perfidy

Dennis Powell has an interesting idea. Sell or give the Hubble Space telescope to a private foundation, and let them raise the money for a rescue mission. He argues that it would remove pressure from NASA at this awkward stage, and be a useful test case for more general space privatization. And hey, it might save Hubble. And that would be a good thing.

The Telegraph says this is the woman who will derail the Kerry candicacy: 

No, really.

Triumph the Insult Dog was seen in Quebec replaing street signs with ones that read, "Quebecqueer Street" and "Rue des Pussies."

Alexa McDonough, a legislator for the left-leaning New Democrats, described the program as "racist filth" and "utterly vile" and demanded the government seek the return of the C$1 million subsidy.

"There may be those who would say, 'Isn't this interfering with freedom of expression?' It's not interfering to say we will not publicly fund this kind of vile, vicious hatemongering," McDonough told reporters.

Since I'm always late with this, I'm going to do it ahead of time. Even though I don't have a link yet. I'm guessing, that on Sunday, if you click this, it will take you to the Sunday Comics over at BTD. If not, just click here, and hunt for it. It'll be good for you.

Jonah Goldberg links to this treasure trove of classic 80s games, transmogrified to be playable on the interweb.

Apparently, an indefatigable British geneologist and historian, Dr Michael Jones, has determined that the rightful king of England is some guy named Mike who lives in New South Wales and works on a sheep station. It seems that the father of King Edward IV was not, in fact, Richard the Duke of York. Rather, his mother Lady Cicely Neville was making nasty with a commoner French archer named Blaybourne while Richard was off fighting his cuckolder's countrymen. And as a result, Edward's younger brother Clarence and his offspring should by right be the royal line. It might be a good thing to get a Plantagenet back on the throne, as I think the Hanoverian line has gotten a little, dare I say, inbred and weak.

Unfortunately, King Michael Abney-Hastings has no desire to leave Oz and take up his duties as King of England, Defender of the Faith, etc.

"When they told me I was surprised all right. But I don't think it will worry us too much. Titles don't mean much out here and I have no intention of leaving Jerilderie.

"Why would you want to be king anyway? They can't do anything without someone on their back. This thing will all blow over in a couple of weeks and life will go back to normal."

He does have two sons, though...

[wik] Coincidently, I almost bought this the other day: The Perfect Prince: The Mystery of Perkin Warbeck and His Quest for the Throne of England. This incident happened a little after the incident of bastardry described above, and involved a young man called Perkin Warbeck claimed to be one of the sons of Edward IV, consigned as boys to the Tower of London and supposedly murdered by order of their uncle, Richard III. Invading England with support from both commoners and princes, Warbeck challenged the legitimacy of the first Tudor king, Henry VII.

I'm adding three new blogs to the blogroll. Every single one of these people is depressingly well-informed, ego-crushingly intelligent, and have mad writing skillz. The links below each lead to a particularly fine, recent vintage post.

• Porphyrogenitus, on liberals,
• Wretchard of the Belmont Club on proliferation, and
• Dan Darling's Regnum Crucis on immigration.

Also, I've added another category, for useful resources. The first two entries are StrategyPage and GlobalSecurity.org, both invaluable sources for information on war, weapons, intelligence and strategy. Lots of good reading to keep you busy.

GuitarPicker (Loyal Reader #0011) has tipped us off to the existence of a new website which encourages sponsoring vegetarians. They even have a logo: 

What does it mean to sponsor a vegetarian? It means that you have to find someone in your life who's a really big pain in everyone's ass every time you want to go out to eat, and then you commit yourself to eating THREE times the amount of meat you'd normally consume to make up for all the meat that your vegetarian buddy isn't eating. It's that simple! That way, you can reverse the guilt trip that they've been laying on us for years by not only neutralizing their cause, but making it actually worse by eating more animals than would have ever been eaten had they not chosen to become vegetarians!

What if vegetarians say they don't care because we'll become fat by sponsoring them? I've thought about that already. All you have to do is exercise. I know it goes against the being lazy rule that I advocate so much, but this is so spiteful that it more than makes up for the exercise you'll have to do--which means that if you choose the 3 to 1 plan and sponsor a vegetarian, you're being so spiteful that you can't lose! If you have a choice, eat three separate types of animal to maximize your efficiency! Only offered beef? No problem: visit the zoo and eat a monkey!

I always thought that vegetarianism was extremely selective. Why is it okay to kill animals, and not plants? And why do animal rights activists only want to save the cute animals? And why do they all wear leather shoes? Besides, our ancestors fought and died for millennia to put us on top of the food chain, so how can we spit on their memory by not eating meat?

[wik] Best bumper sticker so far this year: Save a tree. Eat a beaver.

I just noticed that comments have, for the first time, exceeded the number of posts. This is an important milestone, significant because it indicates that people really, really like us. Only about half of the comments are from Johno or I; and in the early days, we didn't have the technology for comments at all. We have had some very productive and interesting conversations so far, especially considering that we are still only slithering reptiles in the TTLB's great blog food chain. I'd like to thank everyone who has commented, your thoughts were life changing and profound for us. And for all you lazy, shiftless lurkers, start commenting, or the dog gets it in the head: 

The Sun is reporting that Alex Polier, 24, is the center of the Kerry controversy. Still not much info, but the British Press is beginning to run with the story. The major American media (CNN, FOX, ABC, CBS, NYTimes) completely ignored the story last night, and as of this morning, still have nothing on their front pages. Which is a little odd. When the Lewinsky story broke, they were at least reporting on the fact that there was a story.

A couple links to Marginal Revolution: first, an exceedingly brief post, which I will quote in full:

In 1960 Taiwan was poorer than the Congo, here is the source.

Second, some thoughts on the just released Economic Report of the President.

The second post gives us some useful information on the whole economy thingy. Read it and we'll talk. But what really snagged my attention was the first one. I remember from when I actually read books and went to school; that at one time, as decolonialization was getting into full swing, everyone thought that Africa was the next best thing, soon to take advantage of all that brilliant and useful socialism and make the Dark Continent into the worker's paradise. Asia, on the other hand, was believed destined for misery and poverty.

Well, that sure happened. And the key, really, is this:

The Index of Economic Freedom

TL Hines is back with his weekly Dark Horse Dialogues. Now that the Kerry train is in danger of derailment, maybe the Donald Sauter candidacy is about to take off. Well, probably not. If it weren't for the candidate web pages he gives, I would be convinced that he's making this stuff up. But no one is going to make up page after page of classical guitar tablature, just for the sake of a joke. Not even a wierdo like TL. And I really doubt that anyone who wasn't entirely too serious would ever think to add this to one of his tablature pages:

ETHICAL PLEA: I do ask one thing regarding the printing of this tablature: please try to refrain from using government or your company resources to do it. Or, if you feel you have no reasonable alternative, please reimburse your employer for use of his material and equipment. I'd hate to think that my - and other people's - taxes and expenses for goods and services are paying for your recreation on the job. I'm funny like that.

While following the Kerry bimbo eruption trail, I ran across this link to a Kausfiles from back in the double M. The Feiler Faster Thesis is simply that:

The news cycle is much faster these days, thanks to 24-hour cable, the Web, a metastasized pundit caste constantly searching for new angles, etc. As a result, politics is able to move much faster, too, as our democracy learns to process more information in a shorter period and to process it comfortably at this faster pace. Charges and countercharges fly faster, candidates' fortunes rise and fall faster, etc. [Italics in original.]

Kaus mentioned this today in the context of the public's seeming unawareness of such basic Kerry facts as the fact that he threw someone else's medals over the White House fence. This is likely going to be overshadowed by the new bombshell - though hints are now coming out that this particular weakness has been known, at least in theory and in some quarters, for a while now. We shall have to see how this all plays out.

This primary season has had more twists and turns than a sidewinder with MS. We had the magnificent entry of Gen. Clark, then the Dean implosion, now this Kerry thing - along with the usual run of campaign bizarreness. Clark might be endorsing Kerry - even though he apparently knew of the coming bimbo eruption - to angle for a VP slot if Kerry survives the battle. Dean has stayed in, possibly because of his knowledge of it. Edwards must be dancing a jig, because there was little hope that the media or Dean would cut into Kerry enough that he could take the driver's seat. Only Al Sharpton has nothing to gain from this.

If this story has legs, it seems unlikely that Kerry will be able to reposition himself before the next round of primaries, because this story won't be leaving the front pages. Momentum is a thing of the past, as Dean has already discovered.

Click the more link for some fun stuff back from the 2000 election.

It also follows, if you buy the FFT, that Wilentz is wrong: Bush has plenty of time to reposition himself for the general election. His strategists will deploy the cliché that from March to November is "an eternity in politics." (Look at how Bush Sr. went from Gulf War hero to general-election loser! Look at how Clinton came back from the brink of disgrace! Look at how Gore went from being a stiff to unstoppable!) But if the Feiler Faster Thesis is correct, from now to November isn't an eternity anymore. It's more like five eternities. Bush probably has time to move to the center, move back to the right, feint at protectionism, convert to Catholicism, divorce his wife, admit he dropped acid, denounce vivisection, embrace Lenora Fulani, enroll in Bob Jones University, then tearfully apologize for all of the above on Meet the Press and still move back to the vital center again before November. OK, I'm exaggerating. But you get the point. We have no more idea what the public image of Bush will be in November than we have of what Chicago will look like in the year 2100.

I've just been discussing the recent passage of the law banning muslim headscarves in France with my office mate. To be sure, the law is even handed, in that it also forbids Jews from wearing yarmulkes and Christians from wearing large crosses. But participants in a protest in Egypt believe that the law is anti-Islam. And of course they're right.

The prohibitions for Jews and Christians is just a figleaf for a spectacularly lame attempt to do something about the Muslim minority in France that now is over 14% of the population. Theodore Dalrymple wrote in the City Journal a frightening description of the cités surrounding most French cities, and inhabited by millions of poorly assimilated North African Muslims. Until now, there has been little if any attempt on the part of the French or their government to construct any sort of policy for assimilating the growing Muslim minority. This despite the fact that riots, crime and support for radical Islam is rampant in the Muslim neighborhoods.

This effort is far too little, and perhaps too late as well. It has the simultaneous disadvantages of infuriating the Muslims while doing absolutely nothing about the underlying problems. It is a symbolic bandaid on a metaphorical sucking chest wound.

While I on one level I am feeling a delicious sort of anticipatory schadenfreude contemplating the disaster that could be facing France in the not too distant future, the fact is that despite recent French obsteperousness, it would be a very bad thing for the west if la France became the battleground in the fight between civilization and radical Islam.

A word to the wise: if you've gone almost five years without your regularly scheduled cleaning at the friendly neighborhood dentist, you may as well just never get one. I feel like my teeth have been peeled, and it hurts to breath through my mouth. The hygienist was gentle with the five megawatt, ultrasonic pain causing device, but I kept thinking of the line from Fight Club, "You can swallow a quart of blood a day and not get sick."

And because I had been so lax in attending to keeping my oral cavity in tip-top condition, I have to go back in a month do do it all over again.

Drudge is flipping out over news that John Kerry is trying to fight off a media probe into a recent infidelity. Here's what Drudge has to say:

CAMPAIGN DRAMA ROCKS DEMOCRATS: KERRY FIGHTS OFF MEDIA PROBE OF RECENT ALLEGED INFIDELITY, RIVALS PREDICT RUIN

A frantic behind-the-scenes drama is unfolding around Sen. John Kerry and his quest to lockup the Democratic nomination for president, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.

Intrigue surrounds a woman who recently fled the country, reportedly at the prodding of Kerry, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

A serious investigation of the woman and the nature of her relationship with Sen. John Kerry has been underway at TIME magazine, ABC NEWS, the WASHINGTON POST, THE HILL and the ASSOCIATED PRESS, where the woman in question once worked.

MORE

A close friend of the woman first approached a reporter late last year claiming fantastic stories -- stories that now threaten to turn the race for the presidency on its head!

In an off-the-record conversation with a dozen reporters earlier this week, General Wesley Clark plainly stated: "Kerry will implode over an intern issue." [Three reporters in attendance confirm Clark made the startling comments.]

The Kerry commotion is why Howard Dean has turned increasingly aggressive against Kerry in recent days, and is the key reason why Dean reversed his decision not to drop out of the race after Wisconsin, top campaign sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

Well, just when we all thought it was settled...

If this is true, then Kerry is a complete moron. If you can't keep it in your pants when you know a bazillion reporters (not to mention Republican oppo research teams) are going to be scrutinizing what you had for dinner twenty years ago, you don't deserve to be president.

I've been having an interesting argument with Spoons over his quixotic effort to get conservatives to oppose Bush. (This has nothing to do with Gay Marriage day here at Perfidy, but I'm going to run with it anyway. Spoons is getting married, but to a girl. So he isn't qualified to speak on that issue.) He is of the position that it will not advance the conservative agenda to have Bush reelected and confirm in the collective mind of the GOP elite that pandering to the left (little opposition to gun control, prescription drug benefits, huge spending on liberal programs with no reform, etc.) is a successful election strategy. He says:

As conservatives, we can't do much about what kind of Democrats we'll get, because we're not going to vote for one. We can, however, do something about what kind of Republicans we get, by voting for good ones, and refusing to vote for bad ones. If we take the tack advocated by Kim (and, in fairness, the overwhelming majority of conservatives), and insist upon voting for any Republican, no regardless of whether he's conservative or not, then we give up any control over what kind of Republicans we get. Republican positions on domestic issues will then be decided by swing voters and soccer moms.

This is a valid point. And if I thought that there was any chance that voting against (or at least not for) Bush would result in the second coming of Reagan, I might sign up for his program. But as I said in the comments to his post,

I can see where you're coming from. And in all honesty, I would support your ideas more strongly except for the fact that no matter what kind of drubbing the GOP gets, it will always attempt to pander to the middle. Pandering only goes left in this country. Our only hope of getting the candidate you are dreaming of is for him to arrive as Reagan did - by fighting for a strong conservative policy based on a moral conception of politics. That candidate could rally support from the true-blue conservatives, the moderates and even people in the other party. But the GOP will never try, and never could, impose a strong conservative agenda on a mediocre candidate, president or congress. And they won't go looking either.

Politics is compromise, and the perfect is the enemy of the good. If we shoot every candidate who is half good, we will not be in a position to elect one that is good. The Republican party spent decades in the political wilderness until Reagan saved them. We can't count on having another Reagan everytime we need one. The Goldwater style political idealism that holds absolute positions on conservative issues is a ticket to irrelevancy and being locked out of high office. We need to win where we can, and as often as we can - even if the victories are partial, or not what we wanted.

The grassroots movement in the Republican party that resulted in the congressional victories back in 94 is an example of how the rank and file party members can pull the party to a more conservative viewpoint. This is the kind of thing that conservatives can do to influence the direction of the party. While we do not know yet whether Bush is serious, the outcry among conservatives over excessive spending seems to have had an effect on his policy. We can be sure that conservative outcry would have no effect whatsoever on a Kerry administration.

So while I share with Spoons the concerns with Bush's policies in many areas, I cannot abandon my support for the best deal we're going to get, conservativeness-wise. The proper course is to get the man who is closest to you in viewpoint into office, and then try to move him in the right direction.

I can't remember where I saw it, but not too long ago I read that the center of most people's objections to gay marriage can be summed up by the "ick factor." Most people in the reasonable middle of American life have come to the conclusion that gay people should not be hassled, and we'll make use of their talents in interior decorating and fashion, but that otherwise we'd really rather not be confronted by the icky reality of guys... kissing. And other things. While most people would never go out of their way to oppress the lavender minority, they still feel in their hearts what Sam Kinnison said:

How can a man look at another man's hairy ass, and feel love?

And this is where gay marriage comes in. This is the gay populace intruding the ickiness into respectable, normative straight institutions. And most people just don't like the idea. They're not likely to crusade on the issue unless it's crammed down their throats. (Which is what the amendment campaign would do. It would force people to choose sides. And by and large, we'd really be better off avoiding that.)

Left alone, consensus would probably drift towards greater acceptance of gays, and their inclusion in institutions like marriage. Americans don't, as a matter of course, like excluding anyone from anything - at least theoretically. And that bedrock presumption is what MLK played on in the sixties, shaming respectable white americans into believing, and acting on what was right.

I am personally affected by the ick factor when it comes to gay marriage. I don't feel that it's a good thing, and that the institution of marriage as currently defined supports many good things in our soceity. I fear that changing the definition will have some deleterious effects. Of course, this does not mean that I think that gays should be discriminated against in hiring, housing, or through outdated laws like Texas' sodomy statute. (Which also, IIRC, applied to heteros as well in some regards.) Those who argue that the sad state of hetero marriage is an argument in favor of gay marriage are getting it wrong. If it's in bad shape, it needs to be strengthened, not diluted.

My considered opinion is that I would like this issue to go away. We're not to the point (on either side) where we're ready to be discussing it reasonably, and now we are perilously close to permanently polarizing the debate, as happened to the much more serious issue of abortion when Roe v. Wade was handed down.

This guy surely impressed his parents:

Chemistry Mid Term

Thanks to Mapgirl for the link. I'm sure she could do much better.

[wik] Rangitoto College? Sounds like a school for mangy dogs from Oz to me. I bet they have Gay Marriage there.

The President's Commission on the Moon, Mars and Beyond is soliciting comments. Go here and you can submit your thoughts on space exploration, or just complain about the boring design of the website.

And speaking of governments seeking comments, this bit from Wired talks about how the government has been talking to game developers - specifically the designers of large multiplayer online games. At a conference arranged by Beth Noveck of the New York Law School, game developers and government officials sat down to talk about democracy, feedback and public participation in the legislative process. Interesting stuff, which puts me in mind (as do many things) of this essay by David Brin.

I have thought for quite a while now that pure democracy is overrated. Rule of law and a republican system are more important. But, that does not mean that I place more importance on the government that I do on the individual. As Brin talks about in his essay, the largely untapped capacity of individual citizens to operate in self organizing and directed groups is consistently ignored by the "experts." While we have (with the exception of central planning Marxists and Senators from New York) based our entire economic and social lives on this principle, we are reluctant to embrace it for security or government purposes.

I think that we lost something when we gave up on the idea of the general militia. But, the growth of the internet, and yes even the blogosphere has perhaps led to the rebirth of this ideal. Websites like the Northeast Intelligence Network, and others like it; Winds of Change and the Command Post; and hundreds of fevered bloggers collecting, analyzing and annotating countless bits of information are like a general militia devoted to military and strategic intelligence.

Obviously, much of the heavy lifting militarily will still be done by the Army, Navy and Marines. But that does not mean that we don't have a role, and one that the government should begin to take seriously, and not hinder us from performing.