Rebane's Ruminations
November 2012
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Mitt Romney is definitely being disposed of under the traditional bus.  Conservative sage Thomas Sowell joins with his ‘Nice Losers’ that begins –

Mitt Romney now joins the long list of the kinds of presidential candidates favored by the Republican establishment— nice, moderate losers, people with no coherently articulated vision, despite how many ad hoc talking points they may have.

A flavor of America fighting a real war can be gleaned from these quality PR photos that were assembled by a Russian blogger.  For those whose ‘back there’ includes the 1940s, these pictures take you there.

Finished reading Cloud Atlas by Mitchell.  Excellent book; now look forward to seeing the movie with Tom Hanks, Hugh Grant, and Halle Berry.  Even though Mitchell misses the mark on the impact of smart machines on the future of Man, the novel with its unusual structure does have an interesting take on our dystopic future.  I don’t read many novels, but this one held me.  (My next book in the reading stack is Kurzweil’s How to Create a Mind.)

Interesting breakdown of how the counties votes last week.  Them socialists sure pack themselves into small areas, and have a definite and transformative plan for doing that to the rest of us.  (BTW, I agree that the colors should be changed to reflect the leanings of the Right and Left.  Whoever the imbecile, who first designated the currently used wrong assignment, was innocent of both history and ideology.)

RedBlueCounties2012
Nobel laureate Paul Krugman concludes that “Gods, guns and gays didn’t swing voters into supporting corporate interests; instead, human dignity for women swung votes the other way.”  And that’s how it all came down in his Welcome to the Real “Real America”.  It was oh so simple when the true Americans had their say last week.

In becoming acceptable to the nation’s Hispanics, does the Republican party really need to embrace open borders and amnesty?  Isn’t that already the political posture of all the leftwingers under the Democrat umbrella?  Where then will be the political choice for maintaining America as a sovereign nation-state?

Tracking the number of informal petitions to secede that are submitted to the WH website will be of interest.  Over 30 states now have groups collecting and submitting such Great Divide (q.v.) signatures.  Glenn Beck advises that the feds will keep the names of the signatories and get ugly on them later.  We shall see.

Exit question: After 2008 and 2012 will the blacks ever admit that they are racist minority, even unto their own worst interests?

[14nov12 update]  President Obama met with the leftwing activists and unions yesterday, and today seeks to give the impression of ‘equal time’ to the capitalists.  He is doing this by meeting in the WH with the heads of big corporations as I write.  These are outfits that cannot exist without heavy cooperation, or is it collusion, or is it corruption with government.  Meanwhile, the middle and small businesses are going to be trampled by Obama’s tax increases.  American manufacturers are already 20% behind global competitors in their costs.  On top of this they will now see their tax and regulatory burdens increase.  Instead of creating the millions of jobs needed in America, they will be busy seeking new and innovative ways to shed cost in order to survive.  Socialism marches on while the sheeple watch in awe.

[15nov12 update]  As often mentioned here, the world is looking at the United States with various levels of disbelief in how we are managing to inflict evermore egregious wounds on our dumbing population, wealth creation capacity, and body politic.  In the 10nov12 London Telegraph columnist Janet Daley wrote –

The United States has now acquired an electorally powerful liberal bourgeoisie who are convinced, as their European counterparts have been for several generations, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that public spending is inherently virtuous, that poverty can be cured by penalising wealth creation, and that government intervention can engineer social “fairness.” But just when some of Europe’s political class has begun to appreciate the dangers of this philosophy—that taken to its logical conclusion, it leads to economic stagnation and social division—America seems to have decided that it is the quintessence of enlightened sophistication.

[17nov12 update] We saw ‘Assassins’, the Stephen Sondheim musical, at the Off Center Theater in Grass Valley last night with friends.  It was a marvellous if somewhat disquieting performance, and unfortunately the production closes today.  Jo Ann summarized it artfully in an email to friends which follows

Thinking about the play – certain actors, all the main
ones, were absolutely terrific.  JWBooth
was smooth and cunning, the women played off each other very effectively, the
guy with the stomach ache, the bottle maker & Emma Goldman, and Oswald  were played well.  Guiteau and Santa Claus were exceptional
portraits.  The little boy was great in
his role.

The topic, troubled/mentally ill people doing the awful,
was hard let alone entertaining. 
Sondheim’s music was also hard. 
But the talented cast rose to those challenges.  I’m glad I saw it.  Next, I want a jolly good comedy or sweet
Christmas carols.

We all are fortunate to live in a community with so much talent and culture pouring out of every pore.

Posted in , , , ,

86 responses to “Ruminations – 13nov12 (updated 17nov12)”

  1. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    Michael Anderson 12:09 What can/will/must the Republicans do to achieve greater penetration in our nation’s urban areas?
    #1.) promise free stuff?
    #2.) stop focusing on “social issues” (like abortion and gay marriage).

    Like

  2. earlcrabb Avatar

    You can play with the colors on a map any way you want, the final total of votes tells the story. Dems got 62M, Repubs got 47M. Still looks pretty close to me. I’ve been hearing about the demise of one party or the other for decades, but both are still standing. (Remember when the Dems lost Congress in ’94? They were so depressed that more than a few jumped off bridges.) The proof of longevity in the left’s victory will be the economy rather than demographics. If life doesn’t get better for voters, they will look elsewhere for relief.

    Like

  3. earlcrabb Avatar

    Oops. Dem total should have read 52 million.

    Like

  4. George Rebane Avatar

    I take it from MichaelA’s 500pm that the conversation about how purple we all are is over.
    For the record (re earlcrabb’s 445pm) the popular vote tallies according to CBS is Obama 62,615,406, Romney 59,142,004 (as reported here previously).

    Like

  5. Steve Frisch Avatar
    Steve Frisch

    I’m sorry George, but this canard that there is no middle ground is just nonsense. The problem is one of perspective….you do not see a middle ground because you are so red no other ‘color’ can be seen.

    Like

  6. earlcrabb Avatar

    George is right, of course. Got distracted by the phone and typed M(as in votes) instead of % of votes. My bad.

    Like

  7. George Rebane Avatar

    The touted middle is like a ground fog, some see it from a distance, but walk into it and it disappears. From Gallup we read –
    “Obama’s already highly polarized ratings are becoming even more so in his fourth year in office. Thus far, his ratings have averaged 85% among Democrats and 10% among Republicans, for a 75-point gap. That compares with gaps averaging 68 points during his second and third years in office and 65 points during his first. … That is not unexpected, as Gallup has typically found presidents’ ratings to be most polarized by party in their fourth year in office, which is normally the year they seek re-election to a second term. But ratings of recent presidents are far more politically divided than those of less recent presidents.”
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/158018/americans-views-obama-polarized-election-nears.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics
    And the argument that there is no middle ground has not been given here. We only note what the country has understood for at least the last four years – that the middle ground is unoccupied, perhaps because no one can give it a credible form.
    In point of fact, the Left pursues its “issue activisms” while screening a discredited ideology that dares not say its name nor list its tenets, and those claiming the middle provide no satisfaction there because they have none to offer. Only those of conservative and libertarian hue argue their points from principles that are always visible and at the ready.

    Like

  8. Billy T Avatar
    Billy T

    In reply to Dr. Rebane’s 11/15 post at 5:45pm. It is very clear now. The reason Obama got more votes in 2008 as compared to 2012 is simple. Millions of American voters became racists over the last 4 years. Or, millions of American became racists as direct result of Obama. Or, (it is a long shot), millions of American no long take a liking to the direction Obama is taking the country.

    Like

  9. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Only conservatives and libertarians argue from points of principle? Utter hogwash, George. I give you Bernie Sanders from the liberal left, a socialist through and through and a man of principles if there ever was one. And there are plenty of others like him on the left, but you can’t see them because you’ve discredited their tenets to the point where in your eyes they no longer exist.
    And you say the middle have none to offer? Bullswoggle. You just don’t like that most folks don’t wear their political screeds on their sleeves, reserving the right to change their minds based upon each individual case.
    My principles don’t come from a single pamphlet, they come from my heart and my brain and my soul. I have no general quarrel with the Bastiat Triangle, but I don’t try to squeeze every decision I make, or opinion I hold, through its tiny cake decorating nozzle. Why? Because the BT has flaws–voting for example (but let’s save that for another day).
    The best judges, the best leaders, are charismatic and hold close true principles. But they also bend without breaking. They find the middle ground. The break trail, and find a way forward. Windmill tilters didn’t create this country, it was the blood sweat and tears of ordinary heroes who hit the road hard, day after day after day.
    Perseverance, vision, leadership, cooperation, selflessness, humility. That’s America’s foundation.

    Like

  10. Russ Steele Avatar

    Some election views from Southern California by the DiploMad 2.0
    Since the November 6 elections, I have seen what the end will look like: a cross between “Things to Do in Denver when You’re Dead,” and any number of ultra-bleak walking dead or zombie apocalypse movies. As mentioned before, I am temporarily in southern California. If the cliche proves true that California is the harbinger of things to come, the end draws nigh, and not because of a Soviet nuclear attack. This is a state devastated by lunatic pro-immigration, education, environmental, and fiscal policies. This is a self-inflicted mortal wound. What’s doubly weird is that those who have committed this act of collective suicide, if given the chance, would do it all over again. In fact, it is amazing to me how many people leave California for other states but take with them the attitudes and voting patterns that brought disaster to their home state. They are moths to the bright flame of liberalism; they can’t figure out why their wings keep catching fire.
    I am left stunned by conversations with Obama voters here in California. As a group, there can be fewer more ignorant of basic economic facts and processes. They seem oblivious to the collapsing stock market, and the unemployment, poverty, inflation, and taxation tsunamis about to sweep over us all. Many are wealthy, but have gotten so in arenas several levels removed from the real economy: environmental or consumer advocates and lawyers, working for NGOs, consultants, entertainers, etc. They do not see themselves as part of the one percent, despite their $100,000 Fiskar Karmas, BMWs, Lexus, Jags, and the more modest $42,000 environmentally proper Prius. These people are loons; worse, they are the post-apocalyptic vampires and walking dead determined to drag the rest of us with them to their liberal hell.

    Like

  11. L Avatar
    L

    Small quibble w/ P. Emery at 4:18 PM. Do I not recall that Richard Nixon, a sitting Veep in 1960 lost? Was that the end of him? And I expect a close perusal of history will turn up others as well…L

    Like

  12. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 1015pm – Your answer seemed to be ready before you read my words. I didn’t say the Left had no ideology. Of course they have an ideology, it is socialism. And as you point out, leftwing ideologues like Sanders trumpet their beliefs behind the bushes. But leftwing politicians don’t come out and say they are socialists, and argue the policies they promote in the name of socialistic ideals. I posted on some recent research by a liberal professor on this.
    http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/08/the-liberals-intellectually-baseless-ideology.html#more
    Years ago Upton Sinclair was one of the first to identify this phenomenon when in 1951 he said, “The American People will take Socialism, but they won’t take the label.” Democrats have been hiding that name ever since.
    And please point me to someone from the self-declared middle who has structured his thoughts enough to assemble them into an ideology of recognizable tenets, and have it acknowledged by other middle-roaders.
    The BT is anything but a “tiny cake decorating nozzle”, and it is entirely silent on voting. Our Founders thought enough of its principles to enshrine them in our Constitution which was supposed to be the very instrument through which ALL of our public policies had to “squeeze” in order for us to maintain our Republic. We have now abandoned it at our peril.
    Great last paragraph that totally misunderstands our history. It was exactly the audacious “windmill tilters” of their time that created the United States. Acting against prudence and the received wisdom of the common round, it was the one out of three colonists, the patriots who did not hue to any middle way, but instead put their fortunes, lives, and sacred honor on the line to give us our country.

    Like

  13. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    George, we’re splitting hairs, but I wouldn’t expect less.
    Yes, you are correct. The windmill tilters got the ball rolling, but my point was that they couldn’t carry it through and the sod carriers had to finish the job.
    We’ll have to agree to disagree on what the socialists are willing wear on their sleeves…methinks cranks like Paul Broyles and Senator Joe made them more crafty, much to your dismay.
    You wrote: “And please point me to someone from the self-declared middle who has structured his thoughts enough to assemble them into an ideology of recognizable tenets, and have it acknowledged by other middle-roaders.”
    …which totally misunderstands what a Straddler is all about–they negotiate, they win some and they lose some, they rethink tenets, they push through policy. They are not wishy-washy, they are pragmatic. And they certainly want the pamphleteers to have their day in the sun, but once that’s over, if they can’t find common cause with the Purple People then they need to move aside so the adults can get some work done.
    Speaking of adults, I am increasingly impressed with Mr. Brooks. Here might be your Messiah for the Republican Party to re-enter the Promised Land:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/brooks-the-age-of-possibility.html?hp&_r=0

    Like

  14. Ryan Mount Avatar

    Michael-
    The GOP base generally doesn’t want Brooks’ vision of the future. And that’s fine. They can continue to be marginalized as a minority party.
    I really don’t think the answer is for the GOP, or the Greens or the Democrats to become more like each other, which is what I’m hearing. Specifically to the Democrats and the Republicans, what purpose does it serve the Republic for the parties to ostensibly look and act the same? Which, we should note, has been a complaint from third party voters for some time.
    If anything we need the opposite: more diversity and differing opinions. But as a practical matter, all this goes in cycles. And I think the mighty mass of Americans have grown tired (lazy and scared. There, I said it.) of the discord especially with the two major parties and probably wish for a more moderate, temperate government. I do not think that’s healthy, nor congruent with a healthy human spirit. Only in the fiercest ideological battles do the best ideas emerge. “Opposition is true Friendship,” as Blake noted.
    Or to paraphrase Jack Kerouac quoting Allen Ginsberg as they were sitting in a restaurant:
    “The world is a cesspool of mediocrity; waiter, there’s a turd in my soup!”

    Like

  15. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    This argument about the “center” and the lovie-dovieness it will bring is total hogwash. Politics is about a victory in numbers and the implementation of one’s ideas and policies. Harry Reid has practiced this for six years and will be doing it another four at a minimum. Our own State Legislature is practicing the result of the voters empowering them as well. Anyone see a Republican in any of their democrats back rooms?
    I recall Bush’s attempts at “compassionate conservatism” and his desire to end the rancor and get along with the democrats. They crapped all over him at every turn while he kept turning the other cheek. The left and their stenographers in the lamestream media consider compromise as the R’s caving to the D’.;s. When there were 50 Senators from each arty back in the early 2000’s, and Cheney would be the tie breaker, I recall the R’s giving the D’s committee chairs after the cry babies from the D party relentlessly bashed the R’s as “unfair” since things were so close in the “number” of Senators. Did it work? Nope. The D’s simply bashed constantly and the R’s took it. One of my big disappointments with Bush was he always “took it” and to Obama’s credit he doesn’t turn the other cheek and goes for his goals. You have to to respect his dogged determination.
    Until the R’s get tough and the press gets fair we will always be battling uphill. But sticking to our principles as the D’s do is the best way to victory in the battle of ideas. Over time we will pick up our majority and victories will resume. Oh, a good ground game tot turn out our voters works good too.

    Like

  16. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    Speaking of labels (purple, blue, red, pink)…
    It is hateful and discriminatory (at best) to place people into classes. The central planners (progressives) seem to start every objective statement with an adjective separating us all into classes… today it is based on income.
    Am I the only one that finds this approach to be broken (understatement) from the start? Doesn’t a just objective statement require us all to be equal?
    Can we expect an objective statement with an immoral foundation that isolates/targets one ‘class’ to bare good fruit?

    Like

  17. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    The best way to fight class warfare and win is to declare that there are no classes, just as Southerners just to say the blacks preferred thing the way they were.
    George is red shift so much that blue is ultraviolet and beyond his senses of vision.

    Like

  18. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 1124pm – Perhaps we are splitting hairs (for a bald man no mean feat, and not to be taken lightly), but then this is the objective and modus operandus of RR. Your description of middle-roaders is welcome and clarifying, as well as corroborating my assessment. What a novel concept ‘the middle doesn’t have a firm ideology because they are always seeking a solution that needs to be dynamic and flexible’. I can live with that, and now expect self-declared middle roaders (like our friend RL Crabb)to cease referring to a belief system of unstated (unstateable?) tenets.
    RyanM 616am – agreed with your assessment of David Brooks. He is neither a Republican nor conservative, but one of those left leaning middle-roaders MichaelA has described.
    Mikey 812am – am confused about your seeming differentiation between labeled ‘classes’ and labeled political ideologies.
    DougK 825am – You are confusing my keen vision in the realm of ideologies with my assessment of their relative worth to the society of man.

    Like

  19. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “Can we expect an objective statement with an immoral foundation that isolates/targets one ‘class’ to bare good fruit?”
    If classes don’t exist, then how can one “target” one of them?

    Like

  20. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    Labeling someone based on ideology is not an attack on personal liberty. Labeling someone based on ideology does no material harm. Simply referring to someone as blue or socialist or capitalist or purple is not an attack (backed by law) against their personal liberties.
    Labeling someone based on income/class for the purpose of targeted (inequitable) laws is a direct attack on personal liberty.
    The progressive tax system is the best example of an immoral/inequitable/mob driven ‘contract’ that by its definition holds one class (minority) to a different law. Immoral: a ‘rich’ man’s private property is different in the eyes of the law than the private property of all others. Stripping a man of his inalienable rights based on his religion, class, weight, sex, wealth is a travesty.
    A just objective statement for any government policy requires us all to be equal under the law.

    Like

  21. Paul Emery Avatar

    L
    Actually FDR was the losing VEEP in 1920. At least not in modern times.
    I was referring not to a sitting VEEP but as a candidate on a losing ticket such as Kerry, Quale, Palin, Edwards and now Ryan. There are of course sitting VEEPS that became President-Nixon, Johnson, H.W. Bush, Truman.

    Like

  22. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “A just objective statement for any government policy requires us all to be equal under the law. ”
    If that we coming from anyone but you, I ‘d call them a communist.

    Like

  23. George Rebane Avatar

    DougK 954am – Hard to tell with whom you are talking, but your ever illuminating non-sequiturs do get one’s attention. How on earth do you equate the quoted statement with what is practiced under communism, a system of governance which structures its citizens into classes and in which laws are class-specific?

    Like

  24. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    Rebane 10:03am Ditto. Do the socialists/communists among us ever read the work of their forefathers (Marx, Engels and Lenin)? I have and therefore I can’t make any sense out of such statements (Keachie 9:54am).
    The suggestion that a communist society could exist without classes (and the class-specific laws that MUST exist) is irrational (ignorant at best). To suggest that those who are elevated to positions of power would not have benefits greater than the lower classes (and completely different laws for themselves) shows a trust in human nature that I cannot comprehend.

    Like

  25. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Scratch one more business due to union greed and Obamanomics.
    But at the same time the “food police” will be calling this a victory.
    Hostess has hung up it’s apron. So I wonder if those union guys are now on the phone begging “O” to nationalize Hostess just like he did with GM.
    Seen the stock market? A damned pretty sight for the Wall St. haters.
    Now to Israel. Not a word out of the White House. “O” (ha,,) said he has Israel’s back. We shall see real soon, but as of now,, NO he doesn’t.
    Now back to my ” prepping”.

    Like

  26. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    Using the law to make damn certain everyone is “equal.”

    Like

  27. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    “To suggest that those who are elevated to positions of power would not have benefits greater than the lower classes (and completely different laws for themselves) shows a trust in human nature that I cannot comprehend. ”
    So, that explains how the Constitution supports Congress and the other branches of government having LIFETIME HEALTHCARE that is well above the standards set for the rest of the not so equal citizens, née, citizens of the second or lower classes? The Commies are not alone in such behaviors.
    The notion that an employer is looking out for the best interest of his/her employees and customers also stretches my trust in human nature. Many are good for that, then then there is Papa John who comes out and says no I don’t. I don’t think I’ve ever had their pizza, and now I know I never will.

    Like

  28. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    Providing equal protection under the law and ‘making damn certain everyone is equal’ are two VERY different things.
    Using laws/FORCE to ‘make damn certain everyone is equal’ is the foundation of tyranny.
    Having equal laws for all and letting ability, personal values, ambition, self interest, luck and providence to determine success is the basis of liberty.

    Like

  29. MikeyMcD Avatar
    MikeyMcD

    I consider my employees to be members of my family.
    Re: congress and healthcare? early signs of how socialist we have become when our politicians vote themselves rights not permitted by their subjects.

    Like

  30. George Rebane Avatar

    MikeyMcD 1220pm – Well said. Sadly, it is a concept totally inaccessible to the Left that believes the state must impose equality through its diverse stratagems that all reduce to the use of force. The corollary that equality and liberty are opposite ends of a see-saw is a truth, that when uttered, never penetrates further than their vibrating tympanic membranes.

    Like

  31. Douglas Keachie Avatar

    You do know hwen I’m pulling your collective chains, don’t you? If your employees are members of your family, do they get healthcare above and beyond minimum wage? I don not know what line of work you are in. McDonald’s in Brunswick?

    Like

  32. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    I don’t think they are polar opposites. Liberty is a lot more straightforward than equality.
    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equality/

    Like

  33. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 529pm – I’m afraid that you have missed a great point of governance. “straightforward” is a fuzzy concept that means something to you, but has nothing to in the allocation of liberty and equality to a population. People in liberty will achieve with great inequality according to ability and chance. To enforce equality of outcome requires curtailment of liberties; the more equal the end the less liberty in the process, until all wind up as equal slaves.
    As I said, this point is so fundamental, historically only the most dedicated collectivist ideologues have missed the obvious trade-off required.

    Like

  34. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    GeorgeR 1029pm – I’m afraid you have missed my point. I understand perfectly your governance polarity.
    What does straightforward mean?
    “straight·for·ward (strt-fôrwrd)
    adj. 1. Proceeding in a straight course; direct.
    2. a. Not circuitous or evasive; honest and frank. b. Free from ambiguity or pretense; plain and open.
    adv. 1. In a direct course or an honest manner.”
    This is how I describe liberty. It is straightforward. There are no different types of liberty.
    There are, however, different manifestations of equality. Like I wrote in my last comment on this thread, equality is complex, but we can certainly start with the two primaries: 1) Equality in outcome, and 2) Equality of opportunity.
    I don’t support 1) and I mostly support 2). And this is at the heart of why the Republicans and Mitt Romney failed to win the hearts and minds of America this election–the younger and browner voting citizens of this country are increasingly sensitive to equality of opportunity in the 21st century.
    This is why the Southern Strategy is fading.
    I write these words as a free service to conservatives everywhere who are interested in ensuring that the Republican Party does not go Whig, which they are in danger of doing if they don’t get their collective acts together.

    Like

  35. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 1107pm – The discussion and debate and the introduction of their pairing involve ONLY the notion of outcome equality. Pulling in the notion of opportunity equality does dull the point and removes crispness from the discussion without entirely removing the truth of the general notion of their being opposites. As argued by the Left, even the imposition of many forms of equal opportunity come at the price of reducing liberty. Equality under law was the only exception bequeathed by our Founders.
    Nevertheless, your concern for the well-being and survival of the Republicans is noted with appreciation. 😉

    Like

Leave a comment