (save for the carefully-crafted narratives supplied by Obama's handlers and Obama himself -- and remember how awful it was for George W. Bush to be "uncurious"?) was both frustrating and at times comical.  They could dig up John McCain's torturer in Vietnam, and they had no problem attempting to solicit dirt on Cindy McCain from teenage friends of the McCain children via Facebook messages, and they could rush a gaggle of investigative reporters onto the next flight to Anchorage to dredge up everyone and everything ever associated with Sarah Heath Palin. 

But they could never be bothered to assemble major investigative pieces that included interviews with the "Marxist professors" Obama claims he hung out with in college, or the occupants of the neighborhoods that he represented (with the exception of one newspaper, The Boston Globe), or interviews with high school or college buddies with whom he admitted attending "socialist conferences," or his high school or college drug dealers; or extensive front-page profiles of Chicago cronies like Anthony Rezko or his long-time mentor and adviser William Ayres.  They begrudgingly reported on Obama's impoverished extended family only after being scooped by the foreign press and (again) one newspaper, The Boston Globe.  Most major pieces on Obama were published 9 months ago or longer -- much longer -- and the mainstream media had no desire to keep the information in those articles above the page fold in the weeks leading up to the election.

Truth is, with few exceptions, we've completely lost the skeptical inquirers who once populated the ranks of the American mainstream news media.  They no longer see a need to "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable," perhaps because they believe that with Barack Obama in charge, the Federal Government will do that job for them.  They've admitted their biases.  They are in the tank for the Obama Administration, and they are committed to the success of his administration, objectivity be damned.

So what can I do as a blogger?  What can you do as an average citizen?

For starters, stay positive.  Stay hopeful.  No one, except for a few fringe kooks, really wants to see our nation suffer.  We simply have different ideas about what a prosperous future for America should look like. Conservatives want a community of free individuals.  Liberals want a collective managed by a benevolent government.  It's okay to oppose ideas that you believe are harmful.  It's okay to oppose ideas that chip away at the core values of America.  Columnist Cliff May notes:

Give Obama his due: It is an exceptional politician who can win the support of Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, and Kenneth Duberstein, former chief of staff to President Reagan; of William Ayers, an unrepentant terrorist and Christopher Buckley, son of William F. Buckley, founder of modern conservatism; of Rashid Khalidi, an Israel-hater, and Edgar Bronfman, former head of the World Jewish Congress. Here's a not-very-bold prediction: A year from now, someone is going to be sorely disappointed. (emphasis added)

We can clearly define the concepts of voluntary community and individual freedom.  There will be passionate arguments about birthrights, about heritage, about privilege, about what we are owed by our government and about how those debts are to be paid.  We can explain that in America, the state does not -- and should not -- define the individual.  We can argue that the individual should never be forced to turn over whatever he has to the state, even for seemingly benevolent purposes.  We can champion individual charity, which is conspicuously absent among socialist European nations that heavily tax and regulate their citizens.  I could go on, but you get the idea.

It's also okay to be funny - apparently Comedy Central isn't interested in the presidency any more, so the market for White House humor is now wide-open.  Maybe they spent all their creative energy on Li'l Bush and That's My Bush.  Or maybe they're still struggling to come up with a good double entendre for "Obama."  At any rate, nothing should stop us from having some good clean fun with the Presidency and Congress.

What ever we do, the ultimate goal should be dialog.  During this campaign, the press deliberately chose to end dialog and replace it with directive, based on their narrative of how a better America should be achieved.  Many conservatives recognized this, and out of frustration they hit back with extremely partisan commentary that further eroded the ability to reasonably discuss the election and the ideas of the candidates.  

For my part, I am planning to launch a series of dialogs on my blog.  I'll suggest a topic (something like "how do we define centrist?") and then invite bloggers and commenters to contribute their thoughts.  Hopefully such dialogs will help to build a loyal readership base (something I have yet to really successfully accomplish) and at the same time, contribute something positive to the national conversations about current problems and how government should (or should not) involve itself in their solutions. 

It seems to me that now, blogs really are "alternative media," and if you are looking for informative discussion instead of instructional propaganda, you will be looking for those discussions online.  Join me, won't you?