- April 2015
- March 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- October 2014
- July 2014
- December 2013
- February 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- April 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- July 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- April 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- November 2002
- October 2002
- September 2002
- August 2002
- July 2002
- June 2002
- May 2002
- April 2002
- March 2002
Andrei Rublev — which if you haven’t seen the film, you ought to.
One of the most things your humble writer faces from time to time is that there’s so much quality stuff out there: arts, culture, politics, and books. Folks love to complain about the downfall of social media descending into cat pictures and Upworthy-style clickbait — and there’s some truth to that — but it sidesteps all of the really excellent stuff out there. Truth be told, if you can push past the saccharine, there’s a lot of tremendous content that hearkens back to the blogosphere of 10 years ago, where arts, culture, politics, etc. truly reigned supreme.
Of course, my tastes vary from the eclectic to the sublime. Politics just happens to be one of a many-sided intellectual palette, and though not all these things will interest everyone, I suspect that some of it might interest a few of you… and to that end, I’ll share.
Meet the 26-year-old who’s taking on Thomas Piketty’s ominous warnings about inequality (Washington Post): Loyal readers will recall our previous conversation about Pinketty’s Capital and the discussion over r > g (rate of return on capital > economic growth) as an argument regarding income disparity affecting our ability to have a dialogue within a republican form of government. Turns out, Pinketty was wrong… and the guy who flipped the card table was not only a 26 year old PhD candidate, but did it in the comments section of Marginal Revolution:
The comment blossomed into a near-unprecedented career opportunity for a student who just recently turned 26 years old, and who remains a year away from earning his doctoral degree. It will culminate on Friday morning at the Brookings Institution in Washington, where Rognlie will present a research paper before an often-cutthroat audience of all-star economists, including a Nobel Prize winner, Robert Solow, who will critique Rognlie’s analysis.
Organizers say it will almost certainly be the first paper at the prestigious Brookings Papers on Economic Activity that was commissioned based on a blog comment. It is also a rare honor for a graduate student to present a sole-authored paper there; a quick scan of Brookings records shows a similar appearance by the now-renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs when he was a doctoral student in 1979.
Fear not the comments section, folks. Just try to use your real name — no one takes a pseudonym seriously. Continue reading
Of is it the politicization of foreign affairs?
Officials in Washington said that the “chickenshit” epithet — with which an anonymous administration official branded Netanyahu several months ago — was mild compared to the language used in the White House when news of Netanyahu’s planned speech came in.
In his address the Israeli leader is expected to speak about stalled US-led nuclear negotiations with Iran, and to urge lawmakers to slap Tehran with a new round of tougher sanctions in order to force it to comply with international demands. The Mossad intelligence service on Thursday went to the rare length of issuing a press statement to deny claims, cited by Kerry, that its chief Tamir Pardo had told visiting US politicians that he opposed further sanctions.
So the Republicans talk to Likud; Democrats to Israeli Labour? Of course, before we get on our high horse about politics stopping at the waters’ edge (a principle I emphatically endorse), let’s not forget Speaker Pelosi’s trip to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad back in 2007 shortly after the Democrats took control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Once the genie is out of the bottle, it’s hard to put him back in.
Nevertheless, it is impolitic at best to be labeling the leader of one of our closest allies in the Middle East as “chickenshit” in the middle of perhaps some of the most intense negotiations to broker a Palestinian peace.
When most presidents seem to focus on foreign affairs in their second term, President Obama seems to be failing miserably to establish concrete results when in 2008, his campaign had set the standards so very high. That’s unfortunate — because much more could and ought to be done… with less cowboy diplomacy, if one can borrow the term.
The RTD’s Jeff Schapiro opines on the bills concerning business and free enterprise moving through the 2015 General Assembly. I do have to give credit for a classic line:
The legislature has been in session only a week, but already the sturm und drang of an election year has become a screen behind which complex and costly issues unfold often unnoticed — until consumers get the bill.
The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star doesn’t think the bill that would make “Our Great Virginia” our Virginia state anthem — set to the tune of “Shenandoah” and sponsored by Speaker Bill Howell — should be passed into law. To wit:
If Virginia is indeed in the mood to revisit the matter of its musical representation, it should consider its options.
The eight finalists from the old subcommittee remain on its website. They include an old Carter Family song, “Longing for Old Virginia.”
Its merits include a lack of offensive lyrics.
No offensive lyrics? I mean, if that’s a hurdle to jump then great start, I suppose…
But I digress. I’ve long argued that there are excellent alternatives, “Shenandoah” being one of them. Eddie From Ohio’s “Old Dominion” is a close second and a shop favorite here.
But for a really chest thumping anthem? One that really screams Virginia? You couldn’t do worse than “Jefferson and Liberty” could you?
The gloomy night before us flies,
The reign of terror now is o’er;
Its gags, inquisitors, and spies,
Its herds of harpies are no more!
Rejoice, Columbia’s sons, rejoice!
To tyrants never bend the knee,
But join with heart, and soul, and voice,
For Jefferson and Liberty!
No lordling here, with gorging jaws
Shall wring from industry the food;
Nor fiery bigot’s holy laws
Lay waste our fields and streets in blood!
Here strangers from a thousand shores
Compelled by tyranny to roam,
Shall find amidst abundant stores,
A nobler and happier home.
Here Art shall lift her laurelled head,
Wealth, Industry, and Peace, divine;
And where dark, pathless forests spread,
Rich fields and lofty cities shine.
From Europe’s wants and woes remote,
A friendly waste of waves between,
Here plenty cheers the humblest cot,
And smiles on every village green.
Here free as air, expanded space,
To every soul and sect shall be —
That sacred privilege of our race —
The worship of the Deity.
Let foes to freedom dread the name;
But should they touch the sacred tree,
Twice fifty thousands swords would flame
For Jefferson and liberty.
From Georgia to Lake Champlain,
From seas to Mississippi’s shore,
Ye sons of freedom loud proclaim —
“The reign of terror is no more.”
Now that’s a state anthem! Though one could suppose that mentions of “streets in blood” and “worship of the Diety” might be just a tad offensive for some more tender sentiments…
Color me confused, but I haven’t quite figured out what the liberal obsession with Common Core is just yet. Certainly, I understand why conservatives, homeschoolers, and a number of folks who abide in the loving arms of common sense have against it.
Yet I haven’t quite discovered how the algorithm “Common Core Good : Standards of Learning Bad” really works:
Virginia is different from those other states, as is its curriculum in civics, something that befits a state where the first Europeans arrived in 1607. A state home to the New World’s oldest legislative body (hint: That’s the General Assembly). The birthplace of presidents, including four of the first five.
Despite a mark of 86 percent on the current SOL civics exam, legislators would have the state’s teachers stop what they’re doing – stop helping Virginia’s kids actually understand citizenship – to help them memorize answers to a federal test.
Normally I’d fob this off with a “read it all” or something to that effect, but those two paragraphs right there are the thrust of the argument. The rest? Well… lots of fury but hardly sound.
One problem? The Virginia Pilot waxes furiously on how such standards are rather unnecessary, as 86% of Virginia students already pass the civics portion of the SOLs, and even cites the Virginia Education Association’s (VEA) opposition as reason enough to oppose HB 1306.
Yet with five seconds of careful pruning, the Daily Progress discovers this little gem:
“We’ll come out in opposition to that one,” she said. “We’re not in favor of increasing any standardized testing hoop.”
So which is it — is this unnecessary, as the VA Pilot suggests? Or is it increasing the standard, as the VEA suggests (and uses as the basis of it’s opposition)?
Again… color me confused. But it sounds as if Delegate Dickie Bell might be on to something if even the opponents of the bill don’t clearly understand why they are opposed… other than they simply are opposed to the SOL’s in principle and would much rather have a more federalized approach towards measuring the education level of Virginia students.
If there was one line to describe the odd and deplorably hilarious saga of l’affaire Morrissey, this paragraph has to take the cake.
Morrissey arrives at the General Assembly building about 20 minutes before the session is scheduled to begin. He tells reporters that when he was released from jail this morning, his Jaguar was covered in ice and he couldn’t get the door open.
Because those are the daily problems of most inmates at the Richmond City Jail — yes?
All due apologies to Homer and Odysseus, of course.
Brought to you by The Chieftains… who are fine purveyors of civilization and culture. And whiskey. And music. And Ireland. And awesome.