Friday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Two from the movie musical Wizard of Oz, “Courage”: here and (not) here.
  2. Missing the point, what he said might be true, but what is the point and what is the effect of saying it? How is it useful?
  3. Considering space, and while the space of mathematical concepts is larger not smaller than what we perceive, I think there is still a strong anthropological perceptual bias to mathematical concepts and intuitions. Consider for a while what maths might be developed by a intelligent race whose environment and perception made the notion of the integer as foreign or abstracted as infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces.
  4. Mr Obama on foreign affairs, here and (the cartoon is good) here.
  5. How it will be seen vs being responsible.
  6. Green party, low bar or high bar?
  7. Stepping in others shoes.
  8. Examining the “crazy” meme regarding Ms O’Donnell.
  9. Economics of Obamacare.
  10. first ad.
  11. Hmm. Or better perhaps, duh! 

6 responses to “Friday Highlights

  1. Missing the point, what he said might be true, but what is the point and what is the effect of saying it? How is it useful?

    It’s the opposite of what the bedwetters on the right say — that terrorism is an “existential threat” to the United States. It is useful because it completely changes all the cost/benefit analyses. It puts the threat into perspective, in other words.

    Mr Obama on foreign affairs, here and (the cartoon is good) here.

    Chess and backgammon? Nah. Israel is pretending to engage in the peace talks in order to score some PR points while they continue expanding into as much land is possible before a deal is forced upon them while the Palestinians are pretending to engage in the peace talks in order to score some PR points while they continue to wallow in their misery. So maybe Israel and Palestine are playing Go except Israel is bigger and gets away with continually moving the Palestinians’ stones after they’ve been placed. (Both sides are trying to cheat, but Israel has more power. Every couple of hours, Palestine lashes out and Israel lays down a disproportionate smackdown.)

    Examining the “crazy” meme regarding Ms O’Donnell.

    Yeah, I don’t think “crazy” is quite right. More like “naive and gullible.”

    Economics of Obamacare.“Competition used to discourage insurers from providing lousy access to care”

    Libertarians are so cute with their blind faith in the market that flies in the face of evidence.

  2. Hmm. Or better perhaps, duh! A commenter recently remarked that the Democrat notion of nanny state does not “tell us what to eat” …. really?

    Michele Obama is not ‘the state’. Like first ladies before her, her ‘job’ is to cheerlead good causes. But if you want to get down to it didn’t Teddy Roosevelt establish the President’s Council on Physical Fitness?

  3. Missing the point, what he said might be true, but what is the point and what is the effect of saying it? How is it useful?

    ‘Might be true’? Did we not asorb the 9/11 attack? Did Japan not asorb the subway attack? Spain and UK train attacks? OK city as well? As for a nuclear attack on a US city being a ‘potential game changer’, I fail to see anything that can really be debated.

    Effect of saying it – Not much as this really is basically a rational strategy which game theory would say an enemy of the US should anticipate. Somehow I don’t think, for example, Osama’s been sitting on a nuclear bomb for the last ten years because he wasn’t sure until now that using it on NYC would be a ‘big deal’ in the US’s eyes. Likewise rhetorically saying we can asorb an attack is where you want to be. The idea that we are going to go hysterical over losing a building and/or several hudred or even thousand people and break down just invites terrorists to try to take out a building and a few hundred people. Better to project the image that we would asorb such a blow (you can’t really plausibly argue that we wouldn’t care about such a blow the way, say, the USSR under Stalin wouldn’t care). Some terrorists would attack anyway. Others would try to up the ante towards heavier WMD attacks (which increases the odds that they will get picked up on the radar) and others would move on to other things.

    Useful- Well true statements that accurately reflect our policy are useful. It’s not any great strategic shift or new doctrine so by that standard its rather ho-hum.

  4. A commenter recently remarked that the Democrat notion of nanny state does not “tell us what to eat” …. really?

    Even better Mark should watch his mouth here as we have Ms. O’Donnell on his side telling us not to masturbate. Nanny state indeed!

  5. Boonton,
    You’ll have to point out where either I or Ms O’Donnell pointed to a state solution to that matter.

  6. Why? Did Mrs. Obama assert a state solution?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>