You Cannot Be Serious

Continuing his ascent toward globe-girdling Godhead, Barack Obama has now been given the Nobel Peace Prize. The Peace Prize is already little more than a political and cultural absurdity, a rubber-stamp of leftist adulation — but this award, in which the Nobel Committee shows all the dignity and sober judgment of a bunch of teenage girls at a Jonas Brothers concert, is remarkable even by the usual tendentious standards. What, exactly, has Mr. Obama — whose nomination, by the way, was submitted when he had been in office for about two weeks — done? Aside from making fawning salaams and obeisances before Islam in Cairo, and apologizing to all at every opportunity for America’s central role as creator and sustainer of all the world’s ills, his only accomplishments to date have been the extraction of tentative support from Russia for nuclear sanctions against Iran, and a handful of vague and hopeful speeches about a better tomorrow.

There was a time when the Prize was, at least, given for achievements, not aspirations. But I suppose we shouldn’t be too hard on the Nobel Committee: to their credit, they refrained from awarding Mr. Obama top honors in all the other categories as well.

So Sorry

When we enumerate those few qualities that, despite Man’s infinite capacity for folly and cruelty, reveal nevertheless a transcendent spark that sets us apart from the beasts, chief among them, perhaps, is our astonishing ability at times to create, even as we groan upon the rack, works of art of timeless and ennobling beauty. We think of the music of Bach and Beethoven; the plays of Shakespeare; the paintings and sculpture of Leonardo and Michelangelo; the novels of Tolstoy; the great cathedrals of Europe.

Or, if that stuff doesn’t do it for you, there’s this:

For Nuit Blanche 2009, The Apology Project will be staged in its largest scale thus far. A cluster of 55 people wearing large brown paper bags on their bodies will congest a public hallway and personally apologize to every person who ventures through them. The uncanniness of this human blockade will disrupt the regular flow of traffic and provoke reflection about passive aggressive behavior. Who are these people? Why are they here? Why are they wearing brown paper bags over their bodies? There is an enigma about what precisely they are sorry for and why they are choosing to continue doing something that they find reproachable. If it is their awkward presence in the space that they are apologizing for, why do they chose to remain there? Why not just stop an offensive behavior rather than continue to indulge in it and apologize?

Encountering something like this moves me to such depths of emotion that I am simply unable to find words to do it justice. Read all about it here. And for an aesthetic experience of incomparable import and ineffably poignant beauty, be sure to visit the artist’s hompepage, here.

Great Circle

If you’re like me, you’ve spent a lot of time wondering why Saturn’s moon Iapetus is dark on one side. Well, here’s your answer.

Tar Baby

President Obama is grappling with a momentous and extremely difficult choice in Afghanistan. It is a grim situation, and there are really no good options; there is also no consensus amongst his advisers, or the punditry at large, about what we ought to do. Reader JK, who always has his ear to the ground, has sent us a link to a brief article by Henry Kissinger in which the former Secretary of State — who, however you may feel about him, is certainly an experienced hand — examines the problem.

Read More »

Fourplay

With thanks to my colleague Eugene Dushlin for sending this my way, here’s a delightful video clip featuring some very nimble guitar-playing.

…And The Clocks Were Striking Thirteen

According to the New York Times, the city’s Education Department has now banned bake sales. Here.

(Hat tip: The Stiletto.)

Atheists In The Trenches

Over at Maverick Philosopher Bill Vallicella cites, with apparent approbation, an essay by the atheist author Julian Baggini that criticizes the agenda of “New Atheism”, exemplified by the “Four Horsemen” Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens, as misbegotten and counterproductive. What Bill does not link to is a piquant response, at the same website, by the Canadian philosopher George Williamson.

Read More »

Sent Packing

I see that Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Olympics has been rejected. Lord knows why President Obama thought it was appropriate to the dignity of his august office to go, hat in hand, to Copenhagen to petition the IOC on behalf of his hometown; his failure to carry the day is now an embarrassment he, and we, could well have done without.

P.S. While we’re at it, can anybody explain to me why on Earth they (whoever it is that’s in charge of such things) decided to light up the Empire State Building in red and gold last night to honor 60 years of Communist rule in China??

Maybe We’ll Win After All

With talent like this, how can America lose? (Hat tip to Matt Pierson.)

Can’t Touch This

Anybody who had the patience to wade through yesterday’s far too long-winded post (do forgive me for having such a low-rent editorial staff) knows that I have religion on my mind lately. In that post I mentioned, as I have often done in the past, the magnificent defensive arsenal of highly evolved religions. I ran across a splendid example in the subway today — a poster carrying the following message:

“Even though you may know the Bible, spiritual life is hard because Satan deceives you into accepting your thoughts. Living life with God becomes easy when you forsake what you know for the Word. Discover the secrets of true spiritual life at the Bible Crusade.”

-Pastor Ock Soo Park

Wow! That, I have to say, is getting things right out in the open, and no shilly-shallying. You have “thoughts”? And you were going to accept them? Man, that was close; you’re reading this poster just in time. Do you “know” things? Yikes! Forsake them at once. All that stuff — knowledge, thoughts, or anything else that enters your mind that didn’t come from Pastor Ock Soo Park — comes from Satan. And you know that’s true, because you have Pastor Ock Soo Park’s word for it, rather than anything you might “think” about it yourself, which comes from Satan, as we just explained.

Got it?

Is Secularism Maladaptive?

In the paper the other day there was an item about Pope Benedict’s recent remarks to the people of the Czech Republic. The Pope, speaking to one of the most secular societies on Earth, sought earnestly to persuade them of the dangers of a society without God.

On a superficial level this is easy enough to understand; after all, Benedict is the CEO of a huge, multinational business that has been losing market share at an accelerating pace in recent years. We’ve seen a lot of this sort of thing lately: I recall, for example, the CEO of General Motors admonishing Congress not too long ago about the dangers of a society without Chevy Camaros.

But this is a special case, of course: the Catholic Church has been in business even longer than Ford, GM, and Chrysler put together. More than that, though, the Church markets a product that has, for twenty centuries, inspired some of the fiercest brand loyalty in all of merchandising. Which is, really, the point.

Read More »

William Chung, 1935-2009

It is with the profoundest sorrow that I must mark the death of Grandmaster William J. Chung, who was my kung-fu master for many years. He had been suffering from cancer, and collapsed at his home in New Jersey a few days ago. Attempts to revive him failed.

Read More »

Peeing And Becoming

There was an amusing anecdote in my family about my long-departed Scottish grandmother, who, in the course of helping to potty-train one of her grandchildren (indeed I think it might have been yours truly), attempted to stimulate the “wee bairn” by running the water in the sink. The plan, however, immediately backfired, and she ended up having rather suddenly to usurp the throne herself, amid gales of laughter from those present.

This story popped into my mind this evening, and made me wonder: just how did we acquire that response to the sound of running water, anyway? As a good Darwinian, I have to imagine it is likely to have been in some way adaptive, but how did such an adaptation arise?

A guess: perhaps the masking effect of the sound provided an opportunity for our ancestors to relieve themselves in stealth when they might otherwise have been overheard by a predator, or revealed themselves to prey.

Any thoughts, readers?

Race To The Bottom

A reader emailed me a link today, and asked: “Ought the government prosecute?”

The story in question is a distasteful one: apparently somebody set up a poll on Facebook that asked the question “Should Obama be killed?”

According to the linked item, there were three options: “Yes“, “No“, and “Maybe, if he cuts my health care“.

This is, of course, reprehensible and utterly unfunny — and probably very stupid, as I imagine the Secret Service will be making things mighty hot for the idiot who thought this would be nothing more than an amusing prank. They take threats against the President very, very seriously, as they should. The political and racial climate is terribly tense at the moment, and the Secret Service are surely on edge.

So: ought the government prosecute? The answer to that depends on another question: is what this jackass did illegal? I don’t know the answer to that, but I have a feeling it might be, or at least close enough to give it a go. With my blessing. He certainly didn’t do the loyal opposition any favors.

Have we lost all decency?

No need to answer, it’s a silly question.

O Beautiful, For Spacious Skies, For Empty, Wasted Brains

We’ve been hearing a lot lately about how stupendously ignorant most Americans are about science: one in five Americans thinks the sun revolves around the Earth, for example, and almost half of us believe the Earth itself is less than 10,000 years old. But utter benightedness about basic science isn’t nearly enough, as it turns out — we are Americans, after all, and it won’t do simply to be massively ignorant about one or two subjects. As in everything else, we are determined to lead the world in empty-headedness too, it seems, and where better to start than by knowing absolutely nothing at all about America itself?

Read More »

William Safire, 1929-2009

I was startled a few hours ago to hear that the grand-daddy of political “pundits”, William Safire, whose outstandingly informative columns on politics and the use of language educated, persuaded and entertained so many of us for so long, has died of pancreatic cancer at the age of 79. I didn’t even know he was ill, and I am awfully sad to learn that he is gone.

His Times obituary is here.

High Achiever

I’m off to a concert tonight, and traveling tomorrow, so I may not have much time for blogging over the next couple of days. For tonight, then, here’s an engaging biographical sketch, from Tuesday’s New York Times of one of my favorite scientists: astronomer Dr. Carolyn Porco, who is best known for her long association with the unmanned probes that have been exploring our solar system for the past few decades.

Also, don’t miss the stunning new images of Saturn that her Cassini team have been making available, here. And while we’re at it, here’s Dr. Porco giving a talk at the TED conference a couple of years ago.

Come To Papa

I speak up for Western society often, and consider its defense important, but I have to wonder sometimes if it’s really worth it anymore. There may indeed be barbarians at the gate, but the accelerating putrescence of our popular culture reminds me daily that we have an ample store of them right here at home.

A few days ago, the dilapidated former actress MacKenzie Phillips caused a galvanic frisson of anticipation throughout the land when she remarked that she would shortly be disgorging, on the Oprah Winfrey television program, some dank and titillating secret. It has now been revealed: Ms. Phillips has graciously chosen to share with a breathless nation the news that she was for many years the sexual plaything of her father, John Phillips of The Mamas and the Papas.

This important story is, of course, front-page, breaking, blockbuster news, of vital interest to all Americans, and you can be sure that when the interview aired today its target audience, in their millions, watched with rapt attention and satisfying, visceral engagement, just as they might a chicken-wing-eating contest, or a public hanging. I guess the notion that any civilized person might wish to keep such a hideously, repugnantly distasteful thing as private as possible — as I am sure any member of my dear mother’s generation would have taken the utmost pains to do — must nowadays seem amusingly, touchingly quaint.

It would be nice if there were a decent middle ground somewhere between this and this, but I suppose I’m asking too much.

The Army of Sisyphus

The situation in Afghanistan is very bad. If we leave, the consequences will be dire, not least for the many hopeful and trusting Afghans who have taken our side against the monstrous Taliban; those who have cooperated with us will surely be slaughtered. And if we give up the fight, it is not hard to imagine how things will go in Pakistan, nor to imagine the enormous danger that fundamentalist control of the region (and of Pakistan’s nuclear arms and seaports) would pose to the rest of the world.

If we stay, on the other hand, then we will have to fight harder; we are losing ground. We will need a deeper commitment of resources, both military and civilian. But even if we redouble our efforts, it seems very unlikely indeed that we will ever create a reliable, democratic, self-sufficient ally there. Our forces, advisors, and allies will be under constant, patient attack, forever. It will cost us a steady stream of lives and money, and will be a persistent drain on our military and economic strength.

There are no good options.

The noted war correspondent Michael Yon is ever so slightly less pessimistic than I am; he writes:

Today, the war is still worth fighting, yet the goal to reengineer one of the most backward, violent places on Earth, will require a century before a reasonable person can call Afghanistan “a developing nation.” The war will not take that long – but the effort will.

There are no short-term solutions to fix this place. We are planting acorns. Oak trees grow slowly.

He also says that “Pundits who are saying we should pull out of Afghanistan today, to my knowledge, are not here.” He’s right about that.

Mr. Yon has made available an enormously informative presentation outlining the current situation in Afghanistan, and making the case for reinforcements. It’s here.

Meanwhile, a declassified version of General Stanley McChrystal’s grim assessment and request for additional forces is available online as well. Here.

As General McChrystal says in the first sentence of his report, the stakes in Afghanistan are high. This is an understatement. If you have an opinion about this war, you should care enough to be well-informed. Read these documents.

The Forgotten H.G. Wells

Today marks the 143rd anniversary of the birth of H.G. Wells, and Google has marked the occasion with one of those curious UFO banners they’ve been featuring lately.

Wells is best known today for his immortal contributions to science-fiction — such classics as The War of the Worlds, The Time Machine, and The Invisible Man — but in his own time (1866-1946) he was perhaps better known as a political author and activist, one of the most outspoken members of the “Progressive” movement from which today’s liberalism descends. He had an extraordinary faith in the ability of visionary men and women, armed with the ascendant power of science, to sweep aside the old order of the world, and to put a new and better civilization in its place.

Read More »

Irving Kristol, 1920-2009

The enormously influential conservative thinker Irving Kristol (who defined a neoconservative as “a liberal who has been mugged by reality”) has died at the age of 88. His New York Times obituary is here, and an informative Wikipedia article, with many quotes, is here.

This Would Be Funny, If It Weren’t So Sad

If you’ve been paying attention to the news this weekend, you’ve heard that President Obama — who, having apparently run out of things to take over at the federal level, now seeks to expand his suzerainty to state governments as well — has told New York’s dismally feckless governor David Paterson not to run for re-election, so as not to diminish the prospects of other Democratic hopefuls.

This seems a bit much, I have to say. Mind you, I expect there isn’t a registered voter in the Empire State who won’t dance a little jig on the day Mr. Paterson is turned out of office — but I thought we already had a system in place whereby we voters sort those matters out.

Meanwhile, the governor announced today that, presidential decreta notwithstanding, he is not about to abandon his touching little dream of actually being elected to the office he presently holds as a matter of bureaucratic contingency (readers will recall that Mr. Paterson, the former lieutenant-governor, was automatically promoted to fill the vacancy made available by the scandalous sexual escapades of his vastly abler predecessor, Elliot Spitzer).

Mr. Paterson then demonstrated his eagerness to make Mr. Obama’s gloomy prognosis a reality, by announcing his support for the Democratic mayoral candidate, William Thompson — who, I am sure, was every bit as delighted to receive the Paterson anointment as a drowning man is to be thrown an anchor.

NFI

In case you didn’t know, there’s another mystery-creature story making the rounds. This time it isn’t a pulsating blob in the sewer, but a large, glabrous shmoo-like critter (perhaps some sort of defective sloth?) allegedly stoned and beaten to death by some Panamanian teens. (The whole thing may be a hoax, of course.)

Being dead and white, it’s not likely to get much attention in the academic world, but you can see it for yourself here.

E Pluribus Pluribus

Readers may have heard, by now, about former President Jimmy Carter’s wise and helpful comment that “an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he is African-American.”

In today’s Best of the Web newsletter (second item), James Taranto has found in the Newsweek archives a remark that Mr. Carter made during his 1976 campaign:

The furor began when Carter was asked in Indianapolis to explain his recent statement that there was “nothing wrong with ethnic purity being maintained” in neighborhoods. Carter replied that he wholeheartedly supports open-housing laws that make it a crime to refuse to sell or rent a house or apartment on the grounds of race, color or creed. But he opposes Government programs “to inject black families into a white neighborhood just to create some sort of integration.” Said he: “I have nothing against a community that is made up of people who are Polish, or who are Czechoslovakians, or who are French Canadians or who are blacks trying to maintain the ethnic purity of their neighborhoods. This is a natural inclination.”

Whoa, whoa, wait a minute: did he say “ethnic purity”? That there is a “natural inclination” for people to associate with others who are like themselves? But how can that be? What about the primary obligation and summum bonum of any morally respectable society, which is, I hear, to maximize diversity at any cost?

It’s all so very confusing. If Mr. Carter was right, it could mean that emphasizing cultural diversity over unity, and promoting immigration from all over, might actually be bad for a society — that it might even, in the worst imaginable case, lead to an awful sort of politics based on little more than a kind of tribal identity, where each racial, religious, and ethnic group is just out to get what it can for itself!

We’d better keep an eye out — I’d hate to see anything like that happening here in America.

Under New Management

The U.S. has decided to abrogate its agreement with Poland and the Czech Republic to deploy advanced missile-defense systems in those Eastern European nations. This sort of inconstancy is a well-known issue with democracies such as ours, where the internal balance of power shifts every few years, but the Poles and Czechs — who, having had recent firsthand experience of tyranny, have been among America’s most stalwart allies (and who signed on for this missile agreement at the peril of arousing the ire of their reawakened former master, right next door) — are understandably upset, and as far as they are concerned, we’ll be sleeping on the couch for some time to come.

The WSJ’s editorial staff sums up the political overview here. But there are many complex strategic factors in play that are not reflected in the WSJ’s editorial: for a more military-centric perspective, have a look here. New technology is transforming military strategy, and land-based missile defenses may largely be supplanted, in the near future, by rapidly maturing naval systems. In light of that, the president’s decision may well — despite the cost in goodwill amongst our Eastern European allies — prove to be the right one.

Mary Travers, 1936-2009

We note with sadness the death of singer Mary Travers, of complication from leukemia. She was 72.

I spent some time with Ms. Travers many years ago, in the course of mixing two albums for Peter, Paul, and Mary, and it was a pleasure getting to know her. She was cheery and affable, with a wonderful, lusty laugh and a delightfully pungent sense of humor, but was also passionately committed both to her craft and her vision of social justice. My sympathies to her family, to Peter and Noel, and to her many fans.

It’s A Trap!

Too much time on your hands? Try this little diversion.

The Lady Mondegreen

In a recent post we celebrated the healing power of music. But often, when a song touches our very plimsoul, the real baraka is in the lyrics. Here, with a hat tip to Ellisson by way of Kevin Kim, is a splendid example.

Railroad Days

An item in the news today about a D.C. Metro worker who was struck and killed by a train — the third fatality in that system in recent months — was a madeleine that brought back a flood of memories of my own fifteen months as a railroad worker, back around 1975. It’s a mighty dangerous job.

I worked in the signal department of the Central Railroad of New Jersey, reporting for duty at the Boyd tower in Raritan at eight each morning. My official title was “signalman’s helper”, which meant I drove trucks, schlepped equipment, dragged cables, and, mostly, dug ditches.

Read More »

Tuts My Barreh

Ah, the healing power of music. Here.

Parallel Postulates

Lawrence Auster is a very smart fellow, and I admire his formidable presence on the ramparts of Western culture. But he has curious blind spots, for one so intelligent, and one of them has to do with Darwinism.

Have a look at this exchange with a reader, one who patiently tries to explain, as I have often done myself (see, for example, here, here, and here), why biologists use the language of intentionality when discussing evolution. We speak, without any qualms, about the “purpose” of the various “designs” of evolved organisms: a wing is “for” flying, a fang is “for” injecting venom, etc. The point is that designed things have purposes — a proposition with which even Mr. Auster would agree — but what he and others refuse to accept is that the rationale behind the existence of a wing or a fang need not be anyone’s consciously conceived or represented rationale: that there is in Nature a process from which design can emerge without the need for any teleological agency at all. Yes, there is a rationale for the existence of a wing, but it is not the bird’s, or even evolution’s, rationale; it is what Daniel Dennett has called a free-floating rationale. But it seems that Mr. Auster and like-minded like others simply cannot conceive of design — real, functional, finely tuned design — arising in the absence of a conscious and purposeful Designer. I am reluctant to psychologize, but perhaps their intuitions are simpy too irrevocably conditioned by their embedding in the world of human agency.

Read More »

How High Is It, Jimmy?

Tuesday is Primary Day here in Gotham, and as a subscriber to our fair city’s newspaper of record, I have before me the New York Times 2009 Primary Election Voter Guide. It’s very helpful.

Among the positions up for grabs is that of Mayor, which has been filled for the past two terms by New York City’s wealthiest resident, Michael Bloomberg. Having shamelessly modified the city’s term-limit laws so as to allow himself a third tour of duty, he is going to be pretty hard to knock off his perch, but there are some highly qualified challengers who might give him a serious run for his money.

Chief amongst them, I think, is one Jimmy McMillan. Here he is:

Read More »

The Loyal Opposition

Ever since he first bestrode the national stage back in 2004, people have been swooning over Barack Obama (quite literally so, in fact, during last year’s campaign). Yes, yes, he’s handsome, articulate, intelligent, and all that — I get it — but there is also something else, a certain je ne sais quoi, about the man that makes him as heady as catnip to an awful lot of otherwise sober folks.

One wants to be wary in the presence of such a Lothario, however pure his heart and noble his aim, and our friend The Stiletto — who is, for whatever mysterious reason, unensorcelled by his charms — casts a watchful eye on the phenomenon here.

Meanwhile, as long as I’m piling on, here’s a review of Mr. Obama’s healthcare speech, from someone with his eye on “that man behind the curtain“.

Bent Donut Hole

Poking around over at Normblog today, I found a link to something that I think is just brilliant: it’s a map of London’s Tube system, with all the station names replaced by anagrams. Have a look here (you can compare it with the real thing, here).

You Go, Girl

I do like that Camille Paglia. Though a liberal Democrat, she always thinks for herself — and what a lively and penetrating mind she has. In a recent column for Salon.com, she offers some common sense about this excruciating national set-to over health-care. She begins:

As an Obama supporter and contributor, I am outraged at the slowness with which the standing army of Democratic consultants and commentators publicly expressed discontent with the administration’s strategic missteps this year. I suspect there had been private grumbling all along, but the media warhorses failed to speak out when they should have — from week one after the inauguration, when Obama went flat as a rug in letting Congress pass that obscenely bloated stimulus package. Had more Democrats protested, the administration would have felt less arrogantly emboldened to jam through a cap-and-trade bill whose costs have made it virtually impossible for an alarmed public to accept the gargantuan expenses of national healthcare reform. (Who is naive enough to believe that Obama’s plan would be deficit-neutral? Or that major cuts could be achieved without drastic rationing?)

Who, indeed? We read on:

Read More »

The Great Divide

I imagine most of you watched tonight’s health-care speech. My first day back at work was a long one, and so I missed almost all of it; I’ll have to find a transcript. From the post-mortems I did see on the news channels it seems the central issues linger, including perhaps the most central of all: how on earth is all this to be paid for? The notion, for example, that in order to cover new costs we will squeeze $9 trillion out of Medicare by trimming fat without reducing services is obviously a vaporous fantasy, but seems to be part of the plan.

As has been the case throughout, both sides seem far more interested in ideological purity than practical problem-solving, and have busied themselves setting up straw-man caricatures of each other’s positions. Sarah Palin, for example, did nobody any favors by coining the ghoulish term “death panels”; the Democrats, in return, deny reality by pretending that in amongst a vastly expanded national health-care bureaucracy there will be no government panels making life-and-death decisions about allocation of resources. I am not about to rehearse here the many valid concerns that conservatives have about this initiative, but there are indeed a great many of them, and they are not all, despite Democratic protestations to the contrary, rooted in corporate greed and calumnious falsehoods. And there are a great many things that I think indeed ought to be done that could be agreed upon by almost everyone; I certainly wouldn’t suggest that things are just fine as they are, and I don’t think anyone is.

What has struck me most of all, recently, in American politics, is not only how very polarized we are — how deeply the Right and the Left in this country differ in their view of what this country ought to be — but, in particular, how very evenly divided we are. Congressional power seesaws back and forth, but in poll after poll, on issue after issue, we seem split almost exactly in half.

Why, I wonder, should that be?

100%, in the long run

Well, we’re back. Being too weary from the packing, driving, and unpacking to do much here tonight (though if I had more energy I’d write something about the silly kerfuffle over Mr. Obama’s speech to the schoolchildren), here’s a tidbit from reader JK: a website that calculates your chances of dying sometime soon.

Time In

All things must pass, and lazy summer vacations are no exception. A last perfect sunset over Duck Harbor having brought the curtain down on this year’s Wellfleet idyll, it’s back to Gotham, and back to work, for the lovely Nina and me. We’ll be getting back to normal operations here as well in the next few days.

Probing the Dar-al-Harb

We haven’t linked to anything over at Gates of Vienna in a while, but here is an excellent overview by Baron Bodissey of the many fronts upon which the ancient struggle between Islam and the West is now unfolding. The is a great deal more to this conflict than flamboyant acts of terror and costly military responses.

Oh, and speaking of probing, here’s a charming item, from our friend the Gypsy Scholar.

Wake-Up Call

The New York Times columnist and W.F. Buckley protégé David Brooks has been, amongst influential conservative voices, on e of the most admiring of, and sympathetic to, President Obama. In his most recent column, however, his tone is somewhat less approving, and for exactly the right reasons. We read:

This is a country that has always been suspicious of centralized government. This is a country that has just lived through an economic trauma caused by excessive spending and debt. Most Americans still admire Obama and want him to succeed. But if he doesn’t proceed in a manner consistent with the spirit of the nation and the times, voters will find a way to stop him.

Read the whole thing here.

Not Forgotten

Here in Cape Cod, as everyone looks back on the life of Ted Kennedy, the tone, has been, to put it mildly, approving. It’s bad form to speak ill of the recently dead, so one has hardly heard a peep about the darker aspects of Mr. Kennedy’s life, or the skeletons in his closet (not to mention his car). But, with a hat tip to our friend Mike Zaharee, here’s a peep, from the irascible Mark Steyn.

I imagine there is a family in Swiftwater, PA, whose pain is eased to hear at least one voice, in this ambient hagiographic din, that speaks for their little girl.

The Big Chill

I must say there has hardly been a time in the last ten years or more that I have disconnected myself more thoroughly from the welter and bustle of the world. I have hardly glanced at a newspaper for weeks now, and aside from switching the radio on every so often to check the weather, I have been almost entirely oblivious to events outside our secluded corner of Cape Cod. (This being Cape Cod, however, I did hear about the death of Massachusetts’s senior senator a few days back.) I’ve been spending almost all my time getting re-acquainted with family and friends, have switched on the computer only infrequently (aside from a few days of work I had to do last week), and such time as I have had to myself I’ve mostly spent spending reading and playing music, with almost no inclination to write.

Nine days to go, and we’ll be back in Gotham, the nerve-center of the modern world, and things will get back to normal here. Until then, feel free to visit our archives, or to try the “View a Random Post” link on the homepage. And don’t miss the many interesting goings-on over at Mangan’s, where our friend Dennis is, among other things, grappling manfully with Lawrence Auster on several fronts.

My best to all.

So Happy Together

While everyone else is moping about the death of Ted Kennedy (well, maybe not everybody; Mary Jo Kopechne, for one, could not be reached for comment), here at waka waka waka we are enjoying some good news, courtesy of our friend and esteemed colleague The Stiletto.

We all know, of course, that binge drinking is a delightful and restorative way to knit care’s raveled sleave — but if you’re like me, your enjoyment has been dampened in recent years by dispiriting suggestions from the medical community that alcohol consumption at this existentially therapeutic level may in fact damage the brain.

Now comes a welcome report from the University of California, San Diego, that offers the perfect solution — one that, I suspect, more than a few of you may have already stumbled upon. Here.

Town Hall Blues

Required reading: an outstanding essay on the Obama presidency by Fouad Adjami in today’s WSJ. I’m working today, so can’t comment at length myself just now, but readers are invited to weigh in below.

The gist: Mr. Obama, carried into power on a tide of anxiety and guilt, misjudges the fundamental nature of American politics by expecting that the people, having anointed him as their leader, will now refrain from criticism or dissent as he implements his radically progressive and redistributionist agenda.

The article is here.

The Narrow Way

Regular visitors to these pages will know that, in sharp contrast to the shallowness and frivolity of most weblogs, we concern ourselves here only with serious matters of the utmost philosophical import and urgency. In particular, we know that many of you turn, sometimes in bleak existential despair, to waka waka waka as place where you can join, with like-minded others, in a pertinacious and undeviating effort to get at life’s real meaning and purpose, and to unravel the world’s knottiest enigmas.

Well, friends, I am afraid you are never going to make much progress until you have spent a late-summer Sunday afternoon listening to the Incredible Casuals rattle the rafters at the Wellfleet Beachcomber.

Here’s your humble correspondent following this arduous road to Truth, this estival hajj, earlier today:

Read More »

Quicker Than The Eye

From my daughter ChloÁ« comes a link to a dazzling video showing the state of the art in robotic manipulation of small objects. Here.

Nothing To See Here

Though I am languishing on vacation and producing next to nothing (aside from an efflorescence of unshaven whiskers that a friend referred to yesterday as “beach fuzz”), our friend H. Jeffery Hodges, the Gypsy Scholar, has been doing exactly the opposite, offering some excellent posts on a variety of consequential topics. Here, here, here, and here.

As an otiose co-worker from my railroad days used to say (leaning on his shovel as I toiled with a pickaxe), it’s a pleasure to watch a good man work.

Back To School

In response to a recent post about the persistent backwardness of the Arab world, commenters and correspondents have suggested that the problem is not Islam itself, but the “culture of honor” that prevails amongst Arabs (and which has been shown also to be at work in the American South, with arguably similar retrograde effects). Non-Arab Muslims are thought to be more “forward-looking”; the Muslim nations of Southeast Asia are often cited as a counterexample to those who say that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with Western civilization.

Here’s an example of how forward-looking things are over there: a Muslim woman in hijab, about to be caned by Malaysia’s Shari’a courts for drinking beer in a bar two years ago.

Some in Malaysia are concerned about the impression this makes:

“We want to present a face to the world that we are not a fundamentalist country,” Ashli Chin, said a resident in Kuala Lumpur. “This makes us a laughingstock.”

This admirable sentiment overlooks that fact that fundamentalism always wells up from Islam’s core; it is built right in. A secular, Western-style Islamic nation is at the very least a contradiction in terms, and is arguably a heresy in itself. And in this case it is little more than an illusion: Malaysia’s civil court cannot overturn Shari’a rulings.

It’s all just a tempest in a teapot anyway, we are told:

Mohamad Isa Abd Ralip, president of the Syariah [Shariah] Lawyers’ Association of Malaysia, said too much is being made of Kartika’s punishment.

“It is not about causing pain. It is about educating others and to teach the person a lesson,” he said.

The recipient is fully clothed and the flogger cannot raise his arm high, Mohamad Isa said. The blows are delivered using a thin stick, so that they don’t break the skin.

See? No big deal. It’s all about education. And maybe it’s working — enough of these, and perhaps we here in the West might even start to learn something.

[Update: caning postponed until after Ramadan. See here.]

Marion Barry Is Alive And Well

Here’s a heartwarming item: it appears that 95% of the dollar bills circulating in Washington, D.C. carry traces of cocaine.

Beyond QM?

Now and then a blip appears on the screen that just might be something awfully big headed our way; on reading about this just now, I’m wondering if the name “Tim Palmer” mightn’t be a lot more familiar ere long.