Archive for May 18, 2009

Nordlinger and the future

Posted: May 18, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: ,

Jay echos Steyn in today’s impromptus with this bit:

Begin with the flight — my flight from JFK in New York to Queen Alia International in Amman. I can’t help thinking of Mark Steyn. It’s natural to think of Mark Steyn, isn’t it? In this particular case, I’m thinking of demography, and all the arguments Mark has made over the years. He speaks about “demographic energy”: and this is not coming from Westerners.

On my Royal Jordanian flight are many, many children. I believe half the passengers are under ten. Seriously. Parents have brought along three children, four children, five children, more. And I find myself thinking, “My, what large families.” But, when I was growing up — in good old America — that was pretty unremarkable, routine. Now there’s one child, or two if you’re really, really fecund and reckless. And these Middle Eastern families seem: large. “It’s all relative,” as the saying goes (and in this case there’s a double meaning, I guess).

Whenever I am on a “Third World flight” — impolite term — I notice this: children. On the flights within the U.S. I take, children are almost a novelty. Same with flights to and from Europe. But whenever I wander beyond those regions: kid-o-rama.

This cannot be without consequences, can it? Whether you regard them as good or bad: It cannot be without consequences. For more, please consult Mark Steyn.

You just don’t think long range when you have few children or no sense of an afterlife, you tend to be narcissistic and live for the now. This is what the drug culture and the changes of the 60’s have wrought. I’m not likely to live to see the final results but it will be a tough time for my boys.

…and that doesn’t happen all that often:

Yeah, that’s the ticket. Because only Obama, who did very little before taking on the Oval Office, has the wisdom and the gravitas to bring Netanyahu to such a position. You can’t expect the 83 year-old professor who lived through Nazism and Statism and understands that the greatest evils of the 20th century began with people disrespecting the personhood of the guy standing next to them, to have had any impact on Israel’s thinking.

You can’t expect an old intellectual who has been talking about the battle between truth and relativism from his teenage years in a POW camp, through his elevation to the papacy, to have contributed anything of value to the decades-long acrimonies of the Middle Eastern Nations can you?

It’s the Bookworm who nails it:

What the loopy-loo wackos on the Left (and, increasingly, in the middle) don’t understand, is that the Arabs have never wanted and will never want a two state solution. They want a Judenrein world, and they’re patient.

It is this desire for a one state (all Arab) solution, that explains why, as Rick Richman points out, no Middle East solutions have worked thus far.

Until the Arabs want a “two state” solution it doesn’t matter what Israel thinks. One of three things will happen. Either the Arabs will manage to slaughter the Jews, the Jews will finally decide they have enough and decide to slaughter the Arabs (which they’ve had the ability to do for decades, for all the cries of Jewish genocide of Arabs they are sure doing a lousy job of it aren’t they), or the Arabs will decide to live in peace.

Unless choice three comes about, choice one or two is inevitable. It’s just a question of when.

Oh and if you are of the mind that God will not permit the destruction of Israel (choice 1) that’s just not true. He has allowed the Kingdoms of Israel to fall over and over again, but he has never allowed the Jewish People to be eliminated. The history of the people of Israel is a sine wave; they rise and fall just as Moses predicted. In fact it pre-figures the cycle of confession and repentance in the church: man sins, man repents, God forgives, man is tempted and repeat until death or man escapes sin state.

The problem of empathy …

Posted: May 18, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news

…as a qualification is not grasped by Talk Left:

Empathy — for the little guy, for the powerless, for the meek and mute and broken members of society who aren’t noticed by conservative judges, who can’t afford teams of lawyers to plead their cases — empathy allows their voices to be heard: voices of the ordinary and common, voices of the frightened and dispossessed, voices that deserve the attention of Supreme Court Justices.

Is that we can see what liberal empathy has done with urban areas such as Detroit, Washington DC etc. Place after place becoming dependent.

That isn’t the reason why it’s an issue the real problem is you never know who someone might empathize with. Empathy makes for good friends and neighbors but bad law, because the rules are not consistent.

But it’s a moot point anyway since the president will choose who he wants and there is almost no chance that anyone will be able to stop it.

Identity please

Posted: May 18, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: ,

I generally disagree with Darren Hutchinson but you can be sure he will give you not only an honest argument but a reasoned one. He does so again today on the subject of identity politics and the court:

Although Obama relied upon identity politics for his electoral success, the White House is instructing GLBT, Latino and women’s groups to kill the identity talk. Several GLBT, Latino and women’s civil rights groups have urged the president to pick a candidate who will enhance the Court’s diversity. No openly gay or Latino person has ever sat on the Supreme Court. Only two women (both white) have occupied a seat on the Court. And two black men have also served on the Court.

I agree that the candidate should not look like a “token” hire, but there are many persons of color, women, and GLBT lawyers who would make excellent Supreme Court justices.

Now of course who I would like to see on the court and who Professor Hutchinson would like to see are likely as night and day philosophically but like the professor I think a token hire is a bad idea. However the professor also says this:

White House is doing its best to toss aside the very identity-based movements and politics that won the election for Obama. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says that: “I don’t think that the lobbying of interest groups will help. . . .I think in many ways lobbying can – and will –be counterproductive.” Of course, Gibbs never identifies the dangers the groups create by stating their preference for diversity. Also, it seems odd that Gibbs would disparage “special interest” groups, when labor, civil rights, feminist, pro-choice, anti-war, glbt, and many other “interest groups” are essential components of the Democratic Party. Without their support, neither Obama nor Gibbs would have a job at the White House.

That may be so but it’s not relevant. You don’t want to end up with a “Black” seat or the “Asian” seat or the “Latino” seat etc etc etc.

Of course among equally qualified candidates race is irrelevant as long as the candidate is well qualified all the other stuff is moot.

The whitehouse is doing the right thing in de-emphasizing identity. Not only is it patronizing but once you have a quota established then it becomes an entitlement and that will divide us even further.

The disagreement is about a principle since of course the president will almost certainly make an identity choice. Unless there is an old Chicago debt (a la Abe Fortis) to pay back I can’t imagine that either of us will be disappointed with at least the qualifications of the selection.

Update: Somehow missed the word “like” in a sentence above.