Dreaded Secrets -- Revealed!

I often watch "Secrets of the Dead" on PBS. I like the program for what it reveals about Western Intellectuals. One show all but concluded that it really was the Christians who burned down ancient Rome (Christians who were at the same time Jews!).

I first saw the episode that will reprise on Wednesday (Aztec Massacre) in April. It deals with the encounter of the Aztec Empire with "Cortes and the Conquistadors." The program centered on some Spaniards (including women) who were captured -- along with some of the more unruly subjects of the Aztecs -- and sacrificed.

The ritual involved skillfully ripping the heart out of a living human; lifting said heart up to the sky while it is still beating; tossing the heartless (and maybe headless, I forgot to take notes) body down a steep flight of steps; butchering said heartless/headless/discarded body.

Well, I thought we could all come together on this behavior and say "that is just wrong." Liberal and Conservative could finally agree. Marxist intellectual and capitalist Robber Baron, finally, in agreement.

OK, maybe we all know that one special "exception" to the rule -- or two or three -- where ripping out the heart might be understandable (though never condoned). But to do this by the thousands? At what point do we say you've gone from a Civilization that has "a problem" to "A Problem" that has a civilization? I mean, talk about the church militant.

Gee, do I ever lack nuance. First, it was done to keep the sun in the sky and the sun is still up there so they must have done a pretty good job. Plus the Aztecs lacked beasts of burden and their subject people kinda filled that role. And what do you do with an ornery beast of burden? Well, you turn him into a much needed protein supplement. And in a way to encourage the others. So. Sun's in the sky. Maize's in the fields. Pyramid's gettin' built. Capital's kept clean. And all the Spaceships solar powered (sorry, that was Atlantis). Why, times were almost good.

Then Cortes shows up -- a combination entrepreneur and labor organizing thug who's gonna steal your retirement. If only he weren't an entrepreneur but, alas!

At this point the Aztec Priestly caste became the "resistance." The same hat trick performed by the Baathist Party (caste) in Iraq -- an idea promoted by pretty much the same people (read: BBC). What's the evidence the Aztec Priests turned into minutemen? There were Spanish heads on those skull racks. Along with the heads of them new fangled horses (I mean, folks, those equines want to take your jobs).

Well, I concluded that one priestly caste (tenured academia) identifies strongly with another priestly caste. Priest who no doubt bathed more frequently than the on-the-make Spaniards and were more respecting of books and knew the value of a good protein supplement. They knew how to get additional sacrifices from their populations to keep their Temples of Learning up and running. They did not beg for grants, they just took them!

I, on the other hand, saw them as bitter men clinging to their religion and their razor sharp obsidian ceremonial blades and blaming foreigners with their "new ideas" while fearing change.

Meanwhile the Spaniards slip into the role of the Aztecs. And those who rule now can have a certain regard for the problems the Aztecs faced then. I mean, keeping the sun in the sky is thirsty work. And as the sun gets closer, the globe gets hotter. That means more sacrifices to push it back up. And how do you get folks to willingly make them (or unwillingly, if Al Gore's ad campaign don't work)?

Am I being unfair here? Let me think. Nah.

Fear Mongering by the Media does not count.

Dean Baker: The state of the US economy is a direct result of Bush's policies | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

This is the first time in the history of the United States that the president has sought to provoke a financial panic to get legislation passed through Congress. While this has proven to be a successful political strategy - after the House of Representatives finally passed the bank bail-out plan today - it marks yet another low point in American politics.

It was incredibly irresponsible for George Bush to tell the American people on national television that the country could be facing another Great Depression. By contrast, when we actually were in the Great Depression, President Roosevelt said: "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself."

The Media has been telling us we are already in "the second great depression." They need to absolve the Democrat "Fannie enablers" in Congress so the cause of the crisis is "Bush said boo!" and terrified Wall Street. Of course a lot of them Wall Street Fat Cats are Democrats and they do scare easy. Redeploy into T-bills!

But don't listen to Bush. The fundamentals of the economy are actually great. Until tomorrow, when they will want to blame GWB for the rise in unemployment.

That Washington "thing."

The Democrats in Congress organize “Cartels of Caring.” A “Caring” Cartel is at the very center of the Subprime mortgage mess. Its most visible members came in the form of a “big fat Fannie” and its spawn, an adrenalin addled Freddie. This Federal Grendel and his Ma effectively turned the mortgage industry into a government run cartel. Except in this story, Grendel didn’t lose his arm, home buyers and taxpayers lost theirs. It took advantage of home buyers at one end and mortgage instrument buyers at the other — and the entire US in between once the “implicit” guarantee of Freddie and Fannie finally became explicit. They socialized the risk and let speculators hugely profit.

Citizens struggling to make their mortgage payments don’t give money to politicians. Real Estate speculators do.

Cartels are always sold as being good for the public. Their purpose is to steer power and money to their members. The Democrats (but not just the Democrats) combine these two principles to produce “Cartels of Caring.” In the last few weeks we have found out how much “affordable housing” really cost. Ten years from now we will learn the cost of affordable health care — your life, perhaps, but only after your money.

Do you want them to stick their fat Fannies into your health care? In this respect, the “McCain plan” is better since it does give the patients some control. Sen. Obama constructs another “Cartel of Caring,” only this time he invites the insurance companies to join and removes power from the patients. They will construct a system of incentives to over treat the well and hasten the death of the severely ill. This system will not require a Dr. House — a brief bit of grief “consoling” will do. Twelve stages in two minutes. Because we care.

The Main stream Media is another “Cartel of Caring.” They sell themselves as the watch dogs of the American People when they are actually the Guard Dogs of the Washington establishment — and all the Cartels of Caring they create. Hence their Howling at the Moon when Sarah Palin arrived on the scene.

After the election they will want their own position shored up. They are owed that much (and self interest does dictate…)

If you want a movie that most effectively mirrors the current set up in Washington, watch Goodfellows. “Hey, Congressman, I’d like you to meet a friend of mine. Grendel’s a Good Fellow.”

It makes you want to Howl like a Beowulf.

The Vice Presidential Debate

I think Gov. Palin won the debate because the network commentators on NBC were calling it a tie.

I thought her using the word "blunder" in connection with George Bush was a bit extreme, but hey, it seems to work for everyone else. I thought she should have hit more on the failures of Congress in regards to the subprime meltdown and the lax oversight of Fannie and Freddie.

On several occasions Joe Biden said we spent more in three and one half weeks in Iraq than we have in six and a half years in Afghanistan. My guess is he was a bit off in his math (or it is really fuzzy). Three and a half months might be closer. On Health Care: Sen. Biden wants to stick the heavy Fannie of government in our Health Care while Sen. McCain prefers a defter touch.

I thought the best part of the debate was when the families got up on stage. I think I was as relieved as they were that it was over. I'm off to bed.

Update: Western Standard ran the numbers on Sen. Biden's claim.

According to the Congressional Research Service, spending on the war in Afghanistan since 2001 has been $172 Billion. Spending in Iraq is, as the Democrats repeatedly mention, a little under $10 Billion a month.

In other words, Biden's number is off by, oh, something like 2000%. Perhaps Obama's Sub-Committee ought to have held some hearings on Afghanistan after all.

Our Fat Fannie meets Fredie's nightmare.

I've argued for years that the Mortgage deduction was simply the wrong way to go about providing "affordable housing." Affordable McMansions, maybe. But at an unaffordable cost to the economy.

Instapundit.com

Yes, why not turn the mortgage interest tax-deduction into a refundable credit for a couple of years. Surely that would drastically reduce the default rate, wouldn't it?

If you make it worth no more than, say, 30 percent of the mortgage payment (which must be kept up) and cap it at, say, $2,400 a year. Then let people choose which they want to use.

But it should, in the future, apply to saving for a down payment.

Dahlia Lithwick does not know what Affirmative action is.

What Clarence Thomas might have to say about Sarah Palin. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

Critics have scoffed at Thomas' tendency to view affirmative action exclusively through the narrow lens of his own life, but it's clear the "badge of inferiority" has tainted a lifetime of enormous achievement. He will never forgive America for the chances he was given, or for how small it has made him feel. I can't help but wonder what Thomas would say to vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin, who is now suffering the same stigma of affirmative action, and who shows signs of the same blend of defensiveness and outrage that have so shaped Thomas' career.

The criteria used to choose VPs is: can they help the ticket win? That was the criteria used in the Palin pick. If McCain were spotted 10 million votes for making the choice, that would be affirmative action. And if he then "won" by losing by five million votes, of course Liberals would feel good about it -- Affirmative Action works.

The Left promotes Affirmative action by saying we owe women and minorities. But it turns out that woman and minorities now owe Liberals. Clarence Thomas should be saying "thank you" 7/24

There was no Joy in Mudville

I did not catch all of the Debate between Senators McCain and Obama but enough to have some reaction. I thought McCain did alright in a format that did not favor him (he can be quite good in the "Town Meeting" format but stiff behind a podium). Sen. Obama used Henry Kissenger's name -- several times -- while misinterpreting what the foreign policy sage had to say. This could come back to clobber him (but with so much of the Media on his side, who knows?). For the most part I thought Sen. Obama did OK.

What surprised me was the atmospherics of post debate commentary. I figured most of the folks in the broadcast news divisions are Obamaphiles and expected them to be at least moderately pleased. But there was no Joy in Mudville and since I had not seen the mighty orator strike out I wondered why. Then it occurred to me that they expected him to put McCain away -- what with the "subprime mortgage mess" -- and that he had failed to do so. They wanted to see that long ball go out of the park and drive home a few scores to likely put the game out of reach for the Republicans. Instead, Obama may have got on base with a bunt while the lead runner was picked off. McCain was still very much in the game, and may have improved his position a bit.

At Panamas Media Jennifer Rubin asksWho Won the Debate?

And second, the McCain camp will be under the gun to make the most of their material. Some possibilities are already evident. Will the embarrassing stumble over the name on Obama’s bracelet be key? Will the Henry Kissinger misquote come back to haunt him?

I suspect it may be something far more serious. John McCain’s shining moments came in large part when discussing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

She goes on to quote several of McCain's answers about the threat from the Islamic Republic. I also thought it was probably the high point of the debate for McCain.

For Obama the high point was tying the invasion of Iraq to McCain. It is, after all, an unpopular war but seems largely behind us now. And it is better to win wars than to lose them, a point Sen. Obama seems to disagree with.