Allow me to Rant a minute here …
Posted: January 9, 2013 Filed under: just because | Tags: erectile dysfunction drugs, Low Testosterone, penis cult, penis obession, penis pumps paid for with medicare dollars, rape culture 41 Comments
So, it’s been gloomy, drizzly, chilly and foggy here for at least a week. It poured last night and there were flood warnings every where. That means it’s one of those weeks where you tend to spend too much time indoors; and that, of course, means the TV is on way too much. Most of the time I’ve got TV news in the background or the Weather Channel given the right mix of severe weather conditions anyway. We had that outbreak of tornadoes a few weeks ago. I keep telling myself to pull out my videos and books but I also have to do some paper grading and such so it’s not always a good idea for me to get all that distracted.
It’s also been a month of dreary news. We’ve seen some of the worst puffery coming from congress. Many of these old white dudes have decided to take a stand on excessive spending. Our so-called leaders pride themselves on denying victims of Hurricane Sandy a pittance of our vast national wealth. Then, there’s the national “debate” on what kind of arsenals crazy white men are allowed to have and if we have to turn our grade schools into army bases while denying our children other things like computers, school lunches, and well paid and respected teachers. Add a heaping shit load of rape culture and predatory, pampered, and protected athletes from universities and high schools and just the regular news is enough to let you know that there’s so much rampant male bravado and privilege in this damned country gone amok that you wouldn’t think you’d need many more reminders. But, there are many more reminders that our culture is penis obsessed. It’s all over the damned TV these days.
Again, I’ve had the TV on way too much and I’m served up not only these real things but a big ol’ helping of men who need pills, potions, ointments, and
contraptions for erections. There are these TV commercials where ugly, nasty looking trolls like, say, Mitch McConnell, talk about how happy their wives are now because they are real mean again. Some how, I can’t imagine their wives being all that happy but maybe it’s just me.
I’m regaled with yucky details about how they have to lead seal team-like searches for bathroom locations because of poorly functioning prostates. How they still really find their wives charming–complete with flirty, child behaving adult women as props–so they just simply have to have ointments, pumps, and pills to pork them at will. The new, big affront is some kind of testosterone cream that evidently has horrible side effects for any child or women who comes near it. All of this is necessary because they might ‘fade’ into the background because their penises just don’t do things they used to do and which–by the way–is perfectly natural for their age.
You’re old, your whiteness isn’t that special, and your damned leaky, flaccid, penises shouldn’t be the continual obsession of drug companies and Madison Avenue. WTF is wrong with you? The worst of the ads come on late at night and involve some kind of suction contraption where some of the worst looking men in the world go on about being the best they can be.
These never ending assaults of televised white penis obsession are gross and rather traumatizing. It brings back all those icky moments in my life when I realized that a lot of my life was going to be defined around having to deal with them and deal with the fact that a portion of the planet was so obsessed with theirs that the fact I didn’t have one was going to be an issue for all kinds of things. It also reminds me that I have two daughters that still have to deal with this kind of crap.
First, and foremost it brings me back to a first date I had in my freshmen year of college who took me to see the movie Carnal Knowledge showing at one of those Midnight Movie extravaganzas that was so popular back in the day. He ended our date with the pitch “Wanna ball?” That should’ve been a warning to me right there. For those of you that want a reminder of that movie, here’s the last scenes that really stuck in my teenage mind. That would be the Ball Busters on parade slide show and the hooker scene where the male erection seems to be the center of everything.
Anyway, I’ve turned off the TV. I feel like it’s an all out assault. It reminds me of another
one of those movies that I saw with that same guy at that same midnight movie series about a month later. Flesh Gordan is a movie not worth seeing but I do want to mention the attack of the penisaurus scene because, wow they’re back, they’re flaccid and mad and they evidently need all kinds of pumps, attention, creams, pills, and air time. Oh, and did I mention they come attached to a lot of dudes that need some serious psychotherapy?
The Road Less Travelled and a tale of the Middle Path
Posted: January 8, 2013 Filed under: U.S. Politics | Tags: moderates, Republican Extremism 22 CommentsOne day a music teacher was teaching his student how to play a string instrument.
Siddartha heard the teacher say “if you wind the string too tight it will break and if you have the string too loose, there will be no music”. On hearing these words, Siddartha came to the realisation of the middle way of life – it must be neither strict and nor undisciplined.
Every culture has its stories and metaphors. The story of the music teacher on tuning is a famous one for those on the Buddhist path. Like all stories with morals, they usually apply to things way beyond any spiritual path. This is a good one for a set of folks that haven’t been on any kind of a spiritual path–let alone a middle one–for some time. In Buddhism, there is no permanent soul. In the Republican Party, there is agonizing soul-searching from people who may have misplaced theirs.
I offer you a few tales of the Lost Middle Path.
Here’s a name you may not have heard about recently but one that you will know well if you are of a certain age. Michelle Cottle at TDB writes “Mosbacher: I’m Furious at My Own Party”. Some people don’t worry so much about losing their souls or their way. They respond a little more to losing their donor base.
Best not to ask GOP fundraising legend Georgette Mosbacher about the state of her beloved party unless you want an earful. The co-chair of the RNC’s Finance Committee (and CEO of Borghese cosmetics), Mosbacher is “mad as hell” about the myriad ways the “brand has been tarnished”: the sorry state of the presidential primary process, the ongoing alienation of Latino voters, the “outrageous” Senate candidates that the party ran this cycle, the epic failure of the fiscal-cliff negotiations, and, most recently, the House’s dithering over disaster aid for the victims of superstorm Sandy.
“I’m angry!” fumes Mosbacher. “I’m angry about the stupid mistakes that were self-inflicted.” It’s this last part she finds the most enraging. Though she believes the party has “unfairly” been defined by its recent mistakes, she is very clear about where the ultimate blame lies: “We did it to ourselves.”
Mosbacher is, of course, not alone in her ire. Postelection, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a hastily assembled group of Republican leaders laboring to figure out where the party went wrong last cycle and how to get it back on track. So far, however, Mosbacher is unimpressed by their efforts.
“I have not seen an honest postmortem assessment yet,” she told me. “I have not seen anything that gives me any comfort right now.”
This is an unfortunate development for the GOP, because, as Mosbacher explained it to me this weekend: “I’m not writing any checks, and I’m not asking anyone else to write any checks until I hear something that makes sense to me.”
The root problem, as she sees it: the sorry state of the party’s leadership in Washington.
Take the implosion of certain Senate candidates, she says. “One or two bad apples—excuse the cliché—really can spoil the whole thing. But it’s incumbent on our leadership to know who those are. Don’t tell me these people didn’t know who they were before they spewed their nonsense.” Mosbacher grows increasingly agitated. “How did they get this far? Where was the leadership to stop that?”
Ah, yess, Georgette! It’s just a few bad apple that slipped by the DC leadership. Have you put on your Gucci pantsuit recently and talked to your insurrectionist, christofascist, gun loving, nutter grass roots recently? Ever been to a party convention overrun by folks sent by Pat Robertson’s goons and the local KKK?
Seems like a few of the cohort aren’t just withholding the check book these days.
The Republican Main Street Partnership, a Washington-based group that has promoted moderate GOP lawmakers and policies, will remove the word “Republican” from its title and welcome center-right Democrats in 2013, Yahoo News has learned.
The organization’s board of directors voted Tuesday morning to scrap party identification from its title and be known simply as “The Main Street Partnership.” The group’s new president, former Ohio Republican Rep. Steven LaTourette, told Yahoo News that he plans to begin conversations with Blue Dog Democrats and centrist groups in the coming months.
“The goal is to try and fill the void that is the middle,” LaTourette, who resigned from Congress this year, said. “The American political system is like a doughnut: You’ve got sides, but you don’t have anything in the middle, and it would be my goal to work with Republicans and Democrats who want to find the path forward to getting things done and compromise.”
In a statement released Tuesday afternoon, LaTourette added: “While we have changed our name, we have not changed our values or our mission. We will continue to be a right of center organization and continue to represent the governing wing of the Republican Party.”
The Main Street Partnership will also expand its super PAC, Defending Main Street, to aid center-right members of both parties, LaTourette said, adding, “It’s not going to be focused so much on party as it is on protecting people from the right and left extremes if they choose to do the right things.”
So, does any of this make sense or will it work? Can the Republican party be reformed or will some other solution to its extremism emerge? Who are the “Holy Grail of Voters according to the NJ?
What has happened is that the gap between the share of voters who identify themselves as Democrats compared with those who consider themselves Republicans has grown so wide that, for the GOP, winning a majority of the independent vote nationally is necessary but no longer sufficient for winning a national popular vote. In this past election, 38 percent of voters called themselves Democrats, and just 32 percent called themselves Republicans. In 2008, it was Democrats at 39 percent and Republicans at 32 percent. Over the past five elections, only in 2004 were the two parties evenly matched at 37 percent each. In the other four elections, the Democratic advantage has been 4 points in 2000 (when Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College), 5 points in 1996, 6 points in 2012, and 7 points in 2008. This is certainly one reason why Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the past six elections; generally there are more Democrats than Republicans. When the gap gets really wide, independents can’t make the difference.
Similarly, in those past five elections, Democrats have won between 81 and 89 percent of the vote of self-described liberals (averaging 86 percent), while Republicans have won between 72 and 84 percent of self-described conservatives (averaging 80 percent).
Why Republicans tend to stick together a bit more than Democrats—and why liberals tend to vote a little more for Democrats than conservatives do for Republicans—is anyone’s guess.
So if Democrats can reliably count on winning the lion’s share of the votes of Democrats and liberals while Republicans can be equally assured of the support of Republicans and conservatives, the question that arises is whether it’s independents or moderates that are decisive.
Hmmm, where are reasonable to go? Certainly not to today’s Republican party. But, the democratic party’s been pretty worthless too. Excuse me while I go check google maps for the location of the middle path in America. I’m certainly not going to ask Georgette to come out of her shoe closet long enough to figure out what’s gone wrong with the Republican party. I’m also not looking towards the current administration to tell me why it can’t even support policies that Nixon, Eisenhower, Ford and Reagan would’ve found reasonable, let alone the roster of Dem presidents that surrounded them. Now, where’s that damn path!
Another Tale since I just watched this on TV and nearly fainted.
In Dick Armey’s world, Democrats want abortion to be as available as pay-per-view movies.
The former House Republican Majority Leader and former Freedom Works chairman insisted on Tuesday that the left wants “abortion on demand” during a discussion on Hardball about the divisions in the GOP.
Armey acknowledged there had been several “foolish mistakes” the GOP made during the campaign season, including Mitt Romney’s remarks about the 47%. He insisted the party was trying to “rediscover its relationship” with constitutional limitations on big government and fiscal responsibility.
Host Chris Matthews asked why, if the Republicans are really the party of limited government, does the party have its candidates trying to get rid of contraception, and outlaw gay marriage and abortion. “Why don’t you stay out of people’s lives if you really wanted limited government?” asked Matthews.
The former lawmaker insisted that there were simply a few bad apple candidates, just like the Democrats have “had a few rather strange people” too. When Matthews pointed out the GOP platform includes items about personhood and contraception, Armey insisted the Democrats also have “unusual” and “strange” items in their platform.
“Name one,” Matthews challenged.
“Homosexual marriage, all right. Abortion on demand,” Armey shot back. “These issues are in your platform. You don’t think it’s strange for these issues to be in your platform pointing in one direction, but you consider it outrageous that the other party has the same issues pointing in the another direction in their platform.”
Matthews responded, saying “The Democratic party generally supports Roe vs. Wade. It does not support ‘abortion on demand,’” adding the issue of gay marriage is going to be decided state by state, not nationally.
Tuesday Reads, Part I: “Rape is as American as Apple Pie”
Posted: January 8, 2013 Filed under: morning reads, Violence against women, War on Women | Tags: College athletes, high school athletes, Lizzy Seeberg, Notre Dame, rape culture, sexual assault, Traci Lords 20 CommentsGood Morning!!
I decided to do the morning reads in two parts today. Part I is another tale of America’s rape culture. Part II will provide other news links. That way if you can’t face reading Part I, you can return for Part II in a little bit. Here goes….
I was very glad to see that Notre Dame was crushed, 42-14, in the BCS championship game last night. Thank goodness keeping two accused rapists on their team didn’t help Notre Dame in the end. Dave Zirin at the Nation compares the reactions of sports writers to the scandals at Penn State vs. Notre Dame:
Two storied college football programs. Two rape scandals. Only one national outcry. How do we begin to explain the exponentially different levels of attention paid to crimes of violence and power at Penn State and Notre Dame?
At Penn State, revered assistant coach Jerry Sandusky was raping young boys while being shielded by a conspiracy of silence of those in power at the football powerhouse. At Notre Dame, it’s not young boys being raped by an assistant coach. It’s women being threatened, assaulted, and raped by players on the school’s unbeaten football team. Yet sports media that are overwhelmingly male and ineffably giddy about Fighting Irish football’s return to prominence have enacted their own conspiracy of silence….
The main reason this is taking place is because their accusers are not pressing charges. One cannot, because she is dead. Nineteen-year-old Lizzy Seeberg, a student at neighboring St. Mary’s College, took her own life after her claims of being assaulted in a dorm room were met with threats and indifference. The other accuser, despite description of a brutal rape, won’t file charges—“absolutely 100%”—because of what Seeberg experienced.
I’ll provide a few more links about Lizzy’s story in a minute, but Zirin says straight out what I have been thinking for a long time: Violence against women has become “normalized” in American culture.
This is not just a Notre Dame issue. At too many universities, too many football players are schooled to see women as the spoils of being a campus god. But it’s also an issue beyond the commodification of women on a big football campus. It’s the fruit of a culture where politicians can write laws that aim to define the difference between “rape” and “forcible rape” and candidates for the Senate can speak about pregnancy from rape being either a “gift from God” or biologically impossible in the case of “legitimate rape.” It’s a culture where comedians like Daniel Tosh or Tucker Max can joke about violently raping, as Max puts it, a “gender hardwired for whoredom.” The themes of power, rape and lack of accountability are just as clear in the case of the Steubenville, Ohio, football players not only boasting that they “so raped” an unconscious girl but feeling confident enough to videotape their boasts.
After I read this article, I looked for more background on the Notre Dame situation. I ended up so depressed and nauseated that I couldn’t write this post last night. Sorry–I’ve been doing that a lot lately, but sometimes after I read the latest bad news, I need to sleep on it before I can write about it.
Melinda Henneberger, a Notre Dame alumnus and Washington Post columnist, has been writing about the cover-up at Notre Dame for a couple of years now, and she probably deserves credit for keeping the story alive, though low on the radar. Here’s a piece she wrote in December: Why I won’t be cheering for old Notre Dame.
Two years ago, Lizzy Seeberg, a 19-year-old freshman at Saint Mary’s College, across the street from Notre Dame, committed suicide after accusing an ND football player of sexually assaulting her. The friend Lizzy told immediately afterward said she was crying so hard she was having trouble breathing.
Yet after Lizzy went to the police, a friend of the player’s sent her a series of texts that frightened her as much as anything that had happened in the player’s dorm room. “Don’t do anything you would regret,” one of them said. “Messing with Notre Dame football is a bad idea.”
At the time of her death, 10 days after reporting the attack to campus police, who have jurisdiction for even the most serious crimes on school property, investigators still had not interviewed the accused. It took them five more days after she died to get around to that, though they investigated Lizzy herself quite thoroughly, even debriefing a former roommate at another school with whom she’d clashed.
Six months later — after the story had become national news — Notre Dame did convene a closed-door disciplinary hearing. The player testified that until he actually met with police, he hadn’t even known why they wanted to speak to him — though his buddy who’d warned Lizzy not to mess with Notre Dame football had spoken to investigators 13 days earlier. He was found “not responsible,” and never sat out a game.
Even after Lizzy killed herself, Notre Dame officials continued to investigate her and try to tarnish her character. They painted her as possibly mentally ill and claimed she had been the aggressor in the assault. Notre Dame’s president, Holy Cross Fr. John Jenkins, repeatedly refused to meet with Lizzy’s family and did not even extend condolences to them after her death. It is obvious that there is a culture at Notre Dame (and at other colleges and universities) that protects athletes and covers up their violent acts against female students. Naturally, the next girl–who was violently raped–by a member of the football team decided it wasn’t worthwhile to complain about it.
Monday Reads from my Ivory Tower in the 9th Ward
Posted: January 7, 2013 Filed under: New Orleans | Tags: 12th night, A library of one's own, Chrystia Freeland, Joan of Arc, plutocracy, Scientifc Method 51 Comments
Good Morning!
I’m always looking for good books to read. I have to admit that I’m terribly old school. My favorite presents to myself are books, videos, and music cds. I do not trust anything I have to get from the internet given I’ve been without electricity and connectivity for extended periods of time.
I am not a Luddite. I saw the original internet “turned on” in the 1970s in high school. It was like some kind of print out on a huge printer from the closest university that had linked in to our Math Resource Center that said here we are … university (I remember it as Michigan U) and US government to select schools. I first had a personal connection to the internet in 1981 on my IBM peanut with a funky phone mouth/ear piece to modem connection. So, I’m aptly nicknamed “wirehead”. I’ve been connected for longer than Dr. Daughter has been alive.
However, I like the real thing. Call me old fashioned. I liked to write on my textbooks. I like the feel of selecting a video and having a long term relationship with it. I love the anime series Cowboy Bebop and have the complete episodes. I also have the manga and I love the feel of raised ink.
My first experience trying to copy an entire series over years was Upstairs Downstairs. I have the complete episodes on beta–yes that’s BETA–copied straight from my TV and my mom’s TV. It’s no wonder that Downton Abbey is my latest edition. I also have Treme (although my Katrina PTSD keeps me a bit edgy about watching it) and one another series. I passed my addiction to Criminal Minds to BB. The rest of my collection is an odd assortment of movies. My “cloud” is supplemented by a row of book shelves that line a hallway and my bedroom. They get dusty and old but then so do I.
I’ve discovered solar rechargers and hurricane lamps that run on lamp oil. This is my black out technology. The first thing I will do if I’m ever lucky enough to come into a huge amount of cash is go off the grid for everything. I also continue to build my little garden of herbs, vegetables, and fruit trees here in the ninth Ward so very near the Mississippi. Did I mention I can see oil tankers, cruise ships, and destroyers from my front porch?
I fully embrace my eccentricities but, I’ve lived without TV/cable for months and with sporadic electricity recently so I know I’m one storm away from the 18th century.
Reading has always been a safe haven for me. That and playing my piano. All of these things I do without electricity and with plenty of printed material. That’s another story but let me tell you, I still cling to music and a good book when I need to get through my life.
So, here’s a review of a book that sounds interesting. It’s about Life Among the Plutocrats. The exact title is “Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else” by Chrystia Freeland (Doubleday, Canada 2012).
Today’s plutocrats are the latest variation on an old theme, and at the same time they’re strikingly new in many ways.
Societies have supported plutocratic classes at least since ancient Rome, and the Gilded Age of the US after the Civil War presaged our own: A rising class of self-made men, imaginative exploiters of new technology and wider trade. Then it was the telegraph and the railroad; now it’s the internet and the container ship.
Freeland’s plutocrats are mostly self-made also, and overwhelmingly male; one very rich man suggested to her that women lack the “killer instinct” needed for real success. But they are not the idle heirs of rich parents. The “working rich” are a distinct class: smart, ambitious and often outsiders.
What’s more, they represent a dramatic change from the 19th and early 20th century, Freeland argues. Then, the conflict was between capital and workers, with workers doomed to lose because they couldn’t own the means of production.
The communist revolutions were supposed to transfer those means to the workers, but instead transferred them to a new class of upstart intellectuals and technical experts. She cites Milovan Djilas, Tito’s second in command in communist Yugoslavia. In the 1960s Djilas wrote “The New Class” to describe this phenomenon as a corruption of communist orthodoxy; Tito threw him in jail.
They didn’t come entirely out of the blue. Freeland documents the gradual but decisive shift in fields like finance, which since the age of the superstar had been regulated to the point of boredom. This came along with a new struggle: Now it wasn’t capital versus labour, but capital versus talent.Even more ironically, the same new intellectual class now runs capitalism — with the exception of the princelings of the Chinese Communist Party, the billionaire sons and grandsons of Mao’s old proletarian comrades. But elsewhere, smart young men got possession of ex-Soviet resources, or an operating system for newfangled personal computers, and within months were rich beyond imagining.
Here’s an NPR interview with author Chrystia Freeland.
Those at the very top, Freeland says, have told her that American workers are the most overpaid in the world, and that they need to be more productive if they want to have better lives.
“It is a sense of, you know, ‘I deserve this,’ ” she says. “I do think that there is both a very powerful sense of entitlement and a kind of bubble of wealth which makes it hard for the people at the very top to understand the travails of the middle class.”
One standout moment Freeland recalls is a conversation with a billionaire who spoke with great sympathy about some friends who’d come to him for investment advice. “And he said to me, ‘You know what? They only had $10 million saved. How are they going to live on that?’ I kid you not, he was really worried about them.”
Today’s plutocrats come down across the political spectrum, Freeland says; there are definitely liberal billionaires. “It is, however, also the case that in the United States there has been a real shift away from Barack Obama, and a lot of these guys loved him in 2008 … They feel really angry at Obama, and it’s not just the question of taxes.” Freeland calls it “a profound emotional thing.”
“In America,” she says, “we have equated personal business success with public virtue. And to a certain extent, your moral and civic virtue could be measured by the size of your bank account.”
I also embrace my inner geek and outre scholar. You know that I absolutely hate the way politicians and many popular cult figures in conservative media demonize science, facts, and education. Here’s a bit on that worth reading in The New Statesmen:Brian Cox and Robin Ince: Politicians must not elevate mere opinion over science.
The story of the past hundred years is one of unparalleled human advances, medically, technologically and intellectually. The foundation for these changes is the scientific method. In every room in your house, there are innovations that in 1912 would have been considered on the cusp of magic. The problem with a hundred years of unabated progress, however, is that its continual nature has made us blasé. We expect immediate hot water, 200 channels of television 24 hours a day, and the ability to speak directly to anyone anywhere in the world any time via an orbiting network of spacecraft. Any less is tantamount to penury. Where once the arrival of a television in a street or the availability of international flight would have been greeted with excitement and awe, and the desire to understand how those innovations came into being, it is now expected that every three months you’ll be queuing outside the Apple store for a new wafer-thin slab of brushed metal, blithely unaware that watching a movie in the palm of your hand has been made possible only through improbable and hard-won leaps in the understanding of the quantum behaviour of electrons in silicon.
With each new generation, the memory of appallingly high child mortality rates, tuberculosis and vast slums grows fainter and fainter. As the past becomes hazy, we start to believe that there can be no other sort of world. We become nonchalant about vaccines, to the point of seeing them as a lifestyle choice akin to a decision to eat only organically farmed fruit, because we attend fewer and fewer funerals of those who died too young. The technology and advances in knowledge that cosset us have removed, to a large extent, the need to use our ingenuity and to think rationally. Believing complete drivel was once selected against; now it gets you an expert slot on daytime TV.
Against this rather depressing introductory backdrop, however, there are faint glimmers of hope, because science, rational think-ing and evidence-based policy-making are enjoying a revival. Part of the evidence for this statement can be found on the pages of a certain type of newspaper, where the idea that there may be an adjudicator above opinion is treated as an affront to the ideology of the columnist. The adjudicator in question is nature, the universe beyond the Notting Hill basement kitchen, and the wonderful thing about nature is that opinions can be tested against it. The key to science is in this simple statement from the Nobel Prize-winning scientist Richard Feynman, who once remarked: “It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is – if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong.”
This brings me to my own field of financial economics and a blog post on science, politics, mathematics and finance. I do this as I play hookey–or procrastinate grading–while writing this blog post rather than spend time eyeballing the homework of my graduate students trying to figure out how to hedge FOREX exposure. I have to agree that models are a human construct, but still, there’s a need to sort things out in a systemic and provable way. So, the punchline to this blog post grabbed me. Is science an adjudicator of opinions as the authors above (C&I) aver?
BTW, if you haven’t ever heard of their BBC radio show “The Infinite Monkey Cage” you must get on line and find it now.
I also learned the benefits of good old fashioned radio when everything else goes off with the cable and electricity.
C&I base their science on observation, data, and the predictive models constructed on the basis of the data. However there appears to be an assumption that “science” will come up with the right models, modulo the approximation problem, given the data. However this approach makes some omissions: what data is collected and why (science does not work by collecting reams of data in the hope something will drop out), data analysis is subjective (is climate data a hockey stick or a bath – see McIntyre&McKitrick, what does the data say?), models are human constructions.
Making these observations does not seem relevant to C&I, but they are crucial in modern finance, an arena of people competing to select and interpret data and develop the best models. It is a microcosm of good science, and for this reason it should be taken more seriously by the scientific establishment. Not least because modern finance is more relevant, and therefore more interesting, to the public than cosmology or theoretical physics.
Yes, modern economics and finance are relevant and scientific. The problem is that politicians seem to think that faith/dogma based lies are infinitely more useful.
It’s officially Carnival 2013 in New Orleans. Sunday was 12th night and we began with a parade to honor Jone of Arc and a street car ride of a
lot of drunks. The Joan of Arc parade is great visual feast since its participants wear medieval costumes. This week we feast on King Cakes. Lately, the King Cake infused vodka beckons.
“Joan of Arc honors the patron saint of New Orleans which was St. Joan of Arc,” Mardi Gras expert Arthur Hardy said. “Twelfth night is her birthday, so it’s very appropriate. It’s a new small walking club with some horse riders and now some marching groups.”
We are a walking parade open to men, women, and children, dedicated to historical costumery, artistry, handmade throws, and the celebration of New Orleans and her ties to France. Joan of Arc embodies the best qualities of New Orleans and her citizens: loyalty, faith, courage, and determination. We honor Joan on her birthday each year by walking in medieval and Renaissance costumes with horses, live music, a variety of quirky and quaint parade throws, medieval carts and banners, and gifts of king cake and champagne through the French Quarter, from the Bienville statue (representing the founding of New Orleans) to the Joan of Arc statue at Decatur and St. Phillip Street. At this time we have approximately 35 krewe members and will welcome another 10-15 new members this year. We enjoy being a small, family-friendly krewe with a parade that at this time lasts a brief 30-40 minutes from start to finish. Our parade begins at 6:00 p.m. at Bienville Park on Decatur, goes up Conti Street to Chartres, across Jackson Square in front of St. Louis Cathedral, and continues on Chartres up to St. Phillip where we turn towards the River to reach Joan’s statue, a gift from France to the City of New Orleans.
Oh, dear, was this really a newsy thread or just one of my esoteric set of links? JJ covered my archeology fetish yesterday so this will have to suffice for today. It’s a sweet break before we slippery slope towards the inability of Congress to pay for those things for which they voted. Now, if I could just get a better pay check for life in the ivory tower I would be just fine!!
Meanwhile, anything out there of newsy interest to you? Today, I think I will stay in my ivory tower and wish away the likes of our idiot political class. So, my point is that Joan of Arc makes for a great, romantic, showy parade and science makes for effective policy. Vraiment, mes amis!!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?









Recent Comments