Month: December 2002

Weird conference

Supernova 2002 (mentioned by Denton) looks weird. It’s one of those big picture convergence conferences where the big picture ends up being too big to talk about, so it degenerates into a discussion of very little things (like the Tivo boss insisting that his customers are all happy as clams, both of them). Seems to … Continue reading “Weird conference”

Supernova 2002 (mentioned by Denton) looks weird. It’s one of those big picture convergence conferences where the big picture ends up being too big to talk about, so it degenerates into a discussion of very little things (like the Tivo boss insisting that his customers are all happy as clams, both of them).

Seems to me that digital rights is one of the main barriers to convergence, and it won’t be lifted without some heavy compromise. Yet the advocacy groups that are supposed to be representing the computer industry, like EFF and CDT, are anti-compromise.

Grim prospects, no film at 11:00.

Click here for the Supernova group blog.

Gotcha politics at its finest

If you ever find yourself wondering what “Gotcha Politics” is, what it looks like, and why it’s repugnant, go to the Instapundit website for this day, Dec. 8, 2002, and look at the pile of twisted remarks about Trent Lott. Professor Reynolds, the Tennessee law professor who’s normally obsessed only with Europeans and the Second … Continue reading “Gotcha politics at its finest”

If you ever find yourself wondering what “Gotcha Politics” is, what it looks like, and why it’s repugnant, go to the Instapundit website for this day, Dec. 8, 2002, and look at the pile of twisted remarks about Trent Lott. Professor Reynolds, the Tennessee law professor who’s normally obsessed only with Europeans and the Second Amendment, has launched a one-man crusade to run Lott out of the Senate over a remark the Senator made at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party.

The remark itself isn’t important – it was a birthday party, and like everybody else, Lott was laying it on thick, grinning while he praised the old fool. And like many Southerners of a certain age, Thurmond was once a segregationist and a Democrat, and like most of them, he is now neither. In fact, Thurmond has a remarkable record of hiring and promoting African Americans on his staff (Armstrong Williams, for example). And the segregationist franchise has stayed with the Democrats, who now support separate housing and classes for African Americans on college campuses, and all manner of quotas, reparations, and other programs designed to ensure ongoing conflict between the races.

Whatever he may once have been, Strom Thurmond is not a racist — he’d just as soon sleep with a black woman as a white — and neither is Trent Lott. Lott is a bit of a boob, and the Republicans would be better off with a more intelligent, cleverer, and more libertarian leader in the Senate, but he wasn’t endorsing segregation, he was just patting Strom on the back in what should be an acceptably hyperbolic way. Anyone who says he’s a racist is idiotic.

The advantage of blogs over traditional media is that the absence of editors means that news can get out quicker; the disadvantage is that judgment-fogging obsessions, like this one over Lott, Andrew Sullivan’s over Krugman, and Josh Marshall’s over Enron sometimes make them unreadable, unreliable, and offensive.

Here’s to a speedy recovery and a prompt return to Eurobashing Second Amendment activism for Professor Reynolds.

UPDATE: If you’re fed up with all the pissy, politically correct whining about Lott, read Mark Steyn’s column on ole Strom and have yourself a laugh.

UPDATE: Will Vehrs is right on target vis a vis “piling on” and “Gotcha”.

Unilateral pissing contest

Anono-blogger D-squared Digest — A fat young man without a good word for anyone tore into Mr. den Beste and Eric Raymond recently: But anyway, people like Stephen den Beste, author of the turgidly unreadable and unsettlingly technocratic attempts to recreate neoclassical economics without the benefit of reading a word of the literature which populate … Continue reading “Unilateral pissing contest”

Anono-blogger D-squared Digest — A fat young man without a good word for anyone tore into Mr. den Beste and Eric Raymond recently:

But anyway, people like Stephen den Beste, author of the turgidly unreadable and unsettlingly technocratic attempts to recreate neoclassical economics without the benefit of reading a word of the literature which populate USS Clueless (he has a fine line of shite in talking about mobile phone standards too), regard the absence of moderate Muslims lining up to claim that numerically the majority of their religion is made up of horrendous halfwits and ogres, as a sign that Islam is an intrinsically warlike, barbaric and horrible religion. I’m using his piece on this subject as the example because I happen to have just read it, and as an associate of the dreadful Eric Raymond, he’s a target of opportunity.

The attack failed to get a rise out of den Beste, except in the comments section where he fairly well rips the anono-blogger to shreds. D-Squared, whoever it is, is a disciple of Max Sawicky, which tells you all you need to know.

Battling editorials

The Supreme Court’s consideration of racial preferences in college admissions has prompted battling editorials on the America’s most influential editorial pages. The New York Times makes the traditional left-wing argument: If the Supreme Court strikes down the program, it could undo affirmative action in higher education, sharply reducing the number of African-Americans in colleges and … Continue reading “Battling editorials”

The Supreme Court’s consideration of racial preferences in college admissions has prompted battling editorials on the America’s most influential editorial pages. The New York Times makes the traditional left-wing argument:

If the Supreme Court strikes down the program, it could undo affirmative action in higher education, sharply reducing the number of African-Americans in colleges and graduate schools.

And the Wall St. Journal counters with the relevant data:

The university is perfectly up front about its policy of discrimination and defends it as necessary for its “compelling interest” in having a diverse student body. But the experience of two other state university systems — Texas and California — shows that argument doesn’t hold water. Both institutions did away with affirmative action in 1996 — Texas under court order and California at the direction of the Board of Regents — amid prophesies of a “new segregation.”

This turned out to be a “complete fiction,” says Terry Pell, executive director of the Center for Individual Rights, the public-interest law firm that brought the Michigan lawsuits. Today every public university in both states has a non-Asian minority student body of 10% or more. In California earlier this year, minority enrollment at UC’s eight undergraduate campuses topped 19%, up from 18% in 1997, the last year racial preferences were in effect.

In California, the passage of Prop 209, outlawing racial and gender preferences, increased minority enrollment in UC, mostly at the minor campuses.

Of the two editorials, the WSJ’s is clearly the more honest. Affirmative Action continues to provide a crutch to those who don’t want to attack the real problems that disadvantage minorities, poor public schools and too many single-parent families. Understandably, every left-wing special interest group in the country has written a “friend of the court” brief supporting preferences.

Court watchers say O’Connor has switched sides and will vote to strike preferences down.