Blogging on bureaucracy, organizations, USDA, agriculture programs, American history, the food movement, and other interests. Often contrarian, usually optimistic, sometimes didactic, occasionally funny, rarely wrong, always a nitpicker.
Sunday, December 05, 2010
Why We Have Weak Government
Tyler Cowen links to an article on the possible reorganization of the DC-area Metro.
Saturday, December 04, 2010
How Many Years Since WWII?
Who knew there was a commander of the German military for the US and Canada? link
Is That the Best Ya Got?
That's my reaction to Michael Lerner's op-ed column in todays Post, suggesting to save Obama the left must run someone against him in the primaries. His suggested candidates:
" Sens. Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Barbara Mikulski or Al Franken; Reps. Joe Sestak, Maxine Waters, Raul Grijalva, Alan Grayson, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Lois Capps, Jim Moran and Lynn Woolsey. Others include Jim McGovern, Marcy Kaptur, Jim McDermott or John Conyers. We should also consider popular figures outside of government. How about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? Why not Rachel Maddow, Bill Moyers, Susan Sarandon or the Rev. James Forbes?"I don't see anyone there who should make Obama lose any sleep. On the other hand, I didn't think George H.W. Bush had anything to fear from Pat Buchanan either, but Pat (and later Ross Perot) deftly torpedoed the elder Bush. The examples of Ted Kennedy in 1980 and Buchanan in 1992, not to mention Nader in 2000, should be a sufficient caution to liberals against following Mr. Lerner's advice. Yes, Nader was a different case, but the underlying logic is the same: go into the election united and you are likely to win, go in divided and you definitely lose.
Friday, December 03, 2010
Anthropology, A Blast
My sister took an anthropology course or two in college so I saw the books she read in her courses--like Malinowski on Magic is one I remember, presumably Margaret Mead would be another. Off and on over the years I've happened to read a handful of other books in the field--Marvin Harris is one I remember from the 1970's and 80's. I read Respectful Insolence's blast at the American Anthropological Association's proposal to remove the word "science" from their mission statement with surprise and regret.
I've no problem with being open to other cultures and other viewpoints. I understand anthropology often gets into description without much theory. I've no problem with "valuing" other cultures. But I do try to draw some lines: yes, I believe "science" in a broad sense is humanity's best method for learning and manipulating the universe; yes, I believe that some cultural practices should be beyond the pale.
I've no problem with being open to other cultures and other viewpoints. I understand anthropology often gets into description without much theory. I've no problem with "valuing" other cultures. But I do try to draw some lines: yes, I believe "science" in a broad sense is humanity's best method for learning and manipulating the universe; yes, I believe that some cultural practices should be beyond the pale.
Ratification
Some thoughts from a reading of Pauline Maier's "Ratification":
- doesn't seem much concern for the right to bear arms in the discussions. So far I think only NH mentioned it as a right.
- VA was concerned about "arming" the militia, someone even proposed an amendment ensuring the states' right to arm their militias if the federal government failed to do so. That suggests to me a recognition of the fact that depending on personal arms for the militia was not a consideration.
- VA's resolution of adoption included a statement that the "people of the United States" were adopting the constitution, but always had the right to change their form of government.
- opponents and proponents used whatever tactics they could to advance their cause. For example, sometimes they delayed, sometimes they shanghaied their foes into the meeting to make a quorum.
- as for advocates of "originalism", neither proponents nor opponent agreed on a reading of the Constitution; there were lots of variant interpretations.
- a stray thought: in one convention, I believe VA, an argument against a bill of rights was that such a bill would tend to limit rights. By saying that A, B, and C were rights, a bill of rights would imply that X, Y, and Z were not rights. I wonder if that's been born out over the years--I'm thinking specifically of the right of privacy.
Thursday, December 02, 2010
More on Wikileaks and State Department Cables
Here's a story on the background to the Wikileaks episode, describing how the State Department linked up to the military's secure SIPRNET. It doesn't change my previous feelings about the need to track the usage history of each person authorized to access the network.
As a side note, back in the day at ASCS we were on the distribution list for State department cables, or at least some subset of them. Some were "Secret", some were not. Because I didn't have a security clearance I didn't routinely see them, but they came into the records management shop under some arrangement with the defense preparedness people in the agency. As I write, I'm becoming aware of how foggy my memory is, or perhaps how foggy my original understanding was. Were these cables from agricultural attaches, perhaps, and not defense related at all? Maybe.
As a side note, back in the day at ASCS we were on the distribution list for State department cables, or at least some subset of them. Some were "Secret", some were not. Because I didn't have a security clearance I didn't routinely see them, but they came into the records management shop under some arrangement with the defense preparedness people in the agency. As I write, I'm becoming aware of how foggy my memory is, or perhaps how foggy my original understanding was. Were these cables from agricultural attaches, perhaps, and not defense related at all? Maybe.
Republican Change I Can Support
From Politico, Boehner is changing the House Parliamentarian's office with a women's restroom.
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Funny Paragraph of Dec 1: White House and Econ 101
From Brad DeLong:
"I think that one of Christie Romer's predecessors as CEA Chair, Stanford economist and Republican Mike Boskin, says it best. Being Chair of the CEA and advising all the political appointees in the White House is, he says, a lot like teaching Econ 1 at Stanford. Only at Stanford your students do their reading, pay attention, and ask deeper and more thoughtful questions."
"I think that one of Christie Romer's predecessors as CEA Chair, Stanford economist and Republican Mike Boskin, says it best. Being Chair of the CEA and advising all the political appointees in the White House is, he says, a lot like teaching Econ 1 at Stanford. Only at Stanford your students do their reading, pay attention, and ask deeper and more thoughtful questions."
Early Precision Agriculture?
Here's an extension report on the savings from precision agriculture from better information on the farming operation and more precise application of inputs of fertilizer, seed, pesticides, etc. which cuts the amount needed. Coincidentally I was reading a book, I think Bill Bryson's At Home, which mentioned Jethro Tull and the invention of the seed drill, which cut the amount of seed needed from the 3 bushels used in broadcast seeding to 1 bushel in the drill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)