The Invisible Counterpoint

When the Jon Meachams and Mika Brzezinskis work up the courage to condemn the people who have done and are continuing to do this for the "blood they have on their hands," then their purported outrage and beliefs can be viewed as sincere. But they don't do that and won't do that. Righteous anger at those who spill blood is reserved only for hated foreigners (Osama bin Laden) and for the marginalized and powerless who haven't actually spilled any blood (the Koran-burning Pastor and WikiLeaks). That's why this Pastor circus has received so much media attention: it's a cheap, petty and easy way for people with enormous amounts of blood on their own hands to show what Good, Caring People they are by pretending that they hate those who cause it to be spilled. (Glenn Greenwald, “The Pastor and Cheap, Selective Concern for Blood-letting,” Salon, 10 Sept. 3010) What do the weak exist for, except to be trod upon? It's a matter of aesthetics. Both s...

Phil Perspective but did you know that Roberts and Phillips were engaged as of three months ago? A big part of me wishes I had remained free of this information - just like I lament knowing about the CNN nuptials of John King and Dana Bash. (Glenn Grenwald, “CNN anchors attack the scourge of anonymity,” Salon, 24 July 2010) Great stuff, Glenn. Roberts and Philips are a good fit, but completely vile. I'd just wish them better things if it wasn't for all the damage they'll be up to. King and Bash are a good fit too. I like them -- I think they're mostly good, and maybe even possible future allies of yours. In any case, if I was Obama, I wouldn't want them around -- they could balk. Cheers. - - - - - Patrick McEvoy-Halston Re: “King and Bash are a good fit too. I like them -- I think they're mostly good, and maybe even possible future allies of yours .” —Patrick McEvoy-Halston Do you have any examples of especially King's reporting (sic) ...

Authority-based, and feudal? James Surowiekci in his excellent book The Wisdom of Crowds points out how abysmal practicing economists (vs. just those who pontificate) are at actually predicting the market. He discusses how 90 percent of mutual-fund managers and 95 percent of bond managers (most of them with PhDs in economics) routinely and consistently underperform the market (page 33). (Andrew Leonard, “Economists to bloggers: shut up, fools,” Salon, 28 June 2010) I think economic phds are used to hearing this sort of criticism, backed up by terrific evidence, but still are unmoved in their sure knowledge that no one else other than them is to be trusted. I wonder if it's not just that they suspect the evidence against them is hogwash, but that they understand that measure of achievement mostly now rests not in later evidence, but in the particular manner in which one's role / duty is executed. You can't get at professional journalists, economic phds, simply by ...