Casual Observations

Teddy's Mortmain Manque

Wow, what a shock. And here I thought the “Kennedy seat” had been set aside, by state law, as one that could only be occupied by a Kennedy, in perpetuity. I mean, gosh, after all, they are “America's royal family” -- and who else do you know who lives in a “compound” (other than military prisoners)? Maybe it's just as well, though – I mean, the Kennedy DNA has pretty much thinned out over the last couple of generations, to the point where, if it weren't for all that money they “might” qualify as day-laborers. Still, it is a curious thing to see the last hereditary Senate seat being taken over by a member of the opposing party. Not that it will make any difference, of course -- nothing is more pathetic than the sight of Americans, when they "get mad" at the Democrats, voting for the Republicans -- or vice versa. The fact is, they are voting for the Regime in either case. How long until they get so mad that they simply vote both the major parties out of power -- for keeps?

The Hands of Fate

If I were Obama, I'd be insulted. OK, so the “Doomsday Clock” has just been set back one whole minute. Whoop-de-freakin-do! It still shows 6 minutes to midnight – that's six minutes out of (I assume, though they never say) 12 hours... in other words, 1/120... in other words, we are still 119/120 of the way to Doomsday. And here I would have thought the election of Obama would set the Doomsday Clock back... oh, an hour at least, maybe even more. Note that the farthest back it was ever set was 17 minutes, i.e. 11:43 PM – and that was in 1991. So are you telling me that things today are 65% (11/17) worse than they were in 1991? I don't believe it. The last time we were at the 6 minute mark was 1988 – when the Soviet Union was still a going concern. I think some recalibration is in order – sort of along the same lines as the Nobel Prize Committee. You know, an award for “most likely to succeed” or something.

The Party's Not Over

Lest you think that all are suffering from the recession – I beg to differ, at least when it comes to the public sector, and more specifically the public schools, who seem to be rolling in it when everyone else is patching clothes and darning socks. The Mt. Lebanon High School – chronically scandal-plagued, even though it is located in an upscale suburb of Pittsburgh – has “capped” the cost of a proposed renovation at $113.3 million. Yes, you heard it right – that's not the cost of an entire new school, simply the cost of “renovating” what they already have. Among other benefits, this, um, economic stimulus, suburban-style, would raise residential property taxes by 45% over the next five years. That's what those chumps get for living in a crime-free neighborhood! And this is for the benefit of 1900 students (the current enrollment) – which comes out to approx. $60,000 per head. Heck, for that amount you could buy them each a two-bedroom condo. (Or enroll them in a private school for all four years.) And – this is the best part -- “the renovation would reduce the size of the school” -- thus providing a new meaning for the phrase "less is more". Yes – the public school Neros continue to fiddle while Rome burns, and the public seems helpless to do anything about it. And meantime – just a note in passing – the Gulf Tower, in downtown Pittsburgh, 44 floors in all, is planning an upgrade. Price tag? $1 million. Just shows you what the profit motive can accomplish, as opposed to the bottomless pit of taxpayer funding.

The Bungler of Bengal

The recent death of an eminent Indian politician caused a bit of comment on the subcontinent. It seems that Jyoti Basu was, for many years, the ruler of the state of West Bengal -- “at the head of an elected communist government.” Well, for one thing, it should at least be admitted that it is possible to have an elected communist government. So far so good. And, predictably – like so many of his counterparts in Latin America – “he remained popular with the rural masses” because of his efforts at land reform (which were probably about as sophisticated as those of Robert Mugabe). But here's the key sentence – the “kicker” as I like to call it: “Basu and his Communist Party of India (Marxist) failed to attract the investment flowing into regions like Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka." What? You mean a communist government – elected or not – failed to “attract investment”? Gee, I wonder why. Could it be because all communist governments to date have made a specialty out of confiscating capital and punishing the productive? A more sober assessment of Basu was offered by an academic official: Basu “presided over... the underdevelopment of West Bengal for almost (a) quarter of a century”. That's beautiful -- “presided over underdevelopment”. But isn't that what always happens? Isn't that what Castro's been up to all these years... and the Kims of North Korea... and now Venezuela's Chavez? Don't they always wind up presiding over, basically, misery – because it's misery that keeps them in power? And don't they, in this respect as well as many others, resemble our own liberals and Democrats?

Safety Last

And here's another surprise. “Safety outranks liberty in poll.” “Americans lean more toward giving up some of their liberty in exchange for more safety.” And, 51% agreed that “it is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism.” Now, this is from an article that focuses on air safety... but you know darn well that the findings, in principle, apply across the board – and, in fact, have for a quite a few decades – since way before 9-11. (I say it started with the New Deal -- just like almost everything else that's bad.) If all it were about was how large a bottle of shampoo you could pack in your carry-on, it would hardly be a problem. As far as air travel is concerned – for one thing, it's not a “civil right”. It's more like a business deal between you and the airline, and if you don't like their terms, you have the option of simply not flying. I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about. But on the other hand, I wonder why there isn't more fuss about all the erosions of liberty resulting, as night follows day, from the events of 9-11 and the government's response to them. A hard-core conspiracy theorist might say that the events of 9-11 were designed to provide the government with an excuse to relieve Americans of most of their few remaining freedoms; I would say they weren't designed that way so much as that they constituted sort of windfall for those of a totalitarian bent. And of course, the “war on terror” that followed provides an ongoing excuse for any number of intrusive measures -- “temporary” of course, just until the “war on terror” is won, which – by definition – it never will be. And the reason the “war on terror” is particularly suited for this purposes is that it's a war on everything and nothing – on “terror” -- which is itself an abstraction, but which can “occur” anywhere on earth at any time... and not in, or from, any particular country or geographical area, where there might be a chance of at least defining what would constitute “victory”. But how can we know whether we have succeeded in killing, or arresting, all the “terrorists”? We can't. So, since there is no criterion for victory, i.e. for stopping the war, it has to go on as far into the future as anyone can see. What could be more ideal for the turning of “temporary” restrictions on freedom into permanent ones? It's much better than a real war... or a recession, or a depression. It's better than a natural disaster, or a plague or epidemic. It's sort of like saying that the government has to protect us from Men From Mars. They're out there – we're certain of that. And they could attack at any time. Just try proving otherwise! Can you prove there are no Men From Mars, or that they aren't about to mount an attack? Of course not. So shut up and make obeisance to the Patriot Act.