Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

Archive for the ‘Politics and Poker’ 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 »

Sen. Barack McGovern

Posted by Ron Coleman on August 1, 2008

Politico.com:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Friday announced an “Emergency Economic Plan” that would give families a stimulus check of $1,000 each, funded in part by what his presidential campaign calls “windfall profits from Big Oil.”

Details are in this six-page policy paper.

Sound a little familiar?  We can … hope!  (HT to Jane!)

Posted in Gelt, Politics and Poker, Stragety | 9 Comments »

Professor Obama

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 31, 2008

Jim Lindgren at Volokh (via Insty) is talking about what Barack Obama’s teaching job at the University of Chicago was and was not.  The question on the table seems to be whether, when or if he was offered tenure, and under what conditions.  The obvious point:

I have now talked to four members of the University of Chicago law faculty, including at least one of Obama’s campaign donors, and all four of them say that they do not remember voting Barack Obama a tenured or tenure-track offer. …

All thought that a tenure-track offer might well have been approved if it had been brought to the faculty. All expressed doubt whether the faculty would have made a tenured offer; one professor stated emphatically that it never would have happened, which of course is just one person’s opinion. According to those I spoke with, a tenured offer would have been problematic because — despite his intelligence, teaching ability, and success in law school — Barack Obama may not have had any scholarly publications (at least they were not aware of any).

Expressed “doubt”? What on earth is the question?  This is the University of Chicago — full tenure for someone with no publications?  Selections from the comments:

I would be interested to find out when was the last time that UC made an offer-with-tenure to a candidate who did not already have tenure at another institution.

It’s not unheard of for a dean to make promises to a candidate or potential candidate that he can’t deliver on. But how unusual is it for a dean at this sort of school to promise an offer that includes tenure to a potential candidate with no scholarly publications?

As an academic . . . I regard it as exceptionally unusual for someone without a single publication ten years after completing his degree would be offered a tenured position at a place like Chicago.

I was a UC undergrad, I am married to a UC PhD, and I have been a faculty wife at several institutions, none of which come close to UC levels of intellectual self-importance. Unless UC is a radically different place than when I was there a quarter century ago, a job-with-tenure (as opposed to tenure-track) for someone without any academic publications to his name is simply unthinkable.

Interestingly, in the comments David Bernstein dissents, and insists it would not have been unusual for the editor of the Harvard Law Review to be offered tenure even at U. of C. in 1991, even absent any evidence of what is called scholarship.  I find that impossible to believe, though.  There is some red-herring discussion about whether he was perhaps the author of an unsigned HLR student Note… which hardly makes a difference in terms of what we’re talking about here.

The point, I think, is that the Obama myth, despite the efforts of some of us to address it on precisely this point, is so inflated that people would actually believe that he would be the subject of a level of unprecedented legitimization of his status as an intellectual based on … nothing.  Nothing.

Posted in Lex scripta, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

Global cooling

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 29, 2008

Glenn Reynolds links to and repeats the query: “Is it becoming cool to mock the Greens?”

It wasn’t cool all along?  Wow.  Now I’m pretty embarrassed.

Posted in Jocularity, Politics and Poker, Style | Leave a Comment »

“That’s how you teach our enemies not to mess!”

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 26, 2008

So, Iraq turns out to be kind of a non-loss, kind of thing, after all, huh? Well, it’s never too late to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory, is it? Or… too early:

Senator Failure

Senator Failure

Message to Michael Yon: Once in awhile you should step away from the field where the action is actually taking place and into the far rear echelons of politics back home, where facts and first-hand observations can’t get in the way of popular memes and biases, and if you had done so you might have been able to learn that the war has long since been over, dood. We LOST it by congressional fiat.

Also worth stating is that while the senator who declared the surge in Iraq a failure received some criticism for doing so, the pronouncement was, if anything, too late. The proper time to declare a war effort a failure should be the moment when the first American body bag is filled. That’s how you teach our enemies not to mess.

Almost perfect (link added). If only Robert had mentioned The Children…

Posted in Politics and Poker, Sisyphus, Stragety, Uncategorized | 12 Comments »

Pony baloney

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 23, 2008

Some lines are too good to waste.

Having heard that one: How much more can John Edwards go away than he is now?

Posted in Jocularity, Narcissus Rex, O Mores!, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

Obama, the constitutionally unready

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 22, 2008

Heh. A while ago I argued that the Obama concept — as it was being bottled and sold at the time — was intriguing, but that it was not ready for market.

Now Glenn Reynolds links to Steve Calabrisi, who demonstrates how, by the magic of the living, breathing, metastasizing Constitution, he’s not even constitutional!

I hate getting poked by penumbras, don’t you?

Cross-posted on Dean’s World.

UPDATE:  No minor irony.

Posted in Jocularity, Lex scripta, Politics and Poker | 2 Comments »

There will be blood

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 21, 2008

The Ryan Lizza defenestration is so obviously wrong, so offensive all across the spectrum, that human sacrifice — “I had no idea; we have accepted the resignation of the staffer responsible” — will be required for atonement.

Again.

Posted in Medialites, Oppression, Politics and Poker | Leave a Comment »

The human of mouth

Posted by Ron Coleman on July 21, 2008

Dean Esmay:

[A]fter 8 years of watching every minor verbal stumble of George W. Bush be portrayed as proof of his being a drooling semi-sentient moron, I have very little sympathy for the people who are upset when people do the same thing to Obama. Welcome to the big leagues kids, where what you throw at others is likely to be thrown right back at you.

And Obama’s good — really good, unlike GWB, who’s really bad. But human, we are all, even the Chosen One.

Posted in Homo sapiens, Medialites, Politics and Poker | 4 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 »