Amusing First Line

It's not quite "Call me Ishmael" or "Howard Roark laughed", but this was an amusing first line to a newsreport in the Boston Herald:

"For much of last night’s game, Yankee Stadium took on the feel of Southie on St. Patrick’s Day due to the number of Bostonians left loaded in public."

It's amusing because the Red Sox left 15 men on base last night, and had the bases loaded at least three times during the game (without scoring).

'Course the Sox still won.

I broke down this week and got MLB.TV. There is a distinct possibility that this could push the completion of my Ph.d back by 6 months. (just kidding--I hope).

Go Sox!

Sox take 2 out of 3 in the Bronx. Yippie!!

The New Unabomber

In today's WSJ editorial (registration required), they compare Ahmadinejad's lettter to Bush -- in terms of the psychological frame of mind of the author -- to the Unabomber's Manifesto.

Great Quote

"The president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map"”

— Shimon Peres

The Israeli Vice Premier, in an interview
(from Time Magazine's Quote of the Day )

George Bush: Christian Socialist

The other morning I was listening to the Cato Institute's book forum "Imposter: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy". (Event information and download). This is a new book by Bruce Bartlett criticizing Bush's domestic policies for greatly expanding the federal government in size and power (even more than FDR!). He was joined by noted author and commentatory Andrew Sullivan. Cato asked the Bush Administration to send someone to counter--but the administration declined. It was a very interesting and educational forum. I am not sure I regret voting for Bush in the last election (given the options) but I wouldn't be able to vote for him again (if that were even an option).

Anyway, Sullivan had a great comment characterizing Bush as a Christian Socialist. This seems incredibly apt. By this, Sullivan meant that Bush has used the power of government to enact (or try to enact) his Christian cultural and social vision. Another important point made in the forum discussion is that this also explains the (welfare/egalitarian) liberal hatred of Bush even though he's enacted or adopted most of their domestic program and got more it done than Clinton. The hatred of Bush is not over what he is doing -- it is over the why.

Atlas, Pitt, and Jolie

It's being report all over that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are interested in playing Galt and Dagny in the adaption of Atlas Shrugged. (link, link) Also, in an important step making it more likely that the movie will actually be made, Lions Gate has acquired worldwide distrubtion rights for the movie. This is a fairly big deal given that Lions Gate is coming off the Crash Academy Award win and is about to hit it big again with Akeelah and the Bee. They have also had big successes with their horror films Saw and Saw II and of course Fahreneit 9/11 because Michael Moore is a scary).

I am not sure what I think about Pitt playing Galt. But that's also an impossibly hard role to cast I've always liked Densel Washington). I see Pitt more as Rearden if they want to make Rearden younger (though one blog commentator has that role going to Billy Bob if Pitt gets Galt. I guess that means Johnny Lee Miller has to play Francisco).

Jolie as Dagny could definitely work. She's sexy, beautiful, tough, and intelligent.

Firefly Season Two??!?!!

An independent group of producers is trying to buy the rights to Firefly to produce a second season. I have no idea if they'd be able to keep the same cast (essential, I think, to the project). I am hopeful!

To help the project, take the survey.

Speaking of Iran...

The Jerusalem Post today quotes Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying "Open the doors (of Europe) and let the Jews go back to their own countries"

One wonders if Ahmadinejad is willing to allow the Jews that fled Iran after 1948 to return to Iran? Is he saying that the Arab countries, such as Algeria, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, etc., should open their collective doors to the half a million Jews that where forced to flee those countries after 1948?

A Deal for Iran?

I am, more or less, in agreement with libertarianism as a political viewpoint. The less part more often than not arises in regards to foreign policy and international relations. Libertarians tend towards some form of non-interventionism or isolationism. I tend to have a wider view of acceptable and appropriate foreign interventions on the part of the US military. This is why I was a bit surprised by my agreement with a recent Cato Institute commentary on Iran.

Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, and Justin Logan, a foreign policy analyst at Cato, penned a commentary calling for the US to offer a diplomatic deal to Iran. The deal essential is:

The United States should offer Iran full normalization of relations, including a public promise not to attack it, restored diplomatic relations, and normalized economic relations. In return, Iran would need to give up any prospect of building a nuclear arsenal. Iran would be required to immediately open its existing nuclear program to unfettered international inspections.

If Iran would accept such a deal and abide by it, this would be a phenomenal break through. It would peacefully resolve an extremely dangerous situation, and would show that the Iran is more reasonable than it appears.

There are problems, as noted by Carpenter and Logan, with the deal. It smacks of appeasement. Also, one has to wonder how well inspections can prevent the nuclear program from continuing. But in the end, if the deal was accepted and implemented, it would make it much more difficult for Iran to develop nuclear weapons. As for the appeasement, it certainly may lead other countries to pursue a nuclear weapons program to get such deals with the US--but is that such a bad thing? Regimes agreeing to forgo nuclear weapons for normal diplomatic and economic relations with the US seems like a good idea.

Unfortunately, I have no doubt that Iran would soundly and quickly reject such a deal--or would accept but then renege on it. Carpenter and Logan write "If they refused the deal, there would be only one conclusion to draw: Tehran is irreversibly determined to develop nuclear weapons." Since I believe this is the actual goal of Tehran, I would fully expect them to reject such a deal.

NYT: Defenders of the Faith

Slavoj Zizek does a nice twist on Dostoyevsky's classic dictum that without God, everything is permitted. His take, backed by the murderous activities of the Islamists and other religious terrorists, is that with God, everything is permitted.

Read the article. (Free registration required)

Must See: Dr. Wafa Sultan

The internet is full of weird and funny videos--even some that are quite disturbing. But many of them are just silly wastes of time. This video -- of Dr. Wafa Sultan -- is the kind of video that makes you remember how awesome a tool the internet is. Dr. Sultan, demonstrating courage, integrity, and intelligence, forcefully and clearly makes the case against Islamist terror--on Al Jazeera no less.

Watch the video

(Hat tip to Robert Bidinotto)

Meme of Four

Over at the Liberty & Power blog, they are playing a game of Meme tag. Roderick Long gave a generic tag to anyone who, as he paraphrases from Alexander the Great, is strong enough to seize it. So, I thought I'd seize the meme and play as well.

Four jobs I’ve had
1. Summer Camp Chef
2. Cookie Store Manager
3. Bagel Maker
4. College Adviser

Four movies I can watch over and over
1. Casablanca
2. The Godfather
3. Blazing Saddles
4. History of the World

Four places I’ve lived
1. Poughkeepsie, New York
2. Framingham, Massachusetts
3. Tel Aviv, Israel
4. Tempe, Arizona

Four TV shows I love
1. Cheers
2. Seinfeld
3. Las Vegas
4. Coupling (Original BBC)

Four highly regarded and recommended TV shows I haven’t seen (much of)
1. Sopranos
2. The O.C.
3. Lost
4. House

Four places I’ve vacationed
1. Amsterdam, Holland
2. Florence, Italy
3. St Thomas, VI
4. Sedona, AZ

Four of my favorite dishes
1. Turkey Sandwich
2. Caterpillar Roll (Sushi)
3. Grilled Swordfish
4. The Kristen Special

Four sites I visit daily
1. Boston.com Sports
2. Weather.com
3. Amazon.com
4. Arts & Letters Daily

Four places I’d rather be right now
1. Same place, but in a parallel universe where the job pays 20K more than it does here (Copied from Aeon Skoble)
2. Florence Italy, sipping on espresso and eating Gelato
3. Starbucks
4. San Francisco

Four new bloggers (and since I don't know too many other bloggers: friends) I’m tagging
1. Joe Duarte, A Galaxy Far, Far Away
2. Kristen Klein
3. Patrick Stephens
4. Keith Costa

Your Friendly Neighborhood Spidey!

Your results:You are Spider-Man

You are intelligent, witty,
a bit geeky and have great
power and responsibility.

Spider-Man	95%
Green Lantern	65%
The Flash	65%
Superman	60%
Hulk	60%
Robin	50%
Iron Man	50%
Supergirl	45%
Wonder Woman	35%
Catwoman	30%
Batman	20%

Click here to take the Superhero Personality Test

Is Atlas Upside Down?

Here's a link to a surprising appearance of Rand's Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism. Of all places, she shows up on a sitcom (One on One) that airs on UPN. Too bad nobody watches UPN.

http://www.4cybernet.com/One_On_One_01-09-06_158kbps.wmv

(Hat tip to the Yahoo Group: Rand_Discussion)
(Note: I have no more information on this than what is here.)

Sci-Fi Profile

Your Ultimate Sci-Fi Profile II: which sci-fi crew would you best fit in? (pics)
created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Serenity (Firefly). You like to live your own way and don't enjoy when anyone but a friend tries to tell you should do different. Now if only the Reavers would quit trying to skin you.

Serenity (Firefly)	81%
Babylon 5 (Babylon 5)	75%
Millennium Falcon (Star Wars)	75%
Moya (Farscape)	69%
Nebuchadnezzar (The Matrix)	69%
Galactica (Battlestar: Galactica)	63%
Deep Space Nine (Star Trek)	56%
SG-1 (Stargate)	56%
Andromeda Ascendant (Andromeda)	56%
FBI's X-Files Division (The X-Files)	44%
Enterprise D (Star Trek)	31%
Bebop (Cowboy Bebop)	31%

I admit this was the answer I was hoping for!

My Sins

Greed:	Medium
Gluttony:	Medium
Wrath:	High
Sloth:	High
Envy:	Medium
Lust:	Medium
Pride:	Medium

Take the Seven Deadly Sins Quiz

I can be kind of lazy, but Wrath--that's a bit odd. And I would have thought Gluttony and Pride would have been higher!

Philosophic Star Gazing

Here's a worthwhile warning issued by Tibor Machan about some bad habits in the philosophic community:
http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/117/3446/2006-01-16.asp?wid=117&nid=3446.

Dissertation Committee Formed

I have reached a milestone in my progress towards a PhD. I have formed my disseration committee!

The chair of my committee is Peter French. He's the director of ASU's Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics and has a great reputation in ethics and related fields. He's long been the editor of Midwest Studies in Philosophy, and he also edits the Journal of Social Philosophy. My two other committee members are Michael White and Julia Annas. Prof. White is a professor of philosophy and professor of law at ASU. His knowledge of the history of philosophy (among other fields) is encyclopedic. Prof. Annas is a Regents Professor of philosophy at Univeristy of Arizona. She is very well known for her work in ancient ethics and virtue ethics.

My topic is going to be on Phronesis or Moral Wisdom. I want to explore its role in moral theory and in our moral lives. One of the questions I want to look at is to what extent neo-Aristotelian accounts like Rosalind Hursthouse's in "On Virtue Ethics" are superior to versions of Virtue Ethics (and possibly other normative theories), like Michael Slote's in "Morals from Motives", that seem to downplay phronesis. I also want to look at the development of phronesis from Aristotle up through Aquinas and into the modern period.

So now I am working on developing a reading list for my comprehensive exam--which I hope to take in May.

NFL's integrity in doubt

The NFL's integrity as a sport is in doubt. The officiating is so bad and so incompetent. How can the leading sport in the US have some of the worst officiating at the most important time of the year?

I am not just biased here. Yes, I am huge Patriots fan and was disgusted to see the officials hand the Broncos a TD on bad calls not just once, but twice! But I hate the Steelers, and I was outraged when the Polamalu interception of Manning was overturned. In many ways this was worse than the Samuel (bullshit!) pass interference. In that Samuel situation, the officials had to find sufficient evidence (which there in fact was) to overturn the ruling on the field. Okay, I get that someone judges (incorrectly) that there is not enough evidence to overrule the field decision. But in the Polamalu interception, the ruling on the field was that it was an interception. The official now had to find enough evidence to overrule that. With more time and more views of the play, there is no reason to get this call wrong.

Both of these horrific calls handed TDs to the opposing teams. I tend not to be attracted to conspiracy theories, but I am beginning to think that the NFL had a hand in these calls. Subtle pressure on the officials: We want the Colts in the Super Bowl, and we don't want the Pats.

I am more convinced of the first point. The Pats killed themselves in their game; despite the bad calls they could have won had they not made the mistakes they did. But the Colts had a puff schedule, rule changes to favor their style of play, and extraordinary calls in their favor.

(Before you bring up the Snow ball and the tuck rule: almost every commentator, analyst, expert, agrees that the official's ruling was the correct one. In the case of the two examples discussed above, almost everyone is in disbelief at the sheer incompetence)

Something has to be done to improve officiating. Replay isn't enough. It helps, but then these idiots in stripes make mistakes even with it. One proposal that I think might help is to set up an independent committee to review the officiating in each game, each week and to fine officials when they make the wrong call. That'll make them think twice before interfering, wouldn't it?

Edit (1/16 5.45pm): NFL admited that Ref got the call wrong. What I want to know is what consequences there are for the ref for getting this call wrong.

Nuclear Iran is not (cannot be) an option

Thomas Sowell's op-ed peice: Serious or Suicidal. (Try this, if that link doesn't work). Sowell provides a very clear account of the danger of a Nuclear Iran and the need to take serious action on this front. I am aware of the concerns, issues, and problems action against Iran poses, but I see no other rational alternative.