Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

Archive for the ‘Heart and spirit’ Category

Solzhenitsyn and me

Posted by Ron Coleman on August 3, 2008

Alexander Solzhenitsyn died. (UPDATE: New York Times obituary here.) Two years ago this October, on the occasion of the even of elections, I wrote on Dean’s World the following about how and why I became a conservative. That story began with Alexander Solzhenitsyn:

I recognized that I was a conservative during high school, when in support of a paper I was writing on Solzhenitsyn in a senior-year comparative literature class my ethnic-Polish teacher gave me a stack of American Spectator magazines, one of which included an article on Solzhenitsyn by Malcolm Muggeridge.

The entire gestalt of it just spoke sense to me. Was it a reaction to the tepid, petrified left-wing Jewish labor socialism of my extended family? The anger of a first-generation American (on one side) at a society that seemed (remember, I grew up in the ’60’s) so inexcusably and utterly unwilling to defend itself against what anyone could see was subversion? “Common sense,” as a Princeton friend, later dropout and current Washington operator would later describe it when recruiting me for some Reagan-era campus political / social suicide mission? Maybe it was just the natural inclination of one identified as depressingly adultoid from an absurdly young age and whose picture can be found at the Wikipedia entry for “stick in the mud.” I don’t really know, but I do remember that when I told my college roommate that I had, upon my return from an Israel program for Jewish searchers, become committed to religious observance, he said, “Well, now at least your religious ethic matches your political one” (or words to that effect).

Be that as it may, it is truth to me, even though politics, and most politicians, turn my stomach. I mean, there is some ethic in there, isn’t there?

But at the end of the day, these Democrats are the ones who so undermined the world I remember growing up in, and they continue to do so today. They are not even in the league, for patriotism and love of country and decency, of the Democratic politicians of my early youth — Lyndon Johnson, Roberty Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey. With McGovern, that ended.

Jimmy Carter sealed the deal. He made being an American embarrassing, humiliating, depressing, hopeless. Wimpy. Apologetic. Cringing. Losing.

I don’t believe any of today’s Democratic leaders have improved on Jimmy Carter, except that he had the benefit of not having to kowtow, as today’s Democrats do, so grossly to identity politics of every right- and- privilege- demanding ethnic and social subcultural group, no matter how subversive; to the hard-left on abortion rights; and he was allowed to be some kind of public Christian.

I wish there were Republicans today who had a quarter of the qualities of Ronald Reagan. Here was a great man, one who never claimed for himself the mantle of a perfect or even particularly virtuous personal life; but he loved his country, knew right from wrong, and — exercising a quality that I admire for the very scold it places on one such as myself — his ability, now proved doubly and triply, to make everyone around him think he was a dumbbell when in fact he was sly as a fox. Frankly I think George W. Bush comes quite close to these qualities. But, sadly lacking the Gipper’s ability to communicate and being the literal heir to a political tradition of some ideological infirmity to a conservative — think Jim Baker, the man who made me vote for Bill Clinton in 1992 — he is not Reagan. Nor are today’s dizzy denizens of the Capitol statesmen, by and large. Were they ever? The past takes on an undeserved elegance in sepia. The crassness of living, live and unsilenceable color makes today’s professional political class seemingly harder to swallow than its predecessors — red or blue.

But every time I step into the booth I ask myself, If this candidate could choose Ronald Reagan* or Jimmy Carter to make the keynote speech at his or her party’s nominating convention, which one would he or she choose?

The choice is simple.

—
* Captain Ed [just] posted on Reagan as well, so if you’re reading this belatedly, click through to Ed’s comment.

Cross-posted on Right-Wing News.

Posted in Faith and Works, Heart and spirit, Oppression, Politics and Poker | 1 Comment »

Clogging up the lanes

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 20, 2008

At the grocery store, that is. We’ve all seen this. I’ve noticed it before: America’s underclass is eating itself to death.

Posted in Americana, Gelt, Heart and spirit, Oppression | 9 Comments »

Socialism, law and order

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 20, 2008

Wolf Howling makes a thorough argument that socialism, not “mere” liberalism, is at the root at the disintegration of law and order in Britain, which you have to read in full to appreciate. The conclusion:

This is all a case study in why the philosophy of Karl Marx should have been interred with his bones. Instead, it is alive and thriving – much like a malignant cancer – in Britain today. Either Britain will dispense with socialism or Britain will eventually crumble. I am an optimist and an anglophile, and thus my bet is on the former. But I am also a bit of a realist. Given the stranglehold of socialists on all the reigns of power in Britain, and in particular in academia and the news, the latter is a real possibility also.

There may always be “an England,” because it’s a big place and it’s hard to sink an island in the sea, and who would want to? But there may not always, necessarily, be England.

Were we wrong to think that’s a bad thing? I can’t quite bring myself around to that, though there are aspects of the enterprise that have far outlived their usefulness. But it’s hard to be optimistic about England’s future.

Cross-posted on Right-Wing News.

Posted in Euroids, Heart and spirit, Past is prologue, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

Phoenix eve

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 14, 2008

I’m back in Phoenix, picking a jury early tomorrow morning.

I promise you we’re on the side of the angels, so you can pray or “have me in your thoughts” without reservation, and not just because we’re friends.

Posted in Faith and Works, Heart and spirit, Lex scripta | Leave a Comment »

When “I don’t know” is heresy… and when it’s not

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 6, 2008

The brilliant Penn Jillette makes a living from being a skeptic. Skepticism, he reports in the LA Times, isn’t good enough for the “reality based community, however — not on matters central to the canon:Personification of Knowledge, Newark historic courthouse

[S]omeone asked us about global warming, or climate change, or however they’re branding it now. Teller and I were both silent on stage for a bit too long, and then I said I didn’t know.

I elaborated on “I don’t know” quite a bit. I said that Al Gore was so annoying (that’s scientifically provable, right?) that I really wanted to doubt anything he was hyping, but I just didn’t know. I also emphasized that really smart friends, who knew a lot more than me, were convinced of global warming. I ended my long-winded rambling (I most often have a silent partner) very clearly with “I don’t know.” I did that because … I don’t know. . . .

The next day, I heard that one of the non-famous, non-groovy, non-scientist speakers had used me as an example of someone who let his emotions make him believe things that are wrong. . . . Later, I was asked about a Newsweek blog she wrote. . . . She ends with: “But here was Penn, a great friend to the skeptic community, basically saying, ‘Don’t bother me with scientific evidence, I’m going to make up my mind about global warming based on my disdain for Al Gore.’ … Which just goes to show, not even the most hard-nosed empiricists and skeptics are immune from the power of emotion to make us believe stupid things.”

Is there no ignorance allowed on this one subject? . . . You can’t turn on the TV without seeing someone hating ourselves for what we’ve done to the planet and preaching the end of the world. Maybe they’re right, but is there no room for “maybe”? There’s a lot of evidence, but global warming encompasses a lot of complicated points: Is it happening? Did we cause it? Is it bad? Can we fix it? Is government-forced conservation the only way to fix it? . . .

[T]he climate of the whole world is . . . complicated. I’m not a scientist, and I haven’t spent my life studying weather. I’m trying to learn what I can, and while I’m working on it, isn’t it OK to say “I don’t know”?

Skepticism has been turned on its head; doubt becomes a thought crime. What is it called when that happens, exactly? I have always liked this guy.

I can’t give Jillette all the credit in the world for this thinking, however. His skeptical principles of knowing when not to know only go so far. Perhaps it really does matter whose ox is being Gored, because when it comes to other important matters arguably at least as complicated as global warming, Jillette is bold in his ignorance when in, fact, being so makes him feel good. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Faith and Works, Heart and spirit, Narcissus Rex | 17 Comments »

Associated Press still gunning for America

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 6, 2008

The AP wants to make damned sure you get their point:

[T]alk turns to the state of the Union, and the Optimists become decidedly bleak.

They use words such as “terrified,” “disgusted” and “scary” to describe what one calls “this mess” we Americans find ourselves in. Then comes the list of problems constituting the mess: a protracted war, $4-a-gallon gas, soaring food prices, uncertainty about jobs, an erratic stock market, a tougher housing market, and so on and so forth.

One member’s son is serving his second tour in Iraq. Another speaks of a daughter who’s lost her job in the mortgage industry and a son in construction whose salary was slashed. Still another mentions a friend who can barely afford gas.

Joanne Kontak, 60, an elementary school lunch aide inducted just this day as an Optimist, sums things up like this: “There’s just entirely too much wrong right now.”

Happy birthday, America? This year, we’re not so sure.

What a scientific sampling! What a well developed, balanced argument! What rich perspective!

What a repeat of the smear job of just a couple of weeks ago!

Alternatively the AP is right. The four or five people they quote really are representative of “America” — of what writer Pauline Arrilaga calls “we,” Kimosabe. After all, there are those “wrong direction” polls! Perhaps this “news” item really is newsworthy.

In which case, here’s the news: What a bunch of miserable, whining ingrates America has become! And how lucky America is that there are millions in other countries willing literally to risk death to beg, sneak or sue their way in here, take their places and breath the fresh air of liberty and opportunity.

It’s odd that, of all people, Pauline Arrilaga missed that angle, considering that she “writes frequently about illegal immigrants crossing the border, and about the brutality of smuggling rings that exploit them.”

What makes these people submit to such brutality… just to go in “the wrong direction”? Considering that one such story she wrote was described by the AP itself (same link) as “based on meticulous reporting” … why didn’t she ask these immigrants that question?

But she could be right. I’d rather assume the far more intuitively obvious, and historically supportable, proposition: What a nasty self-hating outfit the Associated Press is.

Cross-posted on Right Wing News.

UPDATE:  It’s not just the AP, of course.

Posted in Americana, Heart and spirit, Medialites, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Massively cool, and right-wingy too

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 2, 2008

The AP reports great news from Colombia, where government forces have freed three longstanding US hostages, a kidnapped presidential candidate and eleven Colombian police and soldiers:

[It was] the most serious blow ever dealt to the 44-year-old Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, which considered the four hostages their most valuable bargaining chips. The FARC is already reeling from the deaths of key commanders and the loss of much of the territory it once held.

The Americans — Marc Gonsalves, Thomas Howes and Keith Stansell — were flying directly to the United States to reunite with their families, Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos said. They had been the longest-held American hostages in the world.

Santos said military intelligence agents infiltrated the guerrilla ranks and led the local commander in charge of the hostages, alias Cesar, to believe they were going to take them to Alfonso Cano, the guerrillas’ supreme leader.

The hostages, who had been divided in three groups, were taken to a rendezvous where two disguised helicopters piloted by Colombian military agents were waiting. Betancourt said her hands and feet were bound, which she called “humiliating.”

The pilots, she said, were posing as members of a relief organization, but “they were dressed like clowns,” wearing Che Guevara shirts, so she assumed they were rebels.

But when they were airborne, she looked behind her and saw Cesar, who had treated her so cruelly for so many years, lying on the floor blindfolded.

“The chief of the operation said, `We’re the national army. You’re free,'” she said. “The helicopter almost fell from the sky because we were jumping up and down, yelling, crying, hugging one another. We couldn’t believe it.”

The operation, Santos said, “will go into history for its audacity and effectiveness.”

I like audacity and effectiveness! They often make a great combination, as they did at Entebbe. I like it even better when they’re employed against commies. “U.S. President George W. Bush called his close ally Uribe to congratulate him, as did [French President Nicolas] Sarkozy,” continues the story. “Barack Obama issued a statement congratulating Uribe as well.”

Did Senator Obama know about the Che t-shirt part?  (UPDATE:  Heh.)

UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds links to some cool analyses. “[A]nother embarrassment for the FARC terrorists,” he writes. Actually, isn’t it embarrassing enough to be called “FARC terrorists”?

Posted in Heart and spirit, Oppression | Leave a Comment »

The family secret

Posted by Ron Coleman on June 25, 2008

Maniakes writes, on Dean’s World:

You keep using that word [– atheism]. I do not think it means what you think it means.

As he demonstrates, according to a report a meaningful percentage of self-described atheists admit they really believe in God.

That’s the ones who admit it.

It’s just socially cooler in a lot of places to claim to be an atheist than to say either, “I don’t know” or “God, yeah, but religion I can’t buy into.”  Yes, even the latter; once you admit there’s a God , there’s no end to the thing.

No end to it at all!

Posted in Faith and Works, Heart and spirit, Style | Leave a Comment »

Seven words he’ll never say again

Posted by Ron Coleman on June 23, 2008

George Carlin died today. He was 71. Carlin was a true original, one of the few comics who actually got people to think about some things in new ways, and — unlike, say Mort Sahl — managing to stay funny while doing so over the course of a generation.

But his humor was angry, and his hippy-dippy outlook, cute in the early 70’s, curdled into a know-nothing angry leftism of the “they own all of you, we’re all tools in the System, man” variety.  (You know – the System that made him very, very comfortable despite his harsh criticism of it.)  He was ultimately only a comedian, and hence his bleak “social criticisms” were seldom better enunciated than the facile juxtapositions found in editorial cartoons. But as a vanguard of envelope-pushing in the realm of new levels of public indelicacy he was regarded as a sage, a modern-day Twain, by would-be culture critics of the Don Imus rank.

Now he’s dead.

Posted in Americana, Ars Longa, Heart and spirit | 8 Comments »

Pass the mayo

Posted by Ron Coleman on June 6, 2008

I spent an inordinate amount of time last night writing a post about mayonnaise on LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION®. I am gratified that it’s getting quite a bit of very unexpected play!

If you’re among the somewhat more select audience that reads this blog, though, you shouldn’t miss the post. Because, as you’ll see, it… it means quite a lot to me.

Posted in Blogophilia, Heart and spirit, Jocularity | Leave a Comment »