Smitty and Tammy, Sittin’ in a Tree . . .

You probably know the rest of that playground poem from memory, but Smitty’s a married man and his wife’s not named Tammy. However, Smitty did get a shout-out from Tammy Bruce when she had as a guest on her radio show our good blog-buddy Big Fur Hat from IOwnTheWorld.com:

If you lack the patience to listen to the whole thing, you can cheat by skipping forward to a bit past the 7-minute mark, where you’ll hear this:

Tammy Bruce: I’ve gone to the lounge at IOwnTheWorld.com, and you’ve got pictures there, you’ve got people’s favorite photos, you’ve got some videos, you’ve got . . .
Big Fur Hat: I got a haiku — I got a haiku from Smitty . . .
TB: Oh, I read that!
BFH: I got a haiku from Smitty the other day . . .
TB: I read that! I didn’t know what a haiku was, and now I do, and I thought it was a very good haiku.

And they go on from there, in mutual praise of Smitty’s “Haiku Sonnet for Sarah Palin,” which is unlikely to be included in the next edition of The Norton Anthology of American Literature, but did get reposted at IOwnTheWorld.

Meanwhile, I’m jealous both of Smitty for having been praised by Tammy, and of Big Fur Hat for having been a guest on her show. But now that we know she’s into poetry . . .

There once was a conservative sapphic,
Whom I would throw some blogosphere traffic,
If I were on her show.
There’s a joke there, I know,
But the punchline might be pornographic
.

No, wait, I can do better than that:

There once was a blogger named Smitty,
Who gained fame by composing a ditty.
But alas, the poor fool
Got deployed to Kabul
And complains that the bandwidth’s a pity.

He’s So Much Smarter Than You!

If there is anything I can’t stand, it’s a writer who begins with the presumption that his readers are infinitely ignorant:

In the jargon of the field, this is called “cognitive dissonance” — the psychological mechanism we all use to justify our choices and beliefs and preserve our self-esteem.

That’s from a HuffPo blogger, writing about a study that analyzes how parents reconcile the unpleasant aspects of parenthood with their desire for personal happiness. Smitty in the Kabul bureau e-mailed me the story as blog fodder, and I was brought up short by that phrase, “In the jargon of the field . . .”

Really? I mean, really? Do you really think that someone who owns a computer and has Internet access and uses this technology to search out stories about psychology is so ignorant that they are unfamiliar with the phrase “cognitive dissonance”?

Excuse me for thinking that at least 90% of Huffington Post are college-educated and remember enough of their Psych 101 class to recognize the term. Or else I would suppose that people might grasp the meaning from context and, if they lacked sufficient contextual information to do so, would be prompted to use Google to look it up.

That show-off clause “In the jargon of the field” is just the writer trying to impress us with his own expertise, but I’m probably not the only reader who is insulted by such things.

One of the old-fashioned rules of journalism, of course, is that a news story must be self-explanatory and comprehensible to the average reader, who is imagined to have a sixth-grade literacy level. So when you’re writing a newspaper article about the House passing a bill, you find some way to fit into the story the fact that the bill must be approved by the Senate and signed by the President before actually becoming a law. But you don’t do this clumsily, as if instructing a child; rather, you work this explanatory material into the article smoothly, so that it doesn’t obtrude in the reader’s mind as you telling him something that he obviously should already know.

The HuffPo writer’s show-offy explanation is a thumb in the reader’s eye: “I know this ‘jargon of the field’ and you don’t, you morons!”

Furthermore, as those of you who remember your Psych 101 have been screaming for the past six paragraphs, the HuffPo writer got the definition wrong!

Cognitive dissonance is not a “defense mechanism.” Rather, cognitive dissonance is the ordinary feedback mismatch between our self-concept and reality. Defense mechanisms are the mind-games we play with ourselves to resolve cognitive dissonance, to wit:

Everyone likes to think of themselves as physically attractive, yet most people are no more than average looks-wise, and some of us are decidedly below average. Therefore, the aethetically challenged are likely to overinterpret a smile from a stranger — “Hey, that chick really digs me!” — and to interpret rejection as motivated by something other than their deficiency of attractiveness.

(Thus the popularity of feminism among ugly women, who convince themselves that men aren’t interested in them because men are “intimidated by strong women.” And thus also attractive women’s instinctive standoffishness toward geeky guys; attractive women learn early in life to recognize the kind of dweebs who routinely misinterpret mere courtesy as a signal of romantic interest.)

Our attempts to block out negative feedback, to protect our self-esteem through rationalizing mind-games, are all defense mechanisms, our means of coping with cognitive dissonance, rather than cognitive dissonance itself, as the HuffPo writer wrongly informs the readers whom he insults.

Did you notice that I just insulted dweebs and feminists? I did that on purpose, consciously and specfically, which is how insults should be made. The HuffPo writer, by contrast, accidentally and casually insults every reader who is intelligent enough to realize he’s being talked down to. What kind of person would do such a thing?

Wray Herbert, Award-Winning Journalist! Well, listen up, pal: In the jargon of the field, this is what we call “the blogosphere,” and we’re not impressed by your awards. Paul Krugman has a Ph.D. and a Nobel Prize, and we slap Krugman around on a daily basis just for the fun of it.

Oh, and I’m also an “award-winning journalist,” which proves — if it proves anything at all — that journalism awards are a dime a dozen. Hell, I’d probably be using journalism awards for doorstops and paperweights if it wasn’t for the fact that I’ve never had much appetite for wasting the time it takes to fill out those silly application forms.

Let me further point out, for the benefit of Wray Herbert and any other Award-Winning Journalists who are thinking about trying their hand at this blogging stuff, that in the jargon of the field, this is what we call “the Internet.” People who use the Internet don’t just randomly find stories they aren’t capable of figuring out on their own.

So this Award-Winning-Journalist attitude that assumes readers are ignorant clodhoppers won’t get you too far as a blogger. It makes a lot more sense to think that your readers arrive at any given subject with a basic familiarity, and aren’t in need of any lectures about stuff that is (or should be) well-known by the typical college sophomore.

And one more thing, Wray Herbert: The fact that you won some journalism awards doesn’t mean that people actually like you. In fact, the other bloggers at HuffPo — the really hip ones, the popular bloggers with lots of traffic who get invited to VIP parties with Arianna — are almost certainly laughing at you behind your back.

(That’s what we call “suggestion,” in the jargon of the field.)

IT’S ALIVE!

The dreaded scourge of “liberaltarianism” — the heinous Cato Institute monster that first terrorized America in the waning years of the Bush era — has been revived, at least in the dope-addled mind of Will Wilkinson, who sees in the enthusiasms of Timothy B. Lee the spark to resurrect that nightmare.

It was Brink Lindsey who created that monster, evidently thinking that the No-Blood-for-Oil crowd might embrace it, and Wilkinson became entranced with “liberaltarianism,” no doubt in one of his cannabis-induced reveries. In 2009, Michael Moynihan declared the death of “liberaltarianism,” and last September there was a “purge” at Cato.

Wilkinson’s efforts to bring the monster back to life, however, got a sharp rebuke from Kevin Drum of Mother Jones. With a Democrat in the White House, the Left no longer has any need to play nice with the Cato types. Yet we see how persistent bad ideas can be, and these intellectual Mad Scientists won’t repent of their folly. Beware!

LIVE AT FIVE – 1.18.11

TOP NEWS
Apple’s Jobs Takes Medical Leave Again

Steve Jobs with some Apple gizmo or another

Can Apple survive without its wizard?


Greed Of Leila Ben Ali Major Goad To Tunisian Revolt
“The Imelda Marcos of the Arab World”




House GOP Ready To Rumble
Repeal/replacement of Obamacare still job #1

Lebanon On Brink Of Chaos As UN Indictments Delivered
Ayatollah Khamenei, Hezbollah charged with ordering, carrying out Hariri’s assassination



POLITICS
Rep. Giffords Could Leave Hospital In Weeks, Possibly Days

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords

Plans underway for extended rehab; meanwhile, Federal attorneys fight to keep Loughner’s trial in Arizona

Maine Governor LePage: Backtracking on NAACP Remark, Or Staying The Course?

Federal Grand Jury Probes John Edwards For Campaign Finance Violations

Bloomberg: School Chancellor’s Birth Control Remark Just A Joke

State of Alaska, Native Groups To Sue Department of the Interior Over Polar Bear Habitat



THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Starbucks Introduces Supersized Coffee With Asinine Name
Because “extra-large” is just so pedestrian.
Goldman Sachs Limits Sales Of Facebook IPO; No Americans Wanted
Crude Oil Prices Fall As Trans-Alaska Pipeline Reopens
Facebook Update Exposes User Contact Info
Apple Should Be Paranoid About Android
File Taxes From your Smartphone? There’s An App For That



SPORTS
Zenyatta Crowned Horse of the Year

Zenyatta at last year's Breeders' Cup

19-1 last year, beats out Blame by over 20 votes

Raiders Promote Hue Jackson To Head Coach

#5 Pitt Ends Syracuse’s Undefeated Run

Favre  Retires, Officially


Nyets Lose Sixth Straight, Fall to Warriors 109-100



FAMOUS FOR BEING FAMOUS
Ricky Gervais: One And Done At Golden Globes

Ricky Gervais, dying at the Golden Globes

Robert Downey Jr. – “Aside from the fact that it’s been hugely mean-spirited with mildly sinister undertones, I’d say the vibe of the show’s pretty good so far, wouldn’t you?”

Octomom Whips It In Fetish Video

Anne Hathaway To Play Chris Colfer’s Lesbian Aunt On “Glee”

Heidi Montag Forced To Turn Down DWTS Invite

The Second Creepiest Thing You’ll See Today (Video)

Snooki: Sorry, I’m Not Dead (Video)



FOREIGNERS
PRC, US Eager To Put A Happy Face On Relations
“Baby Doc”‘s Return to Haiti Denounced; France Sez “We Didn’t Do It”
Stuxnet To Create Chernobyl-Style Meltdown In Iran? (Video)
UN To Authorize More Peacekeepers For Ivory Coast



BLOGS & STUFF
Yuval Levin: Paul Krugman, Logician
Don Surber: To Ayres Is Lefty
Legal Insurrection: Jennifer Rubin Discovers Think Progress Playing The Race Card
Big Hollywood: Ricky Gervais Gives Hollywood A Taste Of Their Own Sucker-Punch Medicine
Ed Morrissey: NYT – Maybe We Should Have Waited For The Facts Before Blaming The Right
Outside The Beltway: George Allen Back For Another Bout With Jim Webb?


— compiled by Wombat-socho

Worst. Congress. EVAH! Also Turns Out to Have Been Breathtakingly Unethical

Remember when Democrats promised to clean up the “culture of corruption” in Washington?

Numerous times this year, members of Congress have held fundraisers and collected big checks while they are taking critical steps to write new laws, despite warnings that such actions could create ethics problems. The campaign donations often came from contributors with major stakes riding on the lawmakers’ actions.
For three weeks in June, for instance, the members of a joint House and Senate committee worked to draft final rules for regulating the financial industry in the wake of its 2008 meltdown. During that time, the 35 members of the drafting committee collected $440,000 in donations from that same industry, which was then lobbying heavily for looser rules.
Earlier this month, the chairman of the Senate committee overseeing tax policy, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), gave himself a birthday-party fundraiser – on the same day that the chamber took its first vote on an $858 billion tax package that would provide breaks to wealthy citizens and business interests. . . .
Senators collected $469,000 from the financial industry the day before, the day of and the day after that key Sept. 16 vote, a Post review of donations shows. The biggest recipient was Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), who shepherded the legislation and faced a tight reelection race. . . .

Read the whole thing. And let this be a lesson to America: Whatever the problem is, “vote Democrat” is not the solution.

That Was Crazier Than A Stacy McCain Road Trip

by Smitty

I got no business being online, having arisen yesterday morning around 0800. Got all the duffel bags loaded into the truck (old school working party-style) around 1300 Christmas Eve and bussed over to the Air Force Base in Kuwait. Another working party unloaded truck, and whisked the duffel bags onto three pallets for for shipment. We boarded the C-17 in late afternoon, and got it underway for Bagram.

A little motivation hanging within the C-17

The load of sailors occupied rows of seats five abreast facing forward, and seats along the sides facing the centerline.

The bag pallets live in the back of the cargo bay

We arrived in Bagram around 0100 Christmas morning. We had to break down the baggage pallets and get the bags moved to another staging area. Slightly below freezing temperatures. In a briefing room, the NAVCENT forward staff collected our official orders and welcomed us to the area.
“Are you sick of hearing ‘huuu-aw’?” asked the Master Chief. (‘Hurry Up And Wait’, the Army mantra.) A chorus of agreement from the room. “Tough shit. You’re going to hear it a lot more.”
The briefings died down around 0230, and we took time to applaud one of our own, who, it turns out, was arriving to be the new NAVCENT Admin Officer.
Oh, and we had a 0700 muster for our brief flight southeast to Kabul proper. No point in trying to locate a place to sleep. So we went to the USO, where the WiFi was notional, the computer room a sauna, and an atrocious Eminem flick was playing.
The galley (dining facility or DFAC in Army-speak) opened at 0530, so I wandered through the dim, weird world of Conex boxes and temporary shelters for some entirely predictable military chow.
Seven o’clock rolled around, and we were moving the duffel bags to a new staging pallet for a trip on a Kentucky ANG C-130.
I called my sponsor on DSN, and he allowed that getting a ride across town from Kabul International to our current location on Christmas was going to be tough.
We got in around 0830, and the joint nature of the area was brought home by a company of French infrantry occupying the terminal. It later turned out that they were standing by to greet the French SECDEF.
A supply corps Lieutenant, possessed of nearly Stacy McCain-esque persistence, managed to finagle a couple of cars to fetch him, me, two others, and our crap. Details are murky, and I’m not sure I want to know.
Thus, after a solid 24 hours of travel, we made it to Kabul.
I would like to thank a special someone who really made all this possible:

Rape: I’m Against It

Also arson, armed robbery and extortion. Pretty much everything that’s illegal, I’m against it — fireworks and high-speed driving being the two (usually) victimless crimes of which I’m most fond.

However, nobody’s asked me today about why I hate Nanny State anti-fireworks laws (“Light Fuse, Get Away“), nor have I been asked to debate whether the 55-mph  urban freeway speed limit is the first step down the slippery slope to fascism (it is).

Instead, because Tommy Christopher decided to make a big deal of my argument about the Julian Assange rape case with feminist Jill Filipovic — who wouldn’t vote for a Republican if you put a gun to her head — a certain Republican communication strategist decided it’s time to play “Let’s Do a Beatdown on Stacy McCain,” and sent me these questions:

  • Do you believe that a woman, while asleep – whether from alcohol or rohypnol – is capable of providing consent?

Obviously not. Rohypnol is illegal. Alcohol is legal, but should be used in moderation. Friends don’t let friends get drunk and hook up with strangers.

  • Do you believe promiscuous women deserve to be raped, rgardless of their chosen partner’s proclivities?

No one “deserves” to be raped, just as no one deserves to be robbed or murdered. If I advise against parking your car in Southeast D.C. with the windows down, the doors unlocked and the keys in the ignition, that doesn’t make me “pro-car theft.”

  • Do you believe that rapists of chaste women deserve a greater punishment, than those of promiscuous backgrounds?

No. Nor do I advocate greater punishment for (a) car thieves who smash the windows of locked cars and hot-wire the ignition, compared to (b) car thieves who opportunistically take advantage of idiots who leave their keys in the ignition.

The way the Grand Inquistor framed that particular question conflates different issues in a troubling way. There is the implicit accusation that I am in favor of something I’ve never advocated (leniency for rapists based on a moral judgment of their victims) so as to set me up either as pro-criminal or else as a moralitic prude who lacks sympathy for The Fallen Woman. But this is not at all the issue that got me arguing with Jill Filipovic over the Assange case, and I don’t like being put in the dock for a cross-examination full of deliberately leading questions.

My point is this: Promiscuity makes women vulnerable to exploitation, abuse and disease. This is not my opinion, but a statement of fact.

As to why this is so, I’ve been pondering an argument that involves selection effects (i.e., what kind of guys go trolling for random hook-ups?) and the law of large numbers (i.e., every additional hook-up increases your odds of experiencing The Tragic Hook-Up From Hell). But that would be a very long and difficult essay to write. Nobody’s offered to pay me for such an article and I don’t have time to write it anyway, because I’ve got to answer yet more accusatory questions from a Republican communications strategist.

  • Do you recognize a difference between cases where the rapist is unknown to the victim versus date rape?

As noted in a previous post, Assange’s (alleged) victims find themselves in a he-said/she-said situation, after consenting to sex with a guy they barely knew. This is a good example of the inherent risks of consenting to sex with guys you barely know. In a legal system where the burden of proof rests on the prosecution, the difficulty of proving a date-rape accusation is self-evident, as there is unlikely to be any incontrovertible evidence of coercion or force.

So that’s the legal reality, which cannot be wished away, and therefore women should be strongly cautioned against putting themselves into predicaments where they risk being victims of a crime where successful prosecution is so difficult.

  • are you speaking only to date rape, within a Western country, or does your view extend to victims in developing countries?

If you’re looking for someone to defend the brutality of thugs in Third World pestholes, you need to look elsewhere.

  • have you written anything, prior to this occurrance, about rape?

Interestingly enough, I wrote a column about a case a few years ago in Floyd County, Ga., where a star athlete was acquitted of raping a girl in a classroom at a high school. That column appeared in the Rome (Ga.) News-Tribune, but I don’t think it’s available online now. Strange as it may seem, the forces of organized liberalism all sided with the accused rapist in that case, while I argued on behalf of his alleged victim. I don’t know whatever happened to the girl, but the star athlete is now a defensive end for the New York Jets. Maybe he was truly innocent. Or maybe his encounter with the criminal-justice system caused him to straighten up and fly right.

  • Please point out any particularly important articles authored by you, or your quotes, defending women’s honor.

Let me ask that you talk to Wendy Shalit, author of A Return to Modesty, about the feature article I wrote about her when that book was first published. Ditto the feature articles I’ve written about Michelle Malkin, Phyllis Chesler, Tammy Bruce, etc. Does the name “Pamela Geller” ring a bell? I don’t suppose that any of the articles I’ve written about Sarah Palin (here, here, here, just for example) would meet your “particularly important” standard, since you obviously never read The American Spectator.

  • Are you aware of the sex trafficking and rape statistics within the US?

I could Google it. Are you blaming me personally for these statistics, or is this question just another non sequitur?

  • Have you done any mission, or other aid work in developing countries where sex trafficking & rape are pandemic?

Ma’am, I’m a journalist, trying to eke out a living on the Internet, and have neither the time nor money to engage in save-the-world crusades. But now that you mention it, I’ve been to Africa with a Christian missionary who carries an AK-47 and rescues victims of terrorism. So I’m familiar with the atrocities perpetrated by thugs in Third World pestholes, if that’s your question.

The Grand Inquistor’s point, of course, is that I am her moral inferior and that she is therefore entitled to interrogate me to prove her point.

None of this is going to mean a damn thing to the prosecution of Julian Assange, nor is it going to help any rape victim — not here in America, not in Sweden, not in “developing countries.” But doing a beatdown on the Designated Scapegoat makes people feel good about themselves, which I guess is far more important for them than anything else I might have done with the time it took to answer these questions.

Have a nice day! 🙂

UPDATE: Tabitha Hale would never date a scumbag like Julian Assange.

UPDATE II: Stixblog weighs in on the “culture of victimhood” aspect of the Assange case. Ann Coulter addressed this in her bestseller Guilty: LIberal ‘Victims’ and Their Assault on America. Liberalism’s perpetual celebration of victimhood is one of those ideas that have consequences.

UPDATE III: Speaking of Ann Coulter, her latest column is about Julian Assange.

Damn You, Obama: FCC ‘Net Neutrality’ Decision Forces Me to Blog About the World’s Most Boring Public-Policy Debate

Please, somebody, book me a dental appointment for a root canal, but don’t expect me to get into the soporific wonkfest of blogging about Net Neutrality. During BlogCon in September we were having a fun discussion of politics when some idiot brought up Net Neutrality — and there went 20 minutes of our lives we can never get back.

All that needs to be said about Net Neutrality is, the Left is in favor of it, which means it must be bad and therefore, I’m against it.

End of discussion.

Democrats controlled Congress for four years and were unable to enact Net Neutrality. Why? Because every time they scheduled a hearing, congressmen found themselves slipping into a semi-comatose state after the first five minutes of testimony.

So having failed at legislative implementation — hey, at least the DADT debate gave people a chance to discuss sodomy, which is at least interesting — now Obama has his FCC director enact the damned thing by executive fiat.

Which means everybody’s blogging about it, and it can no longer be safely ignored. Not only that, but now Republicans will have to waste valuable time in the 112th Congress trying to repeal this disaster.

The Tyranny of Tedium: Hearings, amendments, boring op-eds in all the big newspapers, 15-minute segments of wonks endlessly debating this ennui-inducing issue on cable-news networks . . .

Damn you, Obama. Damn you to hell, sir.