Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

We’re all sorry now

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 11, 2008

Most valuable commenter Ara Rubyan writes in and asks:

Given that you’ve written about how all politicians from FDR through Obama have failed to adequately respond to the Holocaust and genocide, could you be persuaded to address President Bush’s latest comments after visiting Yad Vashem?

And if you do, could you please include the comments of Sen. McGovern :

Former U.S. Senator George McGovern piloted a B-24 Liberator in December 1944, and his squadron bombed Nazi oil facilities less than five miles from Auschwitz. In 2005, he said “There is no question we should have attempted…to go after Auschwitz. There was a pretty good chance we could have blasted those rail lines off the face of the Earth, which would have interrupted the flow of people to thos death chambers, and we had a pretty good chance of knocking out those gas ovens.” Reflecting the ongoing controversy, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum historian Peter Black’s response to McGovern’s argument was that had the rail lines been destroyed, the Nazis might have shot the Jews instead. He also said the government couldn’t pinpoint where the gas chambers were and would have had to carpet-bomb the camp.

Yes, I can, Ara. What McGovern says is (as usual) not all that interesting. But I’m surprised at what Black says. I am not a Holocaust expert, but the reason the Germans didn’t shoot the Jews wasn’t because they were shy about using bullets. In the early days of the extermination policy, when German forces sliced through Eastern Europe, they killed Jews the old-fashioned way — drowning them in marshes, burning them up in synagogues, and of course, shooting them. (Incidentally, the trick of making them dig their own graves and then kneel before them for execution was invented by Lenin’s boys.) They switched to gas for efficiency. Obviously they could always have switched back to less efficient methods, but that would have slowed the killing machine — and diverted manpower, and also ammunition.

But regardless of the incremental effect on the genocide — and that is nothing to sneeze at; he who save a single life saves an entire world — knocking out the gas chambers would have been the moral thing to do. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in O Mores!, Oppression, Past is prologue | 12 Comments »

Forty-four years later

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 11, 2008

On this day in 1964,

In a landmark report, U.S. Surgeon General Luther Leonidas Terry issued the warning that smoking may be hazardous for one’s health, concluding that it has a causative role in lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and other illnesses.

We card

That’s how long it’s been since there’s been no excuse. (From Wikipedia.)

It’s bad enough that people do this to themselves — smoke cigarettes — despite what everybody has known in those 44 years. What is also remarkable is the hypocrisy of everyone else in the murder-suicide chain — but most of all, the state, which profits massively from tobacco taxes excised from addicts and from corporate and business taxes on the manufacture and sale of cigarettes, which doles out billion-dollar legal fees to politically-connected law firms that represent the “victims,” runs the judicial system that let that dirty deal go down, and pretends in the most preposterously transparent manner to actually care about who smokes.

Our country and our economy are addicted to assisted suicide by tobacco, and almost all of us are, one way or another, in on the game.

Posted in Americana | 3 Comments »

Before the storm

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 10, 2008

Early yesterday morning, in Passaic, New Jersey. I love these moments, where dark and light wrestle in full view and the atoms are crackling with anticipation.

What’s not to love?

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Velvety

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 10, 2008

This morning my voice is a nice, velvety baritone. Meaning, of course, that there’s a bunch of spit hanging onto my second-tenor pipes. I don’t know if this means the end of the last cold, the beginning of a new one, or if at age 44 my voice has finally finished changing.

But, gosh, I like it this way.

I think I would just be so much more effective as a person if I had a deep voice. And, you know, happier, too. I just love the sound of the opening verse of Lou Rawls’s “You’ll Never Find'” — he just scoops up that “You’ll Never Find” with that beautiful vocal tone and yes! That’s where I want to be.the-jewish-partner.jpg

This morning, I almost am.

Baby.

Posted in Ars Longa, Heart and spirit, Jocularity | 11 Comments »

Just so’s we’re all on the same page (pun intended)…

Posted by Casey Tompkins on January 9, 2008

The inestimable Ara Rubyan recently mentioned the infamous Florida 2000 “butterfly ballot” as an example of how Democratic voters have been “disenfranchised.”

I would like to take a moment to provide an honest-to-God of the actual ballot used in that election.

Florida 2000 ballot

Now, there’s these black pointy things called arrows. The arrows “point” to the appropriate party.

For example, arrow #3 “points” to the Republican Party slate of GW Bush & Dick Cheney. Arrow #4 “points” to the Reform Party slate, while arrow #5 “points” to the Democratic Party slate. Feel free to click on the above image for a higher-rez photo.

Now. If you are too bloody senile, stupid, or stoned, to figure out that that arrow #3 points to the Republican Party slate, while arrow #4 points to the Reform Party Slate, and arrow #5 points to the Democratic Party Slate… I’m sorry. You have the mental process of a cracked soap dish, and are hence ethically and morally not allowed to participate in the electoral process of this country.

Folks, we used this exact same bloody ballot in Ohio for freaking decades. Literally. This image precisely reproduces the appearance of the Ohio ballot for the Presidential election for literally every year I’ve ever voted, except for 2006, related here.

Let us take a moment to note that Ohio voters have never attained national attention for the locals’ inability to comprehend the ballot. The “butterfly ballot” form has worked quite well in this state for literally over 20 years.

Still, there are those who would have you believe that this ballot form somehow disenfranchised Florida voters in the year 2000. I counter-propose that any putative confusion lies within the alleged minds of illiterate, illegal, or just plain decrepit & cornfused voters down there. I cite in evidence the above-mentioned simple fact that Ohio voters have used the same form for several decades with nary a hiccup.

I also note -not having reviewed my own 2004 post linked above recently- that Ohio now requires ID, but that it is not narrowly limited:

First I had to provide identification, something new for Ohio. The nice ladies at the polling station told me the requirement wasn’t restricted “official” IDs such as state of Ohio ID, or even a photo ID such as a driver’s license.. All that is required is a valid document with your correct name and address on it. One woman brought in her checkbook, and the the nice ladies told me a phone bill and/or electric bill were equally acceptable.

I repeat here my original thought: “This impresses me as a healthy compromise which helps eliminate vote fraud while not placing an undue burden on citizens.”

I therefore ask those generally opposed to required-ID for voting: do you consider the above an acceptable form? If not, why not?

Posted in Politics and Poker | 10 Comments »

The holidays are over

Posted by Casey Tompkins on January 9, 2008

Thank goodness!

I would like to extend my apologies to Likelihood readers for the recent hiatus. Ron made a very kind and generous offer to allow me to post here; I published a grand announcement, then I “went black” for the past two weeks.

My only excuse/reason is that Monday (Jan 7) was the first day off I’ve had since Christmas Day, and I’m bloody fried. I observed the 7th by completely vegging out. Had a six-pack, watched a movie, then crashed. Didn’t even do the laundry.

I should have at least put up a “blogging will be light for the next XX days” post, and for that I apologize to Ron and Likelihood readers.

Posted in Blogophilia, Uncategorized | 8 Comments »

Why ID?

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 9, 2008

In the context of the voter ID card issue, Orin Kerr considers some Supreme Court precedent — with a focus on Justiceunknown-comic.jpg Kennedy — on the topic of the constitutional recognition of the value and need for the state to be able to demand, in the appropriate circumstances, that a free person with all sorts of rights … nonetheless tell it who the hell he is.

Posted in Lex scripta, Oppression | 14 Comments »

Mee-yow!

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 9, 2008

Katherine Coble decries the phenomenon of “the en vogue idea of having your own pet Gay Man®”:

Having a gay male friend to be funny with you and boost your self-esteem is sort of like having a Jewish friend to balance your checkbook or a black friend to play basketball with.

Oh, gosh, don’t mention the checkbook part to my wife. She’ll think she married out. Actually, I’d have the gay guy do the checking, the black guy provide the one-liners, and, of course, the (other) Jewish guy to play basketball with. Because he can’t jump any higher than I can.

And, no, I don’t know any gay Jewish black men.  Almost, but not quite.

Posted in Homo sapiens, Jocularity | 1 Comment »

On your mind, on your blog, on your slide rule

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 9, 2008

Jonathan Gewirtz at Chicago Boyz writes about the “Perfect [Internet] Storm.” The whole thing should be read, but I was struck by this opening sentence:

A fascinating post by Wretchard on the dynamics of public events in the Internet age, and on the ways in which such events are now subject to quantitative analysis of the type that has previously been reserved for quantum systems and securities markets[.]

Not quite, I think. As Glenn Reynolds recently pointed out in an aside, there is plenty of reason not to be overenthusiastic about the proposition that the Web provides “razor-precise metrics.” Anyone who has a blog knows this, and for a guy with that big of a sample size in terms of readership, demographics, etc. to remind us of it is instructive.

The post at Chicago Boyz actually veers off in a somewhat different direction. But it’s worth considering this:  The phenomenon described there, which distinguishes between what people will say in virtual life versus and what they will publicly say in real life, is certainly complicated by what we may think they’re saying online and what we deduce that means in real life.

In fact, it’s only a matter of time before some massive, steam-driven, state-of-the-art “quantitative analysis” predicts or describes some extraordinary Internet phenomenon and turns out to be dead wrong. Considering that this is the presidential election season, that time could come very soon.

Don’t be fooled by predictions and analyses just because there are integers.

Posted in Nuvo-Techno, Scientificus, Stragety | 7 Comments »

Johnny, we hardly knew ye

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 8, 2008

Best line of the night? Instapundit:

I’M WATCHNG JOHN EDWARDS SAY “This race is not about me.” Not with those numbers it’s not.

They asked an NPR analyst, “Edwards says he’s staying in this race till the convention. Can he keep that up?” She said, “No.”

On the other hand, someone else made the point that, well, what else does he have to do till then? I’d rather not think about it.

He cannot go find that something else fast enough. Phony (I did not say “pony”!) class war waged by the super-rich, we don’t need.

Posted in Politics and Poker | 3 Comments »