Return to the Latest on No Left Turns
|
Hombre
Harvey Mansfield’s Manliness landed on my desk this afternoon. The publication date was moved up by a few weeks. Not good. My life will be more confused, for everything will take a back seat to this gift from the deep. I had a doctor’s appointment this afternoon and took the book. As I waited for the body doctor I read randomly from the soul doctor...every sentence interesting, biting, clear, even poetic. Not a blemish on any. The book is full of he-men and man-words and ideas that build on the flat world because man’s worth has been asserted and there is blandness no more. So Mansfield asserts the worth and then proves it, as does the old man against the sea. The doctors let me go (all is well, I’m fine), so I stayed in the ante-room and read a bit more. There is Darwin, and Kipling as Darwin, in spirit if not in letter. Men can’t be indifferent to "some God of Abstract Justice." Mansfield: "Every man is his mother’s son and thus better defended by her than by himself. But he would not be better ruled by her. A woman’s disregard of justice gives her license to command but not to govern, since governing has to do with justice." There was more at the Chinese restaurant, despite the poor lighting. "Manliness is not too modest to assert itself, to tell us the value of the manly man." And later, there is Socrates showing that it is the logos in command and not he, and because philosophy is devoted to the what, it abstracts from the who, from the particulars of human life, indeed, from human life itself. Attention to human life is what we call realism, says Mansfield, "especially womanly realism as shown in the following he/she joke. He ’The trouble with women is that they always take things personally.’ She: ’Doesn’t apply to me.’" And then a reminder that teachers have to take manliness into account when they teach for sometimes their teaching calls students to manliness and not moderation. And as he moves toward his conclusion he reminds us that we have to respect the differences between male and female, yet remind ourselves that the convention in which we do this is modern liberalism, not ancient Greece. So the last chapter is called "Unemployed Manliness" I glance at it, sip more tea, and drive home in the snow storm. It will be a rough couple of days, but welcome.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [14] | 2/27/2006 8:35 PM
|
|
Cheney to Resign after Midterms?
Insight Magazine reports that Dick Cheney will likely step down following the mid-term elections as he becomes "an increasing political liability" to the administration. Of course, it’s hard to say whether reports like this are to be taken seriously, but it does sound plausible. Perhaps more interesting than the resignation would be the appointment of a replacement. Would Bush attempt to play king-maker and name one of the candidates hoping to succeed him, or name someone widely respected but certain not to seek the 2008 nomination? (via Drudge)
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [50] | 2/27/2006 4:31 PM
|
|
Taliban at Yale
Chip Brown writes the cover article for the Sunday New York Times Magazine on Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, former ambassador-at-large for the Taliban, and now a Freshman at Yale University. Do you think this is a little odd?
John Fund does. He thinks it would be something akin to Yale letting Josef Goebbels come in. I wonder if Yale alumns (which includes Bush) will be happy with this. I hope not.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [21] | 2/27/2006 11:29 AM
|
|
Michael Joyce, RIP
Michael Joyce passed away Friday at the age of 63. I only met him once, when he spoke at the Ashbrook Center in 2001 on the New Science of Public Administration. He was congenial and smart and a man who loved his country and contributed greatly to its well being. I liked him. I’m sorry that I never got the chance to know him better. May he Rest in Peace.
John J. Miller has a nice piece on him.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [1] | 2/27/2006 11:00 AM
|
|
Malcontents, here and in Iraq
The threat of civil war has apparently driven the Sunnis toward "moderation," says the New York Times. Instead of talking about civil war 24/7 (as the MSM has been) we will now be talking about the re-integration of the minority Sunnis (the caterpillars of the commonwealth) into "participating in the political process." This has been very interesting. It proves that the Sunnis are not the only group who know something about the disciplines of war, and the use of fear, so to speak. The controlled fury of the Shiites was impressive and useful. They have reminded the Sunnis that men are like fish: the great fish are able to eat up the little ones. The Sunnis may now get it. That reminder allows them to talk about the political process (justice) again. And the MSM malcontents are displeased again. Good.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [1] | 2/27/2006 8:47 AM
|
|
Peace Studies
A couple of students at Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School want the peace studies class (taught by retired WaPo reporter Colman McCarthy) banned from the school. They’re going to fail, of course, but the article reveals much about liberal arrogance.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [14] | 2/27/2006 8:44 AM
|
|
All ports, all the time
It looks like there’s a deal in the works that would extend the vetting period, and presumably buy time to make the case for the sale. A good thing, I think. People need to learn more about the nature of the international shipping business. We’re not really in a position to "buy American" here, and DPW has a very substantial American presence in its senior management ranks. Yes, there may have been some political insensitivity in the CFIUS vetting process, not to mention in the Bush Administration’s response, but much of the negative reaction smacks of pure politics. Consider these quotes. "This is just a screw-up," said GOP pollster Whit Ayres. "I think the base will, after some initial bluster, give him the benefit of the doubt, once they have the facts."Gov. Mike Huckabee, an Arkansas Republican and chairman of the National Governors Association, said the deal "put a lot of elected officials in an impossible situation." He said, "The visceral reaction they got from their constituents left them no choice in opposing it." Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, a Republican and usually an administration loyalist, thinks it may be too late for Mr. Bush to win congressional acceptance of the contract. "This may be one of those situations where the horse may be so far out of the barn that you can’t get it back," Mr. Huckabee said.
He isn’t necessarily opposed to the deal, the governor said, but thinks the president should have made his case beforehand. "My comfort level is good, but I have 99 other United States senators who need the opportunity to ask their questions," Frist told the Lexington Herald-Leader before speaking at a Republican dinner Saturday evening in Lexington, Ky.
"We’re behind the president 100 percent," he added. "We believe the decision in all likelihood is absolutely the right one." I’d love to say that I find it outrageous that Mike Huckabee regards it as impossible for political leaders to resist the ill-informed emotional reactions of their constituents, and then, having resisted, to educate them. But I’m merely saddened by the democratic degeneration inherent in the response: leaders follow public opinion, they don’t form and inform it. Is it something in the water in the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock that leads its occupants to think and behave that way? And then there’s this: "We knew that some in the administration were arrogant, but we assumed they were competent," Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) said. "But to be arrogant and not competent raises real questions.""We were told that the president didn’t know about the sale until after it was approved. For many Americans, regardless of party, this lack of disciplined review is unacceptable," Jon Corzine said. Given what we now know about the review process, both in general and in this particular case, neither observation really holds up. Shays’s only objection could be to a certain political insensitivity, which is surely not the equivalent of the kind of policy and technical incompetence he’s alleging. And Corzine is holding the Bush White House to a standard only met on television--in the "West Wing." Given the nature of the international shipping business (see above), this looked like a more or less routine technical decision that could (and perhaps should) have been made at the Assistant Secretary level. Of course, only after it looked like it was going to be politicized was it imperative that it receive high-level attention. The Bush Administration should have gotten in front of the debate, but many shouldn’t have entered it without being better-informed than they were. There’s plenty of blame to go around. In this case, the folks in the White House were perhaps insufficiently political, while the folks outside, especially on Capitol Hill, were only too willing to pander to a short-term public outburst. You decide which is the greater failing.
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [5] | 2/26/2006 8:53 AM
|
|
Will on conservatism
George F. Will reviews two books on conservatism--Jeffrey Hart’s memoir of National Review and Bruce Bartlett’s screed against George W. Bush. Here’s his summary of the two books: Jeffrey Hart’s "Making of the American Conservative Mind" is a relaxed amble along conservatism’s path to the present. Bruce Bartlett’s "Impostor" is symptomatic of the way many conservatives developed a thirst for fights over ideological purity during the wilderness years, and today slake that thirst by fighting one another. They do so partly because liberalism, in its current flaccidness, offers less satisfying intellectual combat than conservatives can have intramurally. Bartlett is angry as a hornet but, like a hornet, he stings indiscriminately. Read the whole thing, as it raises some interesting questions about the future of conservatism. Hat tip: Power Line.
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [598] | 2/26/2006 6:51 AM
|
|
Bloggers, talk radio, and the ports
Peter calls our attention to Glenn Reynolds’ argument that, had the Administration taken note of reaction in the blogosphere, it might not have been surprised when the DPW issue blew up. Fair enough and true enough. But let’s not get blogospherically triumphalist about this. I would not be shocked if the initial hysteria in the blogosphere isn’t what set off some of the radio talkers, who then detonated the dirty publicity bomb that contaminated the White House. Yes, someone in the White House should pay at least as much attention to the blogosphere as does, say, someone working for Sean Hannity. But shouldn’t bloggers do a little more digging before they leap to the kinds of conclusions to which many apparently leapt in the immediate aftermath of the report?
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [5] | 2/25/2006 2:16 PM
|
|
Follow your mind’s habit
Is decision making best when thought through entirely, or as a gut reaction? Scientists now conclude it is the latter. I wouldn’t really dispute the outcome of the study, but I wouldn’t call it a "conscious" vs. "unconscious" mode (especially the Freudian sort, repressed desire and so on). The mind is disposed a certain way as a result of past thinking and past decisions; it has a character, a habit. So when you go with your gut, you are going with your habit of mind. If that’s good, it is likely the decision will be good. My grandmother knew this, didn’t need a study to be published in Science to know which way was better.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [6] | 2/25/2006 1:00 PM
|
|
Bloggers and the ports
Joe is keeping us up-dated on the Dubai port issue (see below) and Glenn Reynolds nicely summarizes what bloggers have done on it, how they are an early warning system, and how the White House inexplicably is not paying enough attention to bloggers as an early warning system.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [1] | 2/25/2006 12:50 PM
|
|
More port deal
While it’s very clear that no one anticipated the brouhaha, it’s not clear that it has staying power. Some, er, leaders continue to pour gasoline on the fire, while others would rather pour oil on troubled waters. The New York street is divided, though national public opinion is firmly (though I believe temporarily) against the deal. My favorite line comes from Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., who is inclined to support the deal: "For those that bother to learn the facts, the comfort level has increased." This isn’t to say that there aren’t still troubling facts, but they seem to have little to do with Dubai or Dubai Ports World. Indeed, Robert Kaplan, second to none in his support for U.S. security, has very high regard for Dubai. Update: This longish NYT article about port security indictates that things are better than I expected, but still worse than they need to be.
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [29] | 2/25/2006 8:32 AM
|
|
Kristol on Fukuyama
I’ve been waiting for this. Here’s a snippet: Remember: The United States of America and its allies--regimes that seek to embody, or at least to move towards, the principles of decent, civilized, liberal democracy--did not seek this war. But we are at war, and we could lose it. Victory is not inevitable.
Does that make Bush-supporting, liberal-democracy-promoting, Iraq-war-defending neoconservative "Leninists," as Francis Fukuyama has recently charged? No. Does it mean we
believe--as Fukuyama defines Leninism--that "history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will"? Does it mean that history does not automatically move in the right direction, that justice does not necessarily or easily prevail? Yes. "I’ll see your Fukuyama and raise you a Wittmann." Read the whole thing to make sense of this.
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [4] | 2/24/2006 11:21 PM
|
|
Coup attempt in Philippines?
A state of emergency has been declared in the Philippines. This is twenty years after Marcos was (peacefully) overthrown. I was there at that time. An interesting country, very likeable people. Eventually they will get their act together and make a deep impression on the world. But not yet, I guess. Also see this for some reflection on the problem of what I call tribes (clans, family dynasties, etc.) and democratic development. The Belmont Club is worth paying attention to as well.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [2] | 2/24/2006 9:21 AM
|
|
Yosemite Sam politics
The WSJ’s Daniel Henninger takes our political "leaders" to the woodshed. A taste: Our political elites, rather than recognize they are playing with a new kind of fire, instead have become pyromaniacs, lighting the fires. New Orleans even now can’t get out from under the initial crazy statements the pols were hurling over Katrina. Our politicians seem to have arrived at the conclusion that they somehow no longer bear responsibility for what they say, or that there is no consequence to what they say. But they do and there is. Yosemite Sam was a cartoon. The ability of government to function in a dangerous world is not. Read the whole thing.
Posted by Joseph Knippenberg | Link to this Entry | Comments [7] | 2/24/2006 8:30 AM
|
|
Defending Country
I was listening to James King and Dave Evans this morning when I came across Clinton Taylor’s defense of country music. I like it. I was in Bulgaria a few weeks after The Fall, sitting in a tavern trying to get a smile out of folks. Couldn’t do it. Then I pulled out a tape I had made especially to take with me (knowing something about the passions of Bulgarians), asked the barkeep to drop it in the machine and as soon as Merle Haggard hit his first note someone yelled a heavily accented "country music" and everyone, and I mean everyone, popped out of their chairs and started singing and dancing. It was good. Very good. It still is. (There is more at--and thanks to--Powerline)
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [1] | 2/24/2006 7:38 AM
|
|
Tom Suddes and Ohio politics
We all know that Ohio is the most important state politically (and it’s not because I live here, someone should tell my mother!). Thomas Suddes, the former chief state reporter for the Cleveland Plain Dealer (he now writes a column a couple of times a week, but spends most his time writing a doctoral dissertation at Ohio University), is the guy that knows more about Ohio politics than any other person I have ever met. I’m not kidding. He knows the players, he knows the issues, he knows the state, its demographics, and its political history. Anyway, I did a Podcast with him this morning on Ohio politics (click on his name). It’s about 20 minutes long and therefore just an introduction, but if you listen to it you’ll begin to hear and feel how he weaves his web. I will continue these conversations with him about every two to three weeks for next many months, if he’ll let me. This is a good start. Thanks Tom. Now get back to your dissertation!
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments [3] | 2/23/2006 4:42 PM
|
|
Big love
I just discovered that Tom Hanks has producing a new HBO comedy series based on polygamy. Sometimes even I am speechless. Mormons are upset, because it reinforces streotypes, some former polygamists are upset because it downplays the real problems people (and families, plural ?), especially women and children, have in such relationships. And the feminists have an opinion. Anyway, you get the picture. What the Hell. There was a TV comedy about Nazis, there are plenty of comedies about gays--in fact maybe all comedies on TV are about gays?--and now there is Brokeback Mountain....
So, only this, Richard II talking:
I have been studying how I may compare
This prison where I live unto the world:
And for because the world is populous
And here is not a creature but myself,
I cannot do it; yet I’ll hammer it out.
My brain I’ll prove the female to my soul,
My soul the father; and these two beget
A generation of still-breeding thoughts,
And these same thoughts people this little world,
In humours like the people of this world,
For no thought is contented.
Posted by Peter Schramm | Link to this Entry | Comments | 2/23/2006 2:31 PM
|
|
