Politics: 20 August 2010

Fridays seem always to be slow.

  1. In yesterday’s column, Paul Krugman equates the “apostles of austerity” to priests of an ancient cult who demand human sacrifices to appease some unseen god. It is, as usual for his columns, well worth reading. The strange thing about Krugman is that time after time he is shown to be right, while “serious” economic “advisers” are shown to be wrong. And what does he get for his troubles? Those in power continue to listen to those who have been wrong in the past, while they dismiss him as being some lunatic liberal. The same can be said for Joseph Stiglitz. I’m afraid we’ve been down the rabbit-hole so long, few realize there is any other reality.
  2. Unlike many in the US, I have always considered Billy Graham an evil purloiner. But he was mostly pretty smart about it. His son—Franklin Graham—answers an offensive and leading question from John King even more offensively. He spreads lies and attacks with innuendo. Of course, one has to wonder what exactly would be the problem if the President were a Muslim. After all, we just had a President who thought God wanted him to be elected. (God works in mysterious ways: through the Supreme Court!)
  3. A program to publicize teabagger-endorsed businesses has been suspended because the businesses found the association lost them customers. This is not surprising. It has been a couple of months since the teabagger negatives topped their positives.
  4. All right! All right! There’s salmonella everywhere! Big deal. Just make sure that you cook foods thoroughly, and for things like Caesar salad, you can coddle the egg or use pasteurized eggs. I can’t speak for baking—I don’t do that.
  5. Secretary of State Clinton (I like saying that) announced that Israel and Palestine will resume negotiations at the beginning of September with no starting terms. It all sounds hopeful, of course, it is impossible to be hopeful at this point.
  6. There is wide coverage of the fact that 60% of Americans oppose the Afghanistan war. I’m not sure why this is big news; people have been against it for at least a year. Maybe it is that journalists are finally opposed to it?

Politics: 19 August 2010

Why is it that I consistently find the best coverage of events in foreign news sources? Oh, I know! Because the American news really sucks. Take for example, item number 1.

  1. The US is withdrawing from Iraq having not completed what we promised. Insurgents are killing an average of 250 people per day; projects to fix the electricity and sewage treatment facilities have been left undone; one-quarter of the population lives below the poverty level; and the elected officials are now at 165 days without managing to create a government. But we killed Saddam Hussein. Gooo team!
  2. The United States pledged an additional $60 million Thursday to the U.N. flood relief effort. Secretary of State Clinton announced this on Pakistan’s Dawn TV. That brings our total up to $130 million. That doesn’t mean you don’t need to donate!
  3. As I’ve noted before, the oil spill is not getting much coverage these days since the oil is not spewing out. There is currently much contention about the NOAA report that claimed that 75% of the oil had “dissipated.” NOAA never gave me a cent, so I am not inclined to cut them any slack. Today, a group at Woods Hole reported evidence of large underwater oil plume in the Gulf. But maybe people are just focusing on the bad aspects of the oil spill; the following video presents the good side.

  4. It is not surprising that 20% of the nation believes that Obama is a Muslim. (Sorry but Faux actually has the best coverage of this—for obvious reasons.) Nor is it surprising that there is strong correlation between ignorance about Obama’s religious beliefs and his nationality, and dissatisfaction with his performance. What is surprising is that this number was just over 10% a year ago. The Washington Post blames the Internet. I blame the Republican Hate Machine (including Faux News) who are forever bring up these issues without explicitly endorsing them.
  5. Obama made four recess appointments today. Good for him. I don’t have a lot to say except that the Republicans behavior in this matter every bit as bad as it is in just about everything else they do.

Politics: 18 August 2010

I just finished reading The Man Who Would Not Shut Up, a biography of Bill O’Reilly. It is a very sympathetic depiction of him. It turns out that he is carbon-based. Of course, all the way through it, I kept wondering, “Why am I reading this?” And I’m half-way through a biography of Glenn Beck—I can’t wait to see if he turns out to be carbon-based too.

  1. I’m right about hamburger! American Meat Institute President J. Patrick Boyle was on the “Colbert Report,” last night and he said that hamburger should not be eaten rare. The USDA recommends cooking all hamburger up to at least 160°F (that’s 344 K, if you’re cooking in the lab). It all comes down to surface—just searing the surface of a steak will kill the bacteria, but hamburg is almost all surface. (Did you hear the story about the genetics students who made e. coli that smelled like banana? It’s true. Clever kids.)
  2. As relief aid begins to trickle into Pakistan, there is much speculation about why the world is being so ungenerous about this catastrophe. Twenty million people have been displaced, hundreds of thousands of homes destroyed, and almost two million acres of farmland flooded or washed away. In addition, 1500 people have died. I had to ask myself why I gave money to Haiti but not to Pakistan. There is no good reason, so I gave my usual pittance. Now you have two reasons to give: decency and guilt. (I’m providing the guilt, in case you didn’t notice.)
  3. You know things have gotten bad when Pat Buchanan is the voice of reason. On Monday Newt Gingrich attacked the Islamic community center, saying, “Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington.” Bachanan later said that he, “went too far with that comment.” But Buchanan is not the only person making sense in this ridiculous debate. On Monday’s Rachel Maddow Show, guest host Chris Hayes (“Who’s the black private dick that’s a sex machine to all the chicks?” Wrong Hayes.) made the argument that in four years, we will all look back on this with the same embarrassment that “freedom fries” now engenders.
  4. I’m sure you’ve heard that Faux News’ parent company gave a one million dollar donation to the Republican Governors Association. In response, Democratic Governors Association Executive Director Nathan Daschle has written a letter to Roger Ailes asking that Fox News (a) put a disclaimer on all coverage of governors and gubernatorial races, and (b) cover this story itself—which Faux has been strangely silent on.
  5. Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s “nigger, nigger, nigger” rant has resulted in her not renewing here contract which is up at the end of the year. On Larry King Live she said that, “my First Amendment rights have been usurped by angry, hateful groups.” I don’t think that’s right. No one is saying she doesn’t have a right to her rant; we’re just saying she’s an asshole.
  6. The last American combat brigade in Iraq has left the country today, but here’s the strange thing: the Pentagon has not confirmed that the move marks an early end to combat operations. And, of course, there are still roughly 50,000 non-combat troops remaining. More when I know what the hell is going on.

Politics: 17 August 2010

There was a good side to my arguments yesterday. I used the “why do you care?” argument in the Prop. 8 case, and it seemed to work. They agreed that, in fact, whether or not there were same-sex unions made no difference to them. This is the thing about Republicans: most of the time they don’t realize that what they care about really has no relevance to their lives. If we could get them to realize this all the time, you know what they would be? Democrats.

  1. The Washington Post has done an investigation of Top Secret America. It is a long (each article is about 5,000 words) three-part series. The highlights? The system is comprised of almost 1,300 government organizations and 2,000 private companies located at 10,000 places throughout the US; upwards of a million people have top-secret security; there is a great deal of redundancy and waste—for example, over fifty organizations track the flow of money to and from terrorist networks; and 50,000 intelligence reports are produced each year—so many that a lot are simply ignored. And still they can’t stop the Jihadists from opening a culinary school.
  2. Those Mexicans are so backward! According to Bay Windows, “Same-sex couples who get married in Mexico City, the only place in the nation where they can do so, are validly married everywhere in Mexico, in all 31 states, the Supreme Court ruled Aug. 10 in a 9-2 vote.” That means the US is the only North American country to not recognize same-sex unions. Gooo team!
  3. The flooding in Pakistan has not received much news coverage. Millions of dark skinned people suffering? Yawn. It is not surprising, however, that a former cricket player—Imran Khan—has launched a fund-raising drive to help out Pakistani flood victims. Cricketers have to stick together.
  4. As I long suspected, getting hit in the head is a bad thing. It seem that Lou Gehrig may not have died from Lou Gehrig’s Disease.
  5. Paul Ryan continues his disingenuous claims about balancing the budget. Ezra Klein takes on his claim that he doesn’t want to destroy Medicare (he does). Ryan wants to replace it with a voucher system. Sound familiar? It’s amazing: even when Republicans have “new” ideas they are old.
  6. See, my faith in Rod Blagojevich has paid off: he was only convicted of lying to the FBI. Just kidding (about my faith, not the verdict). As far as I can tell, he’s guilty as sin—and I say this as one who tried very hard to believe him. The prosecution will retry him on the other 24 counts. Even with the one count he was convicted on, he could get up to five years.

Now go spread the word to them’s that need it.

On Evil by Terry Eagleton

When I checked out On Evil from the library, the librarian asked me, “Do you believe in it?” I stared blankly for a moment before realizing that she was referring to “evil.” I gave her my best intellectual answer, “I guess it’s definitional.” And then I added that I might have more to say on the subject after reading the book. I don’t.

On Evil is the fourth Eagleton book I’ve read this year. It is also—by far—the worst. I found myself annoyed through most of the book because he pointedly avoids ever saying what he thinks evil is. It was only on finishing it that I realized that he had not, in fact, promised me any such insight. The book is called “on evil” after all, and didn’t he spend 159 pages writing “on evil”? Indeed he did.

In the end, though, what is the whole point of this book? It seems that he most wanted to address the issue of terrorism and the stupidity of assuming people who fly airplanes into buildings cannot be understood. And he does an excellent job of this in the last four pages. So really he has a good solid (though short) magazine article.

All of this is not to say that the book isn’t a quick and fun read. It is filled with humor and insight, as when discussing the differences between the angelic (not necessarily good) and the demonic (not necessarily evil), “The angelic consists of high-sounding cliches like ‘God bless this wonderful country of ours,’ to which the demonic replies ‘Yeah, whatever.'” And again, when talking about the lack of true purpose to actions, “In fact any purposeful activity, if you push it far back enough, turns out to be in the service of some nonpurposeful state of affairs. Why did she run for the bus? Because she wanted to get to the pharmacist’s shop before it closed. Why did she want to do that? To buy some toothpaste. Why did she want some toothpaste? To brush her teeth. Why brush your teeth? To stay healthy. Why stay healthy? So as to carry on enjoying life. But what is so precious about an enjoyable life?” Or finally, on Aristotle’s notion that living is something that takes constant practice, but which we never succeed at, “It is just that most of us are better at it than Jack the Ripper.”

As I read On Evil, I kept thinking that there is one kind of evil that I do believe it: institutional evil. It is a system that allows mostly banal actors to produce deleterious results. Consider, for example, the recent Gulf oil spill. It is not that any person involved needed to be evil—be they employee, collaborator, or customer. Individually benign character flaws like greed and laziness are enough to fuel the system that leads to catastrophe. The same could be said for genocide, although such instances seem always to be additionally fueled by evil participants. How Eagleton, a neo-Marxist, could wait until page 143 to bring this issue up—only to drop it within a page—amazes me.

In the end, Eagleton’s evil requires both a soulless actor and a harmful act. This is a definition I can deal with, but not one that I find that compelling. This leaves me with nothing new to say about evil if that librarian ever asks me.

Schopenhauer

Eagleton is at his best when discussing Schopenhauer. For example, he writes, “Isn’t the material world incurably banal and monotonous, and wouldn’t it be far better off not existing? The philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer certainly thought so. Nothing struck him as more self-evidently foolish than the assumption that the human race was a good idea.”

Later, he quotes Schopenhauer from The World as Will and Idea, stating that life consisted of, “momentary gratification, fleeting pleasure conditioned by wants, much and long suffering, constant struggle, bellum omnium [everyone against everyone], everything a hunter and everything hunted, want, need and anxiety, shrieking and howling; and this goes on in saecula saeculorum [forever and ever] or until once again the crust of the planet breaks.”

I read The World as Will and Idea when I was in high school, but I really don’t remember any of it. I do, however, think it had a profound effect on me because Schopenhauer’s view of the universe is very similar to my own. This is why whenever Eagleton talks about him it makes me laugh in a knowing way—like I’m laughing at my own foibles. Yes, Schopenhauer is unrelentingly depressing. But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong.

Now I have to get The World as Will and Idea. It’s going to be a bumpy week.

Update

The other day (8 September 2010), I was waiting at a bus stop and I saw a copy of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Awake! magazine. It caught my eye because of its secondary headline, “Also: What Makes Us Good or Evil? Page 20.” I couldn’t pass that up, so I picked it up and read it. It made me reconsider Eagleton’s book: this was not a subject that was easy to write about. I don’t expect much from the JWs, in general, but this was really pathetic. There was no mention of questions. They simply stated that, “Man is as good or as evil as he chooses to be”—as if John Calvin had never been born.

What also struck me was that of the nearly twenty bible passages cited, only two are Gospels (John 8:44 and Luke 6:43-45) and neither are actually quoted. The John citation tells us that Jesus thought the Devil was a destroyer of man and a liar. The Luke citation is a little more on target, telling us that Jesus thought that good begets good and evil, evil. However, Jesus isn’t exactly clear in Luke. One could certainly interpret Luke 6:45 to mean that we ought to help the poor out of the pit we relegate them to. In other words, that evil is not so much a function of soul as of environment.

The main thing is that Christians are always on about is Jesus and WTFWJD. And yet, when they make arguments, they almost never quote him. Why? Because his ideas were revolutionary. They totally go against the status quo, which is what modern Christians want to maintain above all else (even God).

Politics: 16 August 2010

I had two political arguments today. The first was about the Islamic community center and the second, Prop. 8. I didn’t bring up either of these issues; it is telling that these are the two issues most on my local conservatives’ minds. Why? Neither actually have anything to do with their lives. It is also interesting how people always adhere strictly to the Constitution—until it requires even the smallest sacrifice and then it’s all over. “The first amendment provides the right to practice religion not to put houses of worship wherever you want.” Needless to say, the speaker also thinks the second amendment guarantees the right to own machine guns.

  1. I have been reading Terry Eagleton’s On Evil today, and he wrote something very interesting that relates to a comment made by Nevada senatorial candidate Sharron Angle about depriving abortions from women who have been the victims of rape or incest, “You know I’m a Christian and I believe that God has a plan and a purpose for each one of our lives and that He can intercede in all kinds of situations and we need to have a little faith in many things.” In addressing the fact that sometimes good comes from evil, Eagleton (a Christian) writes, “Though Jesus is portrayed by the New Testament as spending much of his time curing the sick, he never once advises the ill and infirm to reconcile themselves to their suffering. On the contrary, he seems to regard their afflictions as the work of the devil. He does not suggest that heaven will be adequate compensation for their woes.” I’m planning to write a review of the book over on Frankly Curious later tonight.
  2. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals put a stop to same-sex marriages that would have been allowed as of Wednesday. The reasoning is strange. They seem to be saying that they don’t want people getting married in case Prop. 8 eventually stands. The couples married during this time would have some kind of indeterminate status. But there are already 18,000 same-sex couples grandfathered into Prop. 8. What’s the big deal? This is going to be a long slog.
  3. The Republicans are licking their chops over President Obama’s support of the Islamic center a couple of blocks from ground zero. Add “Obama stands up for religious tolerance” to the list of Reasons to be a Proud American. And I’m pretty sure that even though most Americans are intolerant (large majorities are against the Islamic center), this is a losing issue for the Republicans. Keep talking about Muslims, guys; we’ll stick with the economy.
  4. Ken Salazar announced new environmental guidelines that require full environmental reviews of any deep-water oil or nature-gas drilling. Why it wasn’t obvious that this was needed before, I don’t know.
  5. Newt Gingrich is never boring. Media Matters for American reports that he compared the New York City Islamic community center to “Nazis” putting a “sign next to the Holocaust museum.” This doesn’t need comment, right?

I’m still trying to find time to go over this month’s issue of Extra! We’ll get there.

Politics: Happy Birthday Social Security!

Social Security (which included unemployment benefits) turns 75 today—at a time when Republicans are back to pushing for its destruction. This is a good example of why a party of strong ideology (like the Republicans) is bad and a party of pragmatism (like the Democrats) is good. The Republicans were not always so ideological, however. Here is a quotation by President Dwight D. Eisenhower from a letter to his brother Edgar on 8 November 1954:

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

Of course, compared to the neo-fascists of the Republican Party, even Barry Goldwater looks pretty good. But he didn’t have the best political ad of all time:

Politics: 13 August 2010

It’s Friday the 13th, but I don’t believe in luck. The current political crisis is not a question of luck. Simply put, the Republicans are eager to sacrifice the good of the country (and the world) just to gain political power. It is repulsive. If they had not gone off the deep end, I would not be so partisan. But how can anyone of good conscious be a Republican today? John Dean (Nixon’s Whitehouse Counsel) and I are far apart politically, and yet on all the issues that come up in politics today, we are in lock step. That’s right: if Nixon were a politician today, he would be a moderate Democrat. If Reagan were a politician today, he would be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican. Regardless, he would be more reasonable than Ben Nelson.

But since it is Friday, we all deserve a little levity. So I give you Chico Marx. Just watch what he does with the apple:

  1. The word is that Obama’s deficit commission is mostly looking at ways to destroy Social Security and Medicare. As a result, Paul Krugman refers to it as the “catfood commission.” In three blogs today (one, two, and three), Krugman demolishes the “same old disingenuous arguments making the rounds.” I thought after Bush’s 2005 debacle, this was over. Sigh.
  2. The Gun Owners of America and the Christian Coalition are for Net Neutrality. The liberal sell-outs! The Teabaggers are taking a bold stand against Net Neutrality. Goooo team!
  3. Representative Maxine Waters held a 90-minute press conference today in which she defended herself against ethics charges. Although I rather think that Charlie Rangel is guilty, even if the case against him is over-stated, I believe that Waters is innocent. There does seem to be something very wrong with the Ethics Committee.

That’s all for now. I hope you enjoyed Chico.

Politics: 12 August 2010

The Rachel Maddow Show had big news tonight. I owe the first two items here to it. I know how evil she is: she’s a prominent member of the Professional Left. But Ms. Maddow is one of the few jewels in corporate medialand. I also wish to thank Canadian Living for the exceptional Snow Peas and Carrots with Sesame and Garlic that I just ate. It was amazing.

  1. This is important, but don’t expect to see much coverage on it. Several people very close to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer are associated with Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). Why is this important? Brewer was a big proponent of the Arizona “Breathing While Brown” law—better known as SB 1070. CCA runs 6 of the 15 jails in Arizona and has a contract with the Feds to hold federal prisoners—which those arrested under SB 1070 would be. Of course, the people of Arizona voted for the bill because of fear and hatred. But don’t ever lose sight of the fact that the people behind such legislation are in it for the money and power (which is just money, in the end). [Stephen Lemons’ article]
  2. BP just paid the biggest OSHA fine ever. For the oil spill? Nope. They paid $51 million for problems at their Texas City refinery that had an explosion that killed 15 people and injured 170 others. But don’t think this is what the fine was for. No. They had already been fined $20 million dollars for that. You see, oil is so profitable it just isn’t cost effective to prevent the murder of company employees. Pay the fines and move on. There are a lot of fishermen who are looking for work! Goooo team! [Why is the best coverage from the Financial Times?]
  3. There is a growing Republican meme that the unemployed are just spoiled people who won’t take the jobs available. Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported on Michael Hatchell, a 52-year-old mechanic from North Carolina who has turned down “dozens” of job offers during the 59 weeks he has been unemployed. Newt Gingrich has picked up on this and publicly shamed Mr. Hatchell. According to the Republicans, businesses should make rational decisions, but individuals should not. For example: a business should not invest in capital improvements because of “uncertainty” about future tax policy. But individuals with 30 years experience should take minimum-wage jobs, even if they pay less than unemployment insurance. Do Republicans have no shame? Apparently. [Business Insider Offensive Article on Unemployed]
  4. Someone from the Administration actually has something negative to say about someone other than the Professional Left! Jared Bernstein, Chief Economic Advisor to the Vice President, blasted John Boehner and other Republicans for their opposition to the Recovery Act. [It’s fun reading]
  5. And finally a little encouragement: Alan Abramowitz presented Five Myths About Midterm Elections. Number two is: It’s an anti-incumbent year. He points out that this is said every mid-term election and every mid-term election the vast majority of incumbents retain their seats. [It is worth a read]

You may now return to your regularly scheduled lives.

George Henry

George Henry - Self-PortraitYesterday, I had a curious, but ultimately delightful meeting with a young artist named George Henry. He is working on a collection of photographs of the poor, dispossessed, and wounded. And he thought I might be of some help in this endeavor—how much remains to be seen. Until I met with him, I had not seen his work, but a cursory review of his online photo-album showed him to be at least a very interesting artist.

The meeting did not start off terribly well. I was concerned about the project that George had in mind; I thought it might be exploitative. This concern quickly vanished after seeing some of his work and talking to him. Just as my concern was fading, his was rising. He became agitated. “Why are you helping me?” he wanted to know. This struck me as a strange question, so I answered bluntly, “I’m not helping you—at least not yet.” And then he was concerned that maybe I wasn’t who I claimed to be. This all ended in what was—for me—a humorous episode where I showed him my driver’s license. This seemed to assuage his concerns and we went on to have a three-hour conversation with topics as far-flung as the cardinality of different infinities, using literature to determine if you are dreaming, and how platonic idealism makes me a bad artist.

Even without this young man’s (he is only 21 years old) formidable talent (more on that in a moment), he was well worth meeting. It is so rare that I meet people—much less young people—who are interested in much of anything. George seems to be interested in just about everything.

The self-portrait above is a very good likeness of him—both in appearance and attitude. He has a certain frightened yet defiant air about him. Whatever the reason for this (and I could speculate, but it makes me sound so old), he comes off as a cool guy. You can imagine him at the back of the Royal Roost in ’49 to experience Miles Davis at the birth of the cool before anyone new it was cool. One of his paintings is called, “All My Heroes Are Long Gone.”

George Henry - All My Heroes Are Long Gone

From left to right, they are: Leo Tolstoy, Bill Hicks, GG Allin, Andy Kaufman, Travis Bickle, Salvador Dali, and George Orwell. The inclusion of Travis Bickle is a bit perplexing or just creepy, given that he is one of the most evil characters I can think of. But he does fit in with this group. All of them are rebels. The problem with Bickle is his motivation: “Kill a senator? Kill a pimp? It’s all good.” George Henry does seem to have a certain fascination with death.

George Henry - Train Picture Everyone LikesWhat is most compelling about his photographs is what he chooses to shoot. It has a profound affect on his art. Looking at many of his photographs, I often think that I am looking at images from my childhood. There are a number of shots around a junkyard that are exceptional. I particularly like a shot of two little girls who apparently live there; the camera is tilted slightly—giving the feel that the girls are being flung off the earth. His feel for pain is tangible, and he snatches it in the most unlikely places. And, as you can see in the picture of the train stopped in the middle of a snow-covered forest, he is capable exquisite photographic composition.

George Henry’s painting is less consistent than his photography. This may have something to do with his media: he often works on plywood and even particle board. He seems much more at ease with charcoal and paper, as in the self-portrait above. But he always has interesting ideas. The following image, called “Made of Paint,” is very compelling.

George Henry  - Made of Paint

There is a great deal to like from this talented young man. I will be very interested to see what he does over the next couple of decades.

Palindrone

If I remember anything from the 2008 Presidential Campaign, it is Sarah Palin answering questions. She was easy to fear, but hard to hate. She always seemed to me like a small animal in the middle of the road not sure where to run to escape a fast-approaching car. Much later, when she spoke more coherently, I found that she was, in fact, easy to hate: she was filled with the same right-wing hate-mongering that we’ve come to expect from the once Grand Ol’ Party. I miss those early days. And I’ve coined a term to celebrate them.

Katie Couric

Palin’s most famous “answer,” of course, was her answer to Katie Couric’s question about what Supreme Court decisions she was against. Palin provided the following answer initially, “There’s of course in the great history of America there have been rulings that there’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues again like Roe v. Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there so you know going through the history of America there would be others.”

Based upon this one interview, I conclude that Couric is a nice woman. She wasn’t trying to “get” Palin. After this answer, Couric follows up with, “Can you think of any?” She says this in the soft, encouraging voice of a good grammar school teacher. A smart, but ignorant person would say, “My mind’s gone blank with all the lights and pressure of the campaign; let me get back to you on that.” Palin says, “I would think of any again that could best be dealt with on a more local level maybe I would take issue with. But as a mayor and as a governor and even as a vice-president if I’m so privileged to serve. Wouldn’t be in a position of changing those things but supporting the law of the land as it reads today.”

There are some interesting things to note about this exchange. There’s the fact that Palin almost never uses the word “um.” I think this is because she doesn’t need to. When most people talk, they need to pause occasionally to collect thoughts. Palin doesn’t need this time because she is not collecting thoughts; she’s just spitting out words and phrases in the hope that it will make sense. It is the equivalent of a bimbo’s giggle or a redneck’s “ah, shucks!” And that’s just fine if all you want to do is hang out with the girls or throw back a few with the boys.

Also interesting is the fact that Palin correctly states that the VP doesn’t really have anything to do with the Supreme Court. When she first met with the McCain people, she asked what the VP did. So this phrase is probably something they had been pounding into her brain. And it came out at Katie Couric!

If you look at just her first sentence you will see what she has going on, “There’s of course in the great history of America there have been rulings that there’s never going to be absolute consensus by every American.” (Remind anyone of Mars Attacks!?) This would be somewhat coherent if the question had been, “What do you think of the conflict between majority rule and Constitutional protections?” However, even if that were the questions (and it wasn’t—not even close), it would still just be a jumble of words.

The Palindrone

This is why I have coined a term: Palindrone. Or, if you prefer: Palin-drone. As all nerds know, a palindrome is a word or phrase that reads the same forwards and backwards. A Palindrone, however, is a collection of words and phrases combined randomly and signifying nothing, which, if combined in any other order, would still signify nothing. It is pronounced just as you would the two words: Sarah’s last name and “drone.” The accent is on the first syllable.

You might think this is a fairly limited word, but it isn’t. It is very common in politics. Most politicians do not have Palin’s ability to keep a Palindrone going for several minutes, but they can easily do it for a sentence or a whole “paragraph.” If you doubt me about Palin’s ability, see the 2008 VP Debate.

Palin Is Everywhere

Shortly before the 2008 election, Las Vegas held a “Sarah Palin look-alike stripper contest.” Here is a picture of the event from the Daily Telegraph:

What is most interesting about this photo is that when I saw it, I thought it was Sarah Palin. The fact that I had no trouble believing that Palin would be dressed like that during her beauty-pageant days says more about me than it does her. But it does say a lot about her. It is sad, but those five women are probably more serious thinkers than Palin. They just don’t get booked on Faux News.

Update

Although I coined this term, I knew that many other must have thought of it before I did. The Urban Dictionary currently has 19 definitions of the word. They roughly fall into two categories: meaningless speech and Palin follower. Most of the meaningless speech definitions focus on the backward-forward aspect of the pun. This is fine, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense. There is no reason that one would parse a sentence backwards. This is a reason to start moving the words around because such sentences sound like they mean something. Almost all of the definitions are from right before the election two years ago. As usual, I’m right on top of things.

The Six Stages of Sewing

Sewing Machine Time SeriesI have long been fascinated by sewing machines and how they work—especially because my theories on the subject have always struck me as absurd. I knew that a thread came from above, through the eye of the needle, and another from below, from a device called a “bobbin”—a word that sounds so British it seems like a crime, or at least indelicate, for an American to use. And that was about it.

Sewing Machine

Those interested can find pretty much everything they would want to know about how sewing machines work at How Stuff Works and Threads Magazine. What I’m interested in here is how that two-thread mechanism works. I figure that most people understand the rest of the machine, anyway. After all, it doesn’t amaze anyone that the pedals in the middle of a bike make the wheel at the back go around. So it shouldn’t be amazing that the needle and bobbin work in synchronization. But what’s up with that threading thing?

Two Thread System

When I was younger, I thought that through some amazing bit of technology, when the needle penetrated the fabric, the upper thread was removed from the eye and the bobbin thread was inserted into the eye. And then reversed on the next penetration. Wrong, of course. I knew that even as a child, but that was the best explanation I could come up with. In my defense, my 5-year-old’s theories about household plumbing turned out to be spot on.

What is really happening is much more clever than my dubious thought experiments. In all sewing machines that I am aware of, the upper thread stays above the fabric and the the bobbin thread stays below. The trick is that they wrap around each other under the fabric—whether the machine uses a bobbin or not. This is illustrated in the image below that I made from screen captures of a Wikipedia animated gif. [caveat]

Six Stages of Sewing

1. This is the set-up, just as the needle breaks through the fabric.

2. When the needle reaches full penetration, the bobbin hook grabs the upper thread loop.

3. The bobbin hook rotates in the opposite direction of the taut bobbin thread.

4. The bobbin hook continues to rotate the upper thread so that it wraps around the bobbin core—catching on the bobbin thread.

5. After the bobbin hook has rotated once around, it releases the upper thread.

6. The fabric moves backward, effectively moving the needle forward, and thus tightening the stitch.