Random Things I Don’t Get

  1. Syria. So a year or so ago, our President “drew a red line” in the sand taking a “hard stand” against the use of poison gas. Assad (and/or the opposition) used said gases after he said that. Turns out that “red line” meant, “let’s talk”. Supposedly back then Mr Putin hornswaggled the President diplomatically and brokered a wonderful deal which satisfied everyone. Except, now there are reports that weaponized chlorine gas has been in use for some months in Syria. Why isn’t that bigger news? Why isn’t it talked about. I don’t get it.
  2. So the Clinton’s both of them, are scum. They’ve been involved and complicit in so many scandals and have so many items of pure greed and corruption laid to their feet that the mind boggles. Yet somehow, because “they’ve done it before” nobody except the opposition party seems to care. I really really don’t get it. I’m not saying that they need to go to jail (though that would be nice) but … that seems a very low bar. “Not going to jail” is no reason to listen to speeches or pretend you’d vote for them.
  3. Mr Schraub (and lots of other people especially on the right … which Mr Schraub certainly isn’t … ) get affirmative action exactly backwards. Affirmative action is wrong not because it “helps” minorities at the expense of other (mostly missed minorites, e.g., Asian Americans) but because it is harmful to those it supposedly benefits. Those on the right gripe about aff/action for the wrong reasons. Read Clarence Thomas’ remarks on why he thinks his Yale law degree wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on. Or watch (or recall) the movie “Tuskegee Airmen”. The critical error by the openly bigoted people running the training squadron was that making things very very hard creates an elite unit. And how do you destroy the moral and capabilities of a group? Lower the expected standards. Aff action is wrong because it is harmful to those it pretends to help. This should be obvious to everyone observing it. So the point regarding Ms Clinton and Mr Obama gets it hind end foremost. They overcame the deleterious effects of affirmative action. This, on their part, is commendable … but any advantages they received from it is likely dwarfed by the disadvantages (again, read some Thomas on the subject and learn).
  4. And a last snipe  at his post… Mr Schraub writes “Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were and are every bit as qualified and meritorious as your typical President before them” … hmm. Mr Obama was less experienced and qualified as Ms Palin and as qualified as Mr Cruz and about Ms Clinton, well, we the prior point and remind everyone that for example selling US Uranium ore rights to Russian plutocrats to raise money for your PAC is the apparently exactly the kind of qualification Mr Schraub applauds. I remain ignorant of the methods and metrics people use to determine (and those on the left seem very very sure about this sort of things) how “qualified” or “smart” a politician is. As above, I don’t get it.

 

Leave a Reply

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

One comment

  1. Boonton says:

    They’ve been involved and complicit in so many scandals and…

    “Involved and complicit” means what exactly? What I see is endless accusations that never seem to stick. In fact, there’s been a distinct pattern here. Make one accusation, when it fails to pan out after an endless investigation throw a new one on the table to distract from the failure of the first one. After a while, don’t admit failure but assert the amount of accusations is a scandal unto itself (notice how this dodges the issue of accusation failure….”I made 15 charges against Mark” seems to imply where there is smoke, there’s fire…but where is the smoke coming from? Is Mark the problem or is it perhaps I’m making spurious charges for my own benefit?) Consider Benghazi, every few months the Republicans announce a new investigation while old investigations clearing Clintin get buried in late Saturday afternoon press releases. Accusation failure covered up by fresh accusations (emails for example).

    Given the credibility problems, why should not all Clinton accusations going forward be considered false unto proven true?

    The critical error by the openly bigoted people running the training squadron was that making things very very hard creates an elite unit

    Filtering. If UPS in Mississippi said only people who can lift 200 lb packages can get a job here, UPS drivers in Miss. will outshine the rest of the nation where the requirement is only 50 lbs. That doesn’t alter the problem of unfairness. All the people in Miss. who can lift 75 lbs easily but not 200 lbs would not have jobs. While the UPS drivers of Miss. may break world records, average Miss. blue collar workers would still suffer.

    Likewise while Tuskegee’s eliteness is fine, if there was no bigotry the elite airmen would still have been elite. But the airforce would have had more and better average pilots as well.