TomAiello

I think an individual's intelligence makes a real difference on this issue. I've met some pretty smart folks from the South, some of them extremely committed to Southern culture. It seems like you're concluding that people with a culture different from your own are, by definition, inherently less intelligent than yourself. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

"You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." I guess that WC must have been a Southerner. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Bucketing all Euro's in a single demographic is like saying all New Yorkers are the same as all Montanans I dunno...I'd be willing to bet money that 50% plus 1 (most) of the europeans really are scratching their heads in puzzlement as to why we (citizens of the USA) get so fired up about firearms issues. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Read it and Retch, and the numbers. It's interesting to see people point fingers at Barack Obushma or George Obushma, without realizing that they are both part of the same problem. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Honestly, I think it's comical at best ... Where are you from? I think that makes a real difference on this issue. It's kind of like the gun issues--most Europeans have absolutely no idea why some Americans get so fired up about them. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

A lot depends on where you were born and/or raised. I'm from California, and the whole regional pride thing seems kind of alien to me. My wife is from Georgia. The whole regional pride thing is so ingrained in her (and virtually all of her friends and family) that they have trouble understanding my take on it. Honestly, I think it's kind of cool. That regional pride thing is just another aspect of the uniquely Southern culture of part of the country. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm curious what your definition of "righties" is? Can you elaborate? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Yes, but they are Nepalese, not British citizens. That being said, I'm glad to see how its turning out. In the US, joining the military is a shortcut to citizenship. Is it not that way in the UK? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

And what is the solution? No censorship for the broadcast stations? I'd say yes. I don't see how restricting broadcast television and radio achieves anything. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm all stocked up on emergency supplies, which includes ammo. But I'm also buying plenty of other things just now. Stocks are pretty much on sale, and real estate is on sale in some parts of the country, too. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I found this piece earlier today when I thought that 'Obushma' sounded clever and wondered if anyone was using it: The Obushma Spending Record. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I had the attached poster hanging over my bed when I was a kid. We've got a bunch of baby pictures of me and my brother in Raiders gear. My dad grew up in a working class town in the East Bay (Antioch), and, well, that's pretty much Raiders country. He's still got his autographed picture of George Blanda hanging on the wall at home. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm not really up on this, but, um, aren't those guys veterans of your army? And the policy before this has been not to allow them into the country? I'm confused as to what's going on there. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

And, seriously, I have a friend who's an epidemiologist, and he says that data is very similar (in terms of spread rate, which I believe he called "r-not" or some such thing--there were a lot of terms in there I didn't follow) to the 1918 flu epidemic, at this early point. Which is probably why the folks who actually know about this stuff are willing to over-react at this point. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I do! I do! I like that party hat! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

It's in the Rick Warren forum/interview. Obama said: "I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas. I don't think that he, I don't think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretation of a lot of the Constitution." The double "I don't think that he" is the part where people have hypothesized that Obama was going to insert something else. Edit to add: Video and WSJ comments, along with some other commentary, are here. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

You're a Raiders fan? I knew there was something I liked about you.

i actually think that the US fights it's wars for politics, not money. If we're doing it for money, we're getting a spectacularly poor return on investment. In fact, if we were to start invading middle east countries, seizing control of their oil, selling it on the open market and using the proceeds to pay off our national debt...hmmmm....I might be able to get behind that. In all seriousness, I bet that we'd still lose money, given how expensive modern warfare is. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I like Gawain's cuts for starters. I'd also make large cuts in defense spending. I'm envisioning a de-militarizing of the economy along the lines of a shift from war- to peace-time, which also necessitates removing our forces from their numerous foreign entanglements. I understand that it would take years to make those changes, but I think that if ever their was a time for it, it's when the anti-war vote has just swept the democrats to power, and they can use their popularity to end the various wars we're involved in. I continue to be dumbfounded that in the most major area where I preferred Obama to McCain, it's Obama who has turned out to be a third term for the Bush policies. What was that nickname that the Obama campaign came up with for McCain? "McSame"? I think I'm going to start using "Obushma" instead. I'd suggest making them face the actual dollar losses they incurred by refusing to give any government funding to cover the losses. I think that ought to apply to everyone, from the biggest fat cats on wall street (who, because they appear to have the Treasury in their hip pocket aren't having to face any consequences for their actions) all the way down to the smallest homeowner on main street. The best way to hold people accountable for their financial mistakes is to make them actually face up to them--rather than trying to paper them over with the collusion of the government. What was it that Warren Buffet said? "The market, unlike the Lord, does not forgive those who know not what they do." I guess he should have added "...but the US Treasury will." I'd create a common sense immigration policy that allows new immigrants to enter the country seeking work, including low paid labor positions. I'd then create a "registration period" during which you'd grant amnesty to anyone currently in the country illegally, provided they came forward and registered under the new policy (which would allow them to stay if they were working). I'd then eliminate welfare payments (of all kinds) to the resident aliens, explaining that if they want to come and work, that's great, but don't expect any government assistance. In my opinion, the vast majority of illegal aliens would jump at this opportunity (most of them just want to work and earn some money anyway), and it would weed out a few bad apples who are trying to ride the current system (and giving the majority of hardworking immigrants a bad rap). All of them. Right now. Seriously. We can't pay for our own government, and we certainly can't afford to pay for other peoples'. When money is tight, you need to cut back, and giving handouts is pretty stupid when you're already maxing out your credit card. edit to add picture of Obushma -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Anyone else read the decision? I find myself, again, in agreement with Clarence Thomas. If you don't want to read the whole opinion, here is a recap of Thomas' concurrence on the Tech Liberation Front blog. A few weeks ago, I remember someone here saying that he thought Thomas was the "Rainman of the Justices". I couldn't disagree more. Again, in this case, he's showing me that he's perhaps the only justice who is really examining the underlying Constitutional issues, rather than just the present moment. He's also showing that he grasps the nuance of the Court's process, by positioning himself with the majority here, to open the door for a future discussion on Pacifica and Red Lion. I still think that the thing President Obama said during the campaign that worried me the most was that he thought Clarence Thomas shouldn't be on the Supreme Court. Perhaps he was worried that Thomas was too faithful a defender of the Constitution? Overall, I'm not too pleased with the majority decision here. But I think that Justice Thomas has done a nice job of maneuvering to set up a re-examination (and hopefully overturning) of Pacifica, which was, I think, an error to begin with. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Since they are physicists, aren't they likely to overvalue physics research, at least relative to the general public? People tend to value the things they are involved in above the average level--that's why they are involved in them. I'd expect that physicists would be in favor of more government dollars for physics, soldiers would want more government dollars for the military, truck drivers would want more government dollars for roads, and so on. Making arbitrary decisions about which of these people's needs to prioritize above the others is necessarily going to leave some of them feeling left out. Why not let each person pay for the things they value, and leave every one else's resources (money, for example) alone, so that each decides for themselves? It sounds to me more like you do not think the market values things the same as you do, and would like your personal preferences to govern the spending of all other people. How's that fair? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I think you are misunderstanding what money is. Money is a store of value, and a way of measuring value. It has no inherent value of it's one. It's a yardstick, not a yard. "Money is the only thing of value" is like saying "miles are the only thing that have length." -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

In one case (public sector space exploration) you are taking something (the funding) from the general public, to chase something that you value above what you think the market will spend on it. In the other (the mother wanting the drugs), you are withholding something that the purchaser would value at above the market rate. In both cases "you" (the 3rd party observer) are making a normative value judgment about what is "best" for the rest of society that differs from the judgment that society is making for itself, one person at a time. Are you really so confident in your rightness that you think you should override the obvious, stated (and paid for) wishes of other people and substitute your own values? I think what it boils down to is that some folks (you probably among them) feel that some things will be valued by market mechanisms at a lower rate than you personally would value them, and therefore feel that taking from others to fund those things is justified. Others (me among them) are not so sure that my worldview is superior to that of everyone else, or that I ought to be making decisions for them on how to spend their money, so I generally oppose taking money from private citizens to spend on anything--even the things I personally would like to see more of. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Specifically, what value do you see? I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here, but can you see that knowledge feeding the starving, curing diseases, bringing world peace? Yes, and we often disagree about the people and their experts, and even the decisions the experts make. And someone (more likely lots of someones) feels left out, disenfranchised, and often taken advantage of. Wouldn't it be more in keeping with human dignity if we allowed each person to make those value decisions for themselves? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

It's going to be different for every person. The best way to sort this out is to spend time with your family, and then realize the point at which you want to get out and do something else. For some people, that will be after only a few hours. For others, it might be after spending weeks together on vacation. The shape of your personal demand curve (for anything) is going to be pretty complex and idiosyncratic. No one can define that function for you, aside from you. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com