War tends to shake or shatter assumptions, each day making the previous day's speculations obsolete. Still, I will finish this quick post with some ruminations about what may come next.
But first, let's go back - way back - 6 weeks or so to this posting from the Institute for the Study of War November 12, just after Russian forces performed their humiliating retreat from Kherson.
"Russia’s withdrawal from Kherson City is igniting an ideological fracture between pro-war figures and Russian President Vladimir Putin, eroding confidence in Putin’s commitment and ability to deliver his war promises. A pro-war Russian ideologist, Alexander Dugin, openly criticized Putin—whom he referred to as the autocrat—for failing to uphold Russian ideology by surrendering Kherson City on November 12.[1] Dugin said this Russian ideology defines Russia’s responsibility to defend “Russian cities” such as Kherson, Belgorod, Kursk, Donetsk, and Simferopol. Dugin noted that an autocrat has a responsibility to save his nation all by himself or face the fate of “king of the rains,” a reference to Sir James Frazer’s The Golden Bough in which a king was killed because he was unable to deliver rain amidst a drought. Dugin also downplayed the role of Putin’s advisors in failing to protect the Russian world and noted that the commander of Russian Forces in Ukraine, Army General Sergey Surovikin was not responsible for the political decision to withdraw from Kherson City. Dugin noted that the autocrat cannot repair this deviation from ideology merely with public appearances, noting that “the authorities in Russia cannot surrender anything else” and that “the limit has been reached."
Indeed, pragmatically, if Ukrainian sense of nationhood was at all weak before this war, this war has cemented their sense of identity like nothing else could. Even if RF forces plowed all the way way to the Polish border, all they would win for themselves is the agony of an endless partisan war of liberation and hate that would last until the invaders were ejected and reparations paid. After which, the ill will would take many decades to subside.
The PRAGMATIC EFFECTS are as important as any of Dugin's et. al. ideological incantations. Those effects so far are making every Putin pretext for war (mostly lies beforehand) more real, not less, every day.
...and the absolute determination of a now unified Ukrainian people to never again be ruled by Moscow, even if it means marching there to insist.
Those delusions are being disproved, once again.
But what would be the best possible outcome for the world and human destiny?
That will be if some FSB(KGB) guy calculates the value of the blackmail files they are using to control 100+ orgy-party traitors in DC, (as alluded by Madison Cawthorne) and offers those files (maybe to Soros) in exchange for a private island somewhere... or else JoBee takes my advice and breaks up the ring at our end, with clemency offers. See Political Blackmail: The Hidden Danger to Public Servants.
== Other Putin Self-fulfilling prohecies ==
We have some pretty good leaders, now… though dunces at the art of polemic. I wrote POLEMICAL JUDO because the battlefield of memes and facts may be one of the most important in this struggle to save and advance enlightenment civilization. So let me offer some riffs regarding Ukraine that might resonate as pithy and memorable … and that you have likely never heard said as clearly, by any of our paladins out there. I couch them as TAUNTS aimed at the god-emperor of the Foxite right, Vladimir Putin. (And yes, taunts are what get through to MAGAS, like it or not.):
==The one way out of this mess ==
There is only one way out. To waken the mesmerized Russian citizenry, whose stolid reflex is to rally behind and believe their Strong Man. So, let's invite 1000 of them - chosen at random from old utility bills in all provinces - to come investigate claims of Ukrainian 'nazis' and to ask citizens of blasted Ukrainian cities if they will ever view themselves as "russian." Have them join commissioners from Ukraine and developing nations, tallying war crimes and interviewing front line troops at random locations on both sides.
Don't fret the expense! Because - in fact - Putin won't allow this to actually happen. He can't.
And THAT is the way out. Cornering and showing VP unwilling to trust his own people with in-person truth seeking. THAT fact will be one he cannot hide. And it will be his undoing.
Otherwise, the Russian populace with their tradition of out-suffering their enemies, will slog after him and his pet milbloggers straight into hell.
== a final speculation ==
Shall we believe ISW?
"Ukraine's Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) Chief Kyrylo Budanov stated that fighting in Ukraine is in a deadlock on December 29. In an interview with BBC, Budanov stated that “the situation is just stuck” and that both Russian and Ukrainian troops lack the resources or ability to move forward."
Sorry, I don't believe it. This armchair general thinks (or rather speculates) otherwise.
Instead I expect both sides are right now awaiting frozen rivers, which will enhance mobility...
... and dense fog, in order to blind the other side's drones and sensors and vision.
One side likely thinks that general obscurity will blind spy satellites, drones and manpads, thus enabling a massive tank-and-foot groping-forward assault, like in the December 1944 Ardennes Offensive.
The other may believe they can see through fog. Especially with systems provided by allies. In which case, we may see a particular tool-of-rapid-maneuver employed meaningfully for the first time in this struggle.
I guess we'll see if I'm just waving a sci fi what-if. As if my speculations matter an iota in a world whose future is being forged by villains and heroes.
163 comments:
Dr. Brin - "But what would be the best possible outcome for the world and human destiny?"
Irrelevant, demographics are destiny and Russia is already a dead man walking. Putin had to invade in 2022 because after this year there won't be enough young males to fill the ranks of Russia's army.
As always, your best source is Peter Zeihan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A79uneUEfjM
A similar demographic argument would suggest they won’t have a force large enough to hold in 2024 what they tried to win in 2022.
No. I think Putin failed to be properly skeptical of glowing capability reports from his toadies.
DP:
demographics are destiny and Russia is already a dead man walking.
The problem is that they won't go gently into that good night.
DP
The Demographics of Russia are really not that bad - yes there is a shortage of youngsters but they don't have the overhang of lots of pensioners as they have all died!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#/media/File:Russian_population_(demographic)_pyramid_(structure)_on_January,_1st,_2022.png
They don't even have a shortage of young males - at least before the war they had more young males than females
There is a significant gap in the 15 - 26 year old demographic but the below 15 increases again
Demographics are destiny
Disagree 100%
The drop in the number of kids has shown that people are not "breeding machines" but are effectively "rational consumers"
Having kids is a "benefit" but there is a "cost"
If a society wants to have more kids the solution is very very simple
Reduce the "Cost"
This is why the Scandinavian countries have higher birthrates than places like Italy and Spain
The important "cost" appears to be the cost to the womenfolk (what a surprise) - so if the men lend a helping hand the "cost" is lower
Duncan,
Bujold's novel Ethan of Athos addresses that directly. Athos is a planet of men - basically a "no girlz allowed" world using uterine replicators to keep its population going. Ethan, venturing out into woman-rife worlds, is astounded at how many children there are, until a woman explains that child-rearing costs are mostly unpaid and absorbed by women - "scab labor", as it were.
It's a corvee, a tax paid in work, and as it gets higher, more women will refuse to pay.
Pappenheimer
Putin is a near-perfect example of a dictator whose blunders won't be corrected by his flattering court because any hint of disloyalty can be fatal.
Pappenheimer
Hi Pappenheimer
I love Bujold's work - its like our Gracious Host's - but sneakier !
Happy New Year Everybody
Now its 2023 I'm off to bed
The institute for the study of war lol
You make a big deal out of 'expertise'. What 'expertise' do these guys have? None. No military experience. No training in logistics or operational art. none.
Listen to Andrei Martyanov ie Smoothiex12, a former staff officer, engineer, someone who writes books on the actual mathematics of military operations.
Or The New Atlas, an actual former Marine who can tell you why this has been such a slog
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F89iypG7k8s
The mighty Kherson victory was literally Ukraine driving into areas already evacuated by the Russians, evacuated because of the threat that Ukraine would bomb a nearby dam and cut off 20,000 men north of the river. Not because of any military force.
And now the Russians have nearly achieved operational encirclement in Bakhmut. An amazing feat, because they overcame heavy entrenchments built over 8 years and strong enough to survive low yield nuclear weapons while being outnumbered.
"One side likely thinks that general obscurity will blind spy satellites, drones and manpads, thus enabling a massive tank-and-foot groping-forward assault, like in the December 1944 Ardennes Offensive."
You seem to forget Russia has the second largest network of spy satellites and a vast amount of cheap orlan drones to do its own spying. Russia also has EMP anti-drone rifles and the most sophisticated and integrated Electronic warfare suites of any military. Not to mention actual anti-satellite laser equipment which they have already employed several times to jam up starlink and other satellites.
I love the characterisation of highly sophisticated and coordinated combined arms maneuver war as being "groping forward" assault.
"The other may believe they can see through fog. Especially with systems provided by allies. In which case, we may see a particular tool-of-rapid-maneuver employed meaningfully for the first time in this struggle."
Ukraine has no means to wage maneuver war. They are literally down to using technicals now, which is one reason why they are taking such terrible casualties from shrapnel. The Russians have spent the last 3 months laying line after line of entrenchments, pillboxes and dragonsteeth along the entire front. Ukraine will have no more success performing swift mass attacks than the Russians have had in Donbass.
I reiterate, the victories at Kherson and Kharkov were swift advances into areas already evacuated by the Russians. And both times the Ukrainians took horrendous casualties from advancing into areas that were preregistered for artillery.
And I would invite you to visit the Donbass and ask the citizens sometime how they feel about Ukraine after 8 years of shelling, attacks by literal neonazi soccer hooligans, having their language banned, and now their church outlawed by Zelensky.
duncan cairncross:
Now its 2023 I'm off to bed
A time travel message from the future!
(It's still 2022 in the US)
Would you please furnish us your legal name and a profile, including your address? It would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
As a college student in the 1980s, back when Donald Trump was mainly a New York celebrity, I remember noting facetiously that "I am richer than Donald Trump", because I had no net wealth, but at least I didn't owe ten billion dollars.
At that time, that was a joke. I didn't realize how spot-on that observation really was.
Ah, our never-right dirtnap-guy is back. Is he ever not a fabricating shill? Like bizarro asserting the ISW institute has no experienced military folk on staff. Or that the Kherson retreat wasn’t because of devastating losses in attritional artillery duels that RF forces almost never win.
The writhing excuse about the dam is hilarious. Dams are very strong and do not generally fail from artillery… you need emplaced explosives and the Ukrainians were no where nearby to do that. The Russians apparently tried to blow the dam but were unable to, because AFU artillery made a mess of engineers who tried. Carumba.
In fact, Russia does NOT have the second largest spy satellite network. That belongs to China. But quality also counts and they have proved inept at even finding AFU artillery, especially HIMARS and efficiently targeting them. Proof of this is in the fact that they are using so-called ‘precision” missiles like Kaqlibers on stationary civilian infrastructure (under the laughably stupid notion that it will intinidate the civilian population into surrender) instead of using those munitions as effective battlefield weapons. Likewise the shelling of Kherson.
The rest of that paragraph was drooling wish fantasy. But the next one?
“I love the characterisation of highly sophisticated and coordinated combined arms maneuver war as being "groping forward" assault.”
Um. Pretty clever trick, NOT showing any of those traits for 10 months, then shocking us all (soon?) by unleashing “sophisticated and coordinated combined arms maneuver”? Next month? This I gotta see. Anyway, he utterly ignored the point about attacking in FOG… which was THE point…
…as the poor fellow ignored why AFU might use Fog, as well. Generally just drool.
But sure, let’s draft 1000 RANDOM citizens of Russia, Ukraine, Donbas, neutrals etc and make a fact commission. Putin will refuse.
Dr Brin:
Um. Pretty clever trick, NOT showing any of those traits for 10 months, then shocking us all (soon?) by unleashing “sophisticated and coordinated combined arms maneuver”? Next month? This I gotta see.
By now, I'm used to right-wingers lying as often as they breathe. But I'm always amazed when they insist on a falsehood which will be clearly proven false within a very short time frame. Like Mike Pillow claiming that he'll reveal proof of election fraud next Tuesday, and then not doing so. Or Q-Anons insisting that a living JFK Jr. will appear at the rally that they're actually standing at.
Actually, dirtnapninja is welcome here! He provides a one-step-removed look at the RF milbloggers' rationalizations for their stunning battlefield reversals. Humans are fascinating! ...
...though one notes parallels with the claims of "miracle weapons" that Goebbels kept promising any-day-now, after the Falaise Catastrophe and the crushing of Army Group Center.
Indeed, the current waves of Infrastructure Attacks by RF 'precision missiles' calls to mind the V2 rockets that rained on London, after D-Day. Remarkably similar in accuracy. And in effectiveness (nil) at demoralizing the target population. And in expensively using up rapidly-depleting resources.
But do go on, sir. You were saying?
LH that is why I keep pushing my WAGER CHALLENGE. Demand a firm date and firm criterion. They won't bet. They never bet. But do it often enough and a stench of cowardicve starts to cling.
Scattershot: they throw out enough disinform, hoping some of it will stick.
I was told for years that “dead people vote”, and believed such was more than anomalous—sounded plausible.
Anyone have an opinion whether this article about 1922 predictions is for real?
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2021/dec/29/the-future-is-now-100-year-old-predictions-about-2/
Re: 1922 predictions article
One of my touchstone words is 'syntonicity'. Mainly in reference to Seymour Papert and computational thinking, but also going way back to Morse code (a subject near and dear to my heart). Here's a 1901 prediction of cell phones titled, "Syntonic Wireless Telegraphy"
http://earlyradiohistory.us/1901ayrt.htm
Also, the thing about France's birthrate shows the weakness of using linear trends as predictors, thus the need for beefier psychohistory.
Thanks for another year of CB goodness. Moderation and depth -- a rare combo out here on the intertubes.
Happy Hogmanay.
It's 2023 in Ukraine.
Best wishes for the new year.
Well, it will be in 2 hours.
#!@*$$!
Ok, NOW it's 2023 in Ukraine.
I most likely won't be back online until the time warp has plunged the rest of the world into the future.
So Happy New Year, and may the odds be always in our favor.
Happy New Year!
"Ah, our never-right dirtnap-guy is back. Is he ever not a fabricating shill? Like bizarro asserting the ISW institute has no experienced military folk on staff. Or that the Kherson retreat wasn’t because of devastating losses in attritional artillery duels that RF forces almost never win."
Russia started the war with a 2-1 in theater artillery advantage, Its now 6-1 in most areas, and as high as 9-1 in some by the admission of the ukrainians themselves. Why? Because russia has more artillery, better artillery and a vast amount of cheap orlan drones for spotting. This lead to greatly superior counterbattery fire.
Russia did not leave Kherson because of losses. Every single major push Ukraine launched was absolutely smashed. with one exception. Ukraine launched a literal human wave assault with an entire armoured brigade against a company of russian airborne, which lead to a breakthrough that forced an immediate withdrawal to a new defensive line in the eastern part of the kherson region.
"The writhing excuse about the dam is hilarious. Dams are very strong and do not generally fail from artillery…"
They werent worried about the artillery. They were worried about the possibility of saboteurs or the remote chance the Ukrainians might accomplish something with HIMARS. The Russians were having a great deal of difficulty supplying their men in kherson, because the Ukrainians made good use of rockets to blow out pontoons and the Russians had become limited to 2 main bridges.
These supply issues, the relative unimportance of the region, the possibility of their troops becoming cut off if the dam did blow lead them to simply withdraw.
"But quality also counts and they have proved inept at even finding AFU artillery, especially HIMARS and efficiently targeting them. Proof of this is in the fact that they are using so-called ‘precision” missiles like Kaqlibers on stationary civilian infrastructure (under the laughably stupid notion that it will intinidate the civilian population into surrender) instead of using those munitions as effective battlefield weapons. Likewise the shelling of Kherson."
HIMARS is inherently hard to target because its mobile. Thats the whole point of the rocket.Satellites arent much use against it in real time. Thats the job of drones. And the Russians use drones against artillery systems all the time.
you arent going to waste a Kalibr taking out some troops. They are expensive and take time to program and target. You are going to use them the same way the Americans use tomahawks..against infrastructure or extremely high value targets.
I might add, that the Ukrainians have the same problem targetting the Russian rockets.
Russian are most interested in targetting the electrical and rail system. Why? The Ukrainian rail system is mostly electrical, and Ukrainian logistics are dependent on rail.
"Um. Pretty clever trick, NOT showing any of those traits for 10 months, then shocking us all (soon?) by unleashing “sophisticated and coordinated combined arms maneuver”? Next month? This I gotta see. Anyway, he utterly ignored the point about attacking in FOG… which was THE point…"
The initial attack was a good example of maneuver war. But because they gambled on a quick victory leading to a negotiated peace they did not have the second component in place..Mass. Thus when the first phase failed, they were left overstretched, vulnerable to hit and run attacks and forced to withdraw.
This lead to the second phase..attrition war.
You cant do maneuver war in areas with entrenchments that are 50 km deep.
Im not not sure why you are obsessed with Fog. This isnt 1920. Both sides have modern imaging gear and drones which can see right through fog and darkness. And take it from someone who lives in a region with 6 months of snow on the ground..real fog in deep winter isnt common. Its actually alot easier to see in winter for the most part because the leaves are off the trees making it harder to hide.
Alas, I counted 70% of this fellow's assertions that are not just false, but hilariously/sadly diametrically opposie to true. So much so that I will forego my argumentation reflex and just sigh...
... while wishing you all a joyous year of success for freedom, enlightenment and health, ahead.
Happy New Year, may tomorrow's hangovers be nonexistent, and may next years surprises be pleasant.
Happy almost perihelion day everyone. May your next cosmic loop be a joyous one.
Imaging gear and drones can see through falling snow and sleet? Through snowbanks?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/28/us/politics/iran-drones-russia-ukraine.html
As the war in Ukraine grinds on, some officials have become convinced that Iran and Russia are building a new alliance of convenience.
I wonder what Netanyahu thinks of this. For Israel's right wing, isn't this like an alliance between matter and anti-matter?
Our beloved home planet has orbited into 2023. Now I feel confident to wish Happy New Year to all (and my fellow CB travelers).
Another revolution, and another resolution...
'Tis said that, while anyone can talk strategy, generals talk supply. Except Russian ones, it seems.
Hey, not all Russian generals. Koniev emphasized preplanning and prestocking before battle - it's part of why the Kursk meatgrinder was such a surprise to the Nazis.
Also, we in the West have our own half-brained hussar generals. For all their good points, Rommel and Patton had armored columns literally run out of gas.
Pappenheimer
Some of the dirtnap rationalizations are so absurd they stick around. If the cruel infrastructure attacks by RF on Ukraine trule were all about disabling the latter's railroads, then why is there no evidence of rail disruptions whatsoever? Or any targetings of actual Ukrainian rail centers?
Happy and successful and healthy and ever-hopeful new year to all!
If any of what Sergei insists is actually true, the Russian victory will be obvious in a matter of days or weeks, and he'll be able to laugh at us out loud while shouting "I told you so!" to the winds.
I wonder why it is so important to convince us before that when the reality will prove itself so quickly no matter what we think.
Reaching a bit farther than they can stretch in the moment has been the downfall of many a general who let their ego get out of control.
I was thinking specifically of all those Russian artillery pieces, lacking a proportional number of munitions, which is a chronic issue.
(Seems Russia's strategic reserves of things that go bang are getting very low.)
An insurgency would kill many of the Tsar’s beasts.
Speaking of bad decisions -
"...Makiivka in Donetsk was a slaughterhouse. The geniuses decided (seemingly) to store ammunition in the basement of the facility that the mobiks were deployed at."
If this is actually what happened - ammo stored under a Russian barracks - this is on a par with the guy I played Battletech with (once) who decided to store AC ammo in his mech's center torso*. And that was only a GAME.
*For further amusement for those who play or played that game, he looked at me and said, "but I have CASE!"
Pappenheimer
@Pappenheimer have you heard of what happened to HMS Hood?
I would suggest that an independent Ukraine as a trading partner does more long term good for the Russian Federation than another vassal state, though the latter likely speaks to Putin's inner alpha male primate.
Tony,
Yep. The Arizona went that way, too, from aerial attack. Of course, so did the Akagi and Kaga, but the latter 2 were just asking for it by having bombs and torpedoes scattered throughout their hangar decks (emergency load switch leading to unsafe storage).
Pappenheimer
P.S. It does seem that the Russian army has been hollowed out not only materially but in leadership. Even Stalin learned that his commanders needed to be effective more than they needed to kiss his Ану.
Tim H:
I would suggest that an independent Ukraine as a trading partner does more long term good for the Russian Federation than another vassal state...
That general idea was supposed to keep the peace established in 1945. Putin seemed to think that his country continues to be owed the benefits of that peace while violating its terms.
I have heard it said that VP could not allow the Dnieper gas fields to be developed by a rival state who could fill existing pipelines with their own supplies to sell to Europe.
Also I hypothesize that our intel agencies were unleashed when Biden took office to retaliate / mess-with Putin's folk. True or not, time was no longer on his side, as it had been with his agent in the Oval Office.
It took over 400,000 casualties for Stalin to rethink snabbling Finland. Putin's only gone through a quarter of that, so far. One does hope today's Russians are better informed, but a lot can be achieved with total media control.
"I have heard it said that VP could not allow the Dnieper gas fields to be developed by a rival state who could fill existing pipelines with their own supplies to sell to Europe."
The irony is that those gas fields are unlikely to be developed now, anyway.
Tony
The latest and most likely explanation is that the Hood was lost to an incredibly lucky hit in her side when her speed and bow wave pushed the water level at that point low enough that she could be hit just below the main armour belt
The WW1 battlecruiser explosions were due to a concentration on speed of fire such that the anti-flash precautions were simply ignored and a hit on a turret destroyed the ship(s)
Admiral Beatty should have been shot after Jutland
Duncan,
I've ae seen Drachinifel's video too. I still think the most likely explanation is a deck hit over the machinery spaces. The deck armour over the magazines was too thick to be penetrated at the range of the action but the deck armour over the machinery spaces could just be penetrated at that range, at least if the hit occurred at the right time in the roll. And the Captain of the Prince of Wales thought he saw a shell hit near the mainmast. But either way it was a lucky hit. I agree with all your other points.
Duncan, regarding Beatty, have you read THE RULES OF THE GAME: JUTLAND AND THE BRITISH NAVAL COMMAND by Andrew Gordon? It gives a detailed analysis of the Battle of Jutland and gives a history of British Naval Command from the age of Trafalgar up to WWI. I found it much better than Robert K. Massie’s CASTLES OF STEEL which covered some of the same topic, though I absolutely loved Massie’s DREADNOUGHT.
Tony Fisk:
"I have heard it said that VP could not allow the Dnieper gas fields to be developed by a rival state who could fill existing pipelines with their own supplies to sell to Europe."
The irony is that those gas fields are unlikely to be developed now, anyway.
Not sure that counts as irony. To Putin, if he can't have the gas fields for himself, it's probably a good consolation prize that no one else can have them.
Or as The Joker once put it in Batman, "If you make something unusable, that's just as good as stealing it."
re: Glass Onion
I can't respond to this without spoilers, so if you want to see the movie and haven't seen it yet, please stop reading now.
***********************************
***********************************
** SPOILERS BELOW *****************
***********************************
***********************************
Dr Brin:
(1) as far as life histories go, Norton's character far more resembles Zuckerberg. "Alpha" was clearly a riff off of "Apple" and "Alphabet" (Google). But whatever.
This I agree with. Though there are intimations that the character is Elon Musk, his face and his corporate history more closely resemble Zuckerberg (though he sounds like Musk when he speaks, and he has that car). I suspect the writers' intent was not to pillory a single person in particular, but to dig at tech billionaires who think they're always the smartest person in the room, and the resemblances to real persons is the writers hitting the audience over the head with the obvious.
(2) The 'stupid' part of Norton's character makes no sense.
Agree as well. That seemed to me to be writing to the bit--the writers getting a gratuitous dig in at the tech billionaire class. But it also had no noticeable bearing on the rest of the movie.
As I mentioned earlier, I wondered if Bron's malapropisms were supposed to signal that "he" was some kind of robot with AI which was able to believably mimic human interaction but not in quite all situations. That would have been cool. :)
(3) again, there are almost no elements in Glass Onion that make a credible murder mystery. No believable motives - for ANY of the characters to risk prison for! Not even one of them.
Here is where I diverge from you. At least I think I do because I'm not sure I understand your specific point.
The suspense of the plot wasn't about "Who killed Duke?" It was more about "Why were these people brought together?", and then once we're aware of it, "Who killed Andi?" And every one of the disruptors dependent on the Alpha teat had a motive to do that.
That may all be beside the point, though. I'm not sure the story is structured as a classical whodunit murder mystery. It did feel more like a farce where the audience is being purposely misdirected about what is going on at all. In that, it reminds me a bit of the novel Reamde--a thousand page thriller which keeps throwing curves about where the plot is heading for the first third of the book.
Had Janelle's character turned out to be alinve, having no twin, after all... THAT woulda been cool. Having none of her 30 year friends knowing she had a twin? Pricelessly dumb.
I actually wondered if she was really alive, "playing" her own twin. But in retrospect, I don't know that that works any better. What would be the point of her lying about her identity to the detective, but presenting herself as her actual self to the others?
The twin is a soap opera trope, and did seem a bit far fetched, not to mention awfully convenient. But I don't think the friends were necessarily ignorant of the twin's existence. They just didn't know it was her right there with them. And since only one person knew Andi was supposed to be dead, and even he didn't actually witness her final moments after he left her to die, it's only a little implausible that they'd be fooled by a lookalike with access to Andi's journals.
"Some of the dirtnap rationalizations are so absurd they stick around. If the cruel infrastructure attacks by RF on Ukraine trule were all about disabling the latter's railroads, then why is there no evidence of rail disruptions whatsoever? Or any targetings of actual Ukrainian rail centers?
Happy and successful and healthy and ever-hopeful new year to all!"
They are having enormous problems with their rail now. The Russians arent targetting the rails themselves, which can be repaired. they are targetting the electrical substations, which cannot be easily replaced. And Ukraine is starting to run out of replacement equipment. They are replying increasingly on stored diesel locomotives to make up the difference, but there are no spare parts for these engines.
And were you this concerned when NATO was waging economic terrorism against Serbia by deliberately bombing civilian infrastructure?
Yes, Beatty shoulda been shot.
We'll see if maybe there are EU drilling teams already in Ukrains, working under fake grain silos to reach the Dnieper gas. It'd be the right thing.
Jesus, I begin to suspect that dirtnap is a satire guy. It is the top theory to explain such ravings.
The "who killed Andi" mystery wasn't treated as a mystery at all! Only as an absurd flashbeack "tell" that it was Norton. That was no fun at all! Though the type of murder DID leave open the possibility of a faked twin or a dead twin.
gotta say that Reamde was a novel in search of an actual plot. I think the mountain lion was the most believable character. That being said, it was enjoyable...would recommend for a long flight, then leave in the seat pocket in front of you.
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer:
gotta say that Reamde was a novel in search of an actual plot.
Personal taste and all, but I disagree. The plot noticeably twisted wildly in the first third of the book, but I took that to be intentional, keeping the reader guessing as to what the story was really about. Whether or not that was intended, I enjoyed that aspect of the book. I enjoy the beginnings of a story when you can't guess what's going to happen next, and that one kept it going much longer than most.
Once the terrorist shows up in China, the plot becomes much more straightforward.
Your handle makes me nervous: death agent?
Have you ever considered therapy?
If you think that the dialog in Glass Onion is too much parody then read Musk's texts (Exhibits H&J) from Twitter v. Musk. He texts with a bunch of tech and VC billionaires about buying Twitter, and the texts are..something.
Exhibits were under seal but Musk's own lawyers wanted them public in a remarkable self-own. His billionaire buddies were *embarrassed* at having their idiot dick-waving and ass kissing contests revealed.
Also, LoL at SBF supposedly having ~10B$ cash on hand when a few months later he said he had less than $100k.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23112929-elon-musk-text-exhibits-twitter-v-musk
@Larry the irony lies in that the world's carbon budget is now so depleted that no new fossil deposits can be responsibly developed. Putin didn't have to lift a finger on that score: the market would have done his work for him.
The added irony, of course, is that his attempts at energy blackmail are causing EU countries to switch to renewables faster than ever.
Hey, I understand that the candidates for House Speaker don't get to win by a plurality. Even so, won't it be funny if the Democrat Hakeem Jeffries gets more votes than any of the Republicans do?
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/03/us/house-speaker-vote
It’s official: Out of the 434 votes cast in the first roll call, Hakeem Jeffries received 212 and Kevin McCarthy received 203.
Woo-hoo!
(That does not mean Jeffries won; he was still short of the 218 majority.)
D'oh!
To quote John Bohner, "Are you kidding me?"
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/03/us/house-speaker-vote
...
It appears that Jim Jordan is trying to move his supporters’ votes to Kevin McCarthy, while Andy Biggs is trying to move his supporters’ votes to Jordan.
...
It appears we are in the exact same scenario as the first ballot, just with the anti-McCarthy votes consolidating for Jim Jordan, who himself is supporting McCarthy.
...
Kevin McCarthy’s Republican opponents coalesced around Jim Jordan even though Jordan gave the speech nominating McCarthy for the second round of voting. Jordan would not be acceptable to a significant number of Republicans, however.
...
BTW, there was a real jerk named Jim Jordan in my high school freshman English class. I doubt it's the same guy, but I could still never support anyone of that name. :)
The Speaker fight right now echoes the plan that was supposed to happen in 2016 if Trump lost.
The members would deny Paul Ryan the Speakership and vote for Jim Jordan until a savior came in to fix it. That "savior" was planned to be Mike Pompeo. Gods what idiots these fascists are.
matthew:
Gods what idiots these fascists are.
Marjorie Taylor Greene said on Twitter:
If the base only understood that 19 Republicans voting against McCarthy are playing Russian roulette with our hard earned Republican majority right now.
This is the worst thing that could possibly happen.
And in foreign news...
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/03/world/russia-ukraine-news
...
At the memorial service in Samara, about a hundred participants waved Russian flags, coordinated aid collection for survivors and called for revenge, according to videos and local media reports. Local media did not mention any criticism of the officials responsible for the war.
“The entire West has closed ranks against us in order to destroy us,” Yekaterina Kolotovkina, the head of a soldiers’ humanitarian fund and the wife of a Russian general fighting in Ukraine told the Samara rally, echoing a main theme of state propaganda.
“For the first time since the start of the special military operation, I asked my husband to take revenge for the tears of the widows,” she added, using the Russian government’s euphemism for the war. “We will not forgive, victory will be ours.”
...
In other words, "How dare Ukraine fight back, and how dare the West help them. We will have revenge for their response to our bombing the shit out of their country!"
MTG talking about Russian roulette is funny.
No matter who winds up as Speaker... they will need occasional Democrats to get much done.
Maybe they had a choice between demonstrating at the service, or having their rations cut.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/03/world/nasa-astronaut-walter-cunningham-obit-scn/index.html
Alfred,
It doesn't seem that they will need any Democratic votes for their priorities -
1. Investigating Hunter Biden, the FBI, the DOJ, Ukraine, maybe the United Federation of Planets (it's all Gay Space Communism)
2. Impeaching Pres. Biden (and anyone else they feel like)
3. Blowing up the world economy in September by refusing to raise the debt ceiling (or at least threatening to - we'll see if their paymasters are OK with this/still have a grip on the tiger's ears).
I haven't heard that they have any legislative aims. Caveat - If a hurricane hits Texas or Florida they may actually need Democratic votes to get past their own crazies and pass an aid bill or two.
Pappenheimer
Sooner or later a major hurricane is going to do the Tarantella along the Gulf Coast. I hope these bozos aren't in charge when it happens.
Pappenheimer
P.S. re: impeachment - they don't expect anything to get through the Senate, so no Democratic votes required.
Shoot - forgot to add St. (Ret.) Anthony Fauci to the investigations list.
Pappenheimer
And with that, a good night.
I forgot the investigations. Should make for an interesting circus. I don't expect impeachments, though. McConnell will tell them off and if McCarthy is Speaker... they'll just do prolonged investigations.
Nah. The guy with a legislative agenda is Jordan and he won't accomplish any of it. He said as much when he nominated McCarthy for the second ballot. I was highly amused watching that animated nomination speech backfire on him when all the non-McCarthy votes chose him instead.
McCarthy will have to give up a lot of power to get the job and that's exactly what Gaetz said he disliked about him. So... this could take a while.
Alfred Differ:
McCarthy will have to give up a lot of power to get the job and that's exactly what Gaetz said he disliked about him.
I'm sure Gaetz means that he disliked the speaker giving up a lot of power to the centrists or the Democrats. Giving up power to him is just what he's after.
* * *
Pappenheimer:
It doesn't seem that they will need any Democratic votes for their priorities -
McConnell has shown us since 2009 what a bare minimum of Republicans can "accomplish" if their aim is obstruction rather than legislation.
i see that you are trying to channel the Episiarch in this reality denying post. No sense arguing, I will just let the actual events of 2023 reveal your delusions.
You may enjoy this Robert Reich essay:
https://robertreich.substack.com/p/what-the-hell-is-the-republican-party
The party appears to have moved on to an unpleasant afterlife.
I like graphs that clearly show connections between technology/psychology/history. It's why I maintain a secondary, calculus-based computational psychohistory model. Here's a poignant "Why Janey Can't Code" one.
The 1984 inflection that reversed female coding hopes:
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/07/1141358586/women-coders-programming-computer-science
Larry,
I don't think Gaetz wants to share with McCarthy. I think he wants a minority veto within the House GOP. He'd threaten any of McCarthy's plans to get attention on his particular details.
Razor thin margins for majority do this in parliamentary systems too. The way things are going makes it likely the House GOP will make the entire body impotent.
Alfred Differ:
I don't think Gaetz wants to share with McCarthy. I think he wants a minority veto within the House GOP.
That's what I meant by "giving up power to him." It wasn't mean to be taken lit'rally. It referred to any concession that Gaetz and his ilk could extract from McCarthy.
What the far right holdouts seem to be after are rule changes that allow them to hold the country hostage and to shoot the hostage if necessary.
Hey, if the Speaker is not required to be a sitting House member on the grounds that the Constitution doesn't say he must be, then there's no reason the Speaker has to be an American. I mean, the Constitution doesn't say that either. So maybe they can make Vladimir Putin the Speaker and be done with it.
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS, LARRY!!! :D
Larry Hart: there's no reason the Speaker has to be an American
I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination for Speaker.
Sorry, scidata, but that didn't do any good for Jim Jordan yesterday. He still got 20 votes. :D
I think it would be awesome if Putin were elected Speaker. Aside from being hilarious, I think it would increase the clusterfuckery that is the Republican Party by perhaps an order of magnitude, and thus contribute to it losing its grip on political power in the US more quickly. It's like a scheme the Stainless Steel Rat might devise to bring about the downfall of warring fascist regimes on some obscure backwater planet. While smoking a fine cigar and sipping Antarean Pantherpiss, of course.
Unfortunately, it will remain nothing but a fantasy.
I must go to work soon, but the Schadenfreude involved in watching the current congress at 'work' in starting to alarm me. I think of myself as a nicer person.
Pappenheimer
scidata:
Larry Hart: there's no reason the Speaker has to be an American
I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination for Speaker.
DON'T GIVE THEM IDEAS, LARRY!!! :D
Ok, how about this one. The Constitution also doesn't say that the Speaker has to be a human being. So I nominate a candidate that the whole House can get behind--my cat. His name even has a long, proud American history--Hamilton. Who would not cast a vote for Hamilton as Speaker?
If elected Speaker, my cat would also have a shot at the presidency by way of the line of succession. You may say that he'd have to be 35 years old to be eligible? No, read the text. All that is required is that he is not a person who is less than 35 years old. And since he is not a person, that qualifies.
That's only just a little bit more absurd than what we're seeing today. :D
A confession:
https://spectator.org/when-putin-got-into-reaganomics/
"So I nominate a candidate that the whole House can get behind--my cat."
Caligula would smile.
Good discussion. I still like Arnold for Speaker.
Hey "jim," how about making your assertions explicit and fact checkable wagers? With escrowed major stakes?
I did witness someone on CSPAN yesterday mentioning that the Speaker doesn't have to be a Representative. It's just that they always have been for reasons related to political power structures.
jim,
The lovely thing about episarchs is we ALL do that to some degree. Who among us CAN'T identify with them?
If you really, really believe though, you can probably get one or more of us to bet money on a well-defined proposition with defined odds.
Alfred Differ:
I did witness someone on CSPAN yesterday mentioning that the Speaker doesn't have to be a Representative.
That's been common wisdom for a while. Everyone seems to accept it at face value except me. I think it's absurd.
When I was on jury duty, the judge told us that the first thing we must do is to elect a foreman. He didn't explicitly say, "from among the members of the jury itself," but if we had come back and said that we decided that Donald Trump was our foreman, I don't think he would have been amused.
If you really, really believe though, you can probably get one or more of us to bet money on a well-defined proposition with defined odds
Sure, if one feels secure enough in one's correctness (and the other guy's wrongness), a bet is a good money-making opportunity. But just for purposes of telling jim to put up or shut up? I don't see the point. As with the dirtnap guy, we'll know who is right soon enough without regard to convincing each other ahead of time.
* * *
The Republicans were just barely able to pass a motion to adjourn for the night. 216 to 214 or something like that.
Dr Oger,
I thought that Caligula's candidate always voted "Neigh"*
Pappenheimer
*stolen without shame from Lois Bujold
LH the purpose of the wager is to force the matter at hand to be expressed explicitly in an objectively fact-checkable way and that cannot be evaded by hurriedly changing the subject. The two things MAGAs fear most.
Of course they never bet! But they know they should and it's a blowhard coward who refuses to back up his ravings. Hence they are shamed and revealed as blowhard cowards. And it is the macho bluster that they treasure most that is damaged by their refusal to step up. The way a man would.
David, I don't think you can get them to accept any impartial judge of an issue. If they are declared the loser they will shift goalposts and attack the umpire. And their evasions while transparent to most will be clutched at by other MAGAs.
Larry,
When I bring up bets with people I know won't do it, I'm mostly interested in whether they understand what an unloaded wager really is.
I could wager the sun will come up tomorrow, but who would take the opposing side? At what odds?
There are a whole lotta people who only understand bets as logical propositions. True/False. They are so much more than that.
@Alfred Pratchett's arbiters of reality might, but they've got thumbs on the scales
Alfred Differ:
I could wager the sun will come up tomorrow, but who would take the opposing side? At what odds?
It's been so cloudy in Chicago for the last month, I wouldn't know whether or not the sun actually came up. :)
But seriously, point taken.
The Onion might as well be considered actual news:
https://www.theonion.com/kevin-mccarthy-assures-skeptical-republicans-he-shares-1849945112?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
WASHINGTON—In an effort to garner their support and become Speaker of the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) assured his skeptical GOP colleagues Tuesday that he shared their vision of innocents drowning in oceans of blood. “While I hear your concerns and am prepared to make a long list of concessions in exchange for your support, at the end of the day, we all want to joyously stomp on the necks of hardworking Americans as they pathetically cry out for a mercy that shall never come,” the California lawmaker said in an impassioned plea to House Republicans, responding to criticism from far-right members of his party who argue he no longer represents the values of those focused on littering this country from coast to coast with the gory entrails of its docile populace.
Alfred Differ redux:
I could wager the sun will come up tomorrow, but who would take the opposing side? At what odds?
A few years back, we were having repeated polar vortex incursions, and I thought that if Chicago was ever going to have snow in July--something that has never happened in recorded history--that would be the year. I was champing at the bit to find a venue that would give me 100-1 odds on such a bet.
It's not that I really thought we would get snow in July (and we didn't). But I was willing to lose $100 for the chance of winning $10,000, and could probably have been talked into betting $1000 for the chance of winning $100,000. I'd expect to lose the bet money just as I expect to lose the money I occasionally use to buy lottery tickets. But I would have been willing to take the chance for good enough odds.
I know I sound preachy sometimes, but again, BNW (especially Neil Postman's take on it) nailed this era perfectly: We are indeed amusing ourselves to death. Those 20 votes are not about policy in any respect - they are simply about performance art that triggers a dopamine response, that causes cameras to turn and wallets to open.
Still waiting for dirtnapninja's predictions from the Sept 3 blog post to come true... I offered him a bet at that time. Good thing for him that he didn't take it.
"Yeah...when this offensive ends like the ardennes offensive because the Russians have superior mobility, logistics and firepower, we'll see what folly it was.
Ukraine is launching a meme offensive against a soft sector after getting hammered badly in Kherson. The point of this is not to hold the territory, because they cant. Ukraine does not have the resources. Its to look good for western politicians to justify sending more money down a moneyhole. In a week or so when the momentum shifts, and these spearheads are smashed with artilley and cut off by armour, Ukraine will be worse off then it was when they started.
Ukraine should have negotiated a peace in the first few weeks. But the people driving this war want to hurt Russia, even if it destroys Ukraine in the process, and this plan is a perfect example of that."
Oh, why didn't I think of this one?
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/05/us/house-speaker-vote
We’re going directly into an eighth vote — there’s a Hanukkah joke that I won’t bother to make because it will be edited out...
Perhaps darthninja is in St Petersburg, chilling out.
Can't believe it took so long. Gaetz has nominated Trump for speaker.
I need a popcorn refill.
Darrell E:
Can't believe it took so long. Gaetz has nominated Trump for speaker.
So some 200+ Republicans are not voting for Trump? How's that gonna play with the base?
Hey, on Stephanie Miller's show this morning, they pointed out that McCarthy has now lost the popular vote more times than Trump has. Maybe Trump is trying to catch up. :)
Lloyd alas you don't get it. The purpose of the wager challenge is to
1- pin down a precise, testable topic
2- Not allow a change of subject
3- Demand adjudication by a panel that all parties accept.
All three terrify MAGAs. But it is #3 that frightens them most.
Here's my standard (paste-in) wager demand. "Have a reputable atty verify you escrowed $10k stakes. We'll put evidence to a nonpartisan panel of retired sr military/intel officers. (Most former lifelong Republicans.) Believe Fox-yammers? Pool with fellow MAGAs to take MY money!
Putting evidence to a nonpartisan panel of retired sr military/intel officers confronts them with cognitive dissonance because these are exactly who they know should be folks utterly above reproach. SOME thereupon go on to repudiate the officer corps and that discredits them in front of other republicans.
But mostly they just flee. And that is where the damage is done to their mad 'cause.' knowing that they flee again and again and again from stepping up, the way an actual man would do.
(Detailed at https://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-wager-and-university-challenges-two.html )
Larry,
It would be a shame for someone not to try to take my money. If I neglected to say where on Earth the test was to take place, they could just fly to some place north of the Arctic Circle in the next few days and win inflated odds. 8)
Our host defines terms rather well. The only thing I'd add is a form describing how a wager is stated because the yammering crowd won't read that but the rest of us need to learn how to frame a measurable gamble.
I'd also be inclined to set up wagers a bit like options so they can be bought and sold.
--If I think Event A is unlikely to happen, I might sell a contract that would be worth $100 on a particular date is Event A happened. I'd sell it at a price below $100 on the belief I'd never have to pay up.
--If I think Event A is becoming likely before the contracted date, I might try to buy a similar contract from someone else in order to close my position. The other seller gets some new price on their belief that they won't have to pay up.
--If the first buyer thinks Event A is becoming less likely, they might try to sell a similar contract to close their position. The other buyer effectively gets better odds from the person who is still short one contract.
For this all to work, the event has to be well defined. The sun will come up at latitude 15N within the next 24 hours. See? Defined event and a termination date. What remains is to ensure a believable third party will state whether the event happened in time.
------
This kind of contract is already being worked out by people working with a cryptocurrency called Etherium. There are already ways to do this except for that step involving the third party. In their jargon such data sources are called Oracles and are supposed to be independent enough that they are hard to game by contract holders. For the sunrise bet, we might set up a light sensor at a particular location, but it would be vulnerable to someone putting a box over it or something like that.
Work to be done yet, but we are getting there.
As soon as somebody says "cryptocurrency" - I think SCAM
David, I think these people do not believe that there is such a thing as objective fact finding. They want to be able to believe whatever feels good for them. So good luck getting them to accept anyone other than someone that they are certain will agree with them as an arbitrator. And even if they do accept an arbitrator how to you spread knowledge of their inevitable evasion?
I agree with your attempt to pin them down, but I think you have the wrong target. I see decision making as a better target. If a decision has to be made who has the final call? Whose decision will they accept as final even if they disagree with it? You have to get them to admit that they will not accept any decision that does not go their way. I have not seen any of them asked whose call on the election they would accept even when they think it is wrong. And if there is no such person you should ask them why opponents should accept any decision in their favour.
Tomorrow is January 6.
Maybe McCarthy can be elected Speaker if Mike Pence has the courage.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/04/opinion/kevin-mccarthy-speaker-race.html
One of the most amazing aspects of the House Republican crackup has been watching [Marjorie Taylor] Greene’s angry exasperation as her shot at real power is imperiled by attention-seeking hard-liners. “They’re proving to the country that they’re just destructionists,” she said on Sunday. It was the embodiment of the Twitter meme: “‘I never thought leopards would eat MY face,’ sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party.”
Dr. Brin,
According to the info I'm finding online, the Dnepr doesn't freeze over solid enough for anything but light vehicles to safely drive on. That's going to put a damper on mobility. - don't want a reprise of Lt Preipus in...wiki says 1242.
Pappenheimer
Lloyd alas I will accept that I cannot communicate what I have learned from TEN YEARS doing wager challenges... that there is value in the challenge even though they alwyas, always, always writhe and then flee. BECAUSE they alwyas, always, always writhe and then flee.
Yes, they try the 'no objective reality" ploy. But when you demand a panel of retired senior and mostly apolitical military officers, they must either accept the authority of the heroes who won the Cold War and the War on Terror ...
... or denigate them...
.,.. or run away. Yeas they never choose #1 and rarely #2. Alas, you fail to see the value in exposing their hypocrisy and cowardice. Nor can I ever convince you to try the experiment for yourself.
And hence we get to the OTHER thing that's amazing about the Wager Challenge. That the liberals who refuse to even try it - as an experiment - are exposed with another character flaw.
Laziness. Rationalized torpor. Slothful preference for grumpy lassitude over stepping up and trying something that might call for a little effort.
J'accuse.
Maybe you can communicate with the religious, somewhat. Once I showed a drawing of a space elevator to a Christian, and she liked it. Reminded her of the Jacob’s Ladder dream.
Alan:
Regarding theology, two items. I published a PLAY "The Escape" in the genre of "smartass confronts the devil." Also there's also this TED style talk I gave at a Singularity conference, concerning how to converse - with understanding, erudition and empathy, but also decisively, with your neighbors who use the Bible as a shield against modernity.
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryoqtB6H5nw.
Lloyd,
Consider for a moment how they appear to their relatives and neighbors when they refuse the wager. The point to the effort to to affect SOMEONE, but it need not be the person you face.
This particular gun fires sideways and occasionally around corners.
But when you demand a panel of retired senior and mostly apolitical military officers, they must either accept the authority of the heroes who won the Cold War and the War on Terror .
I challenge the notion that we "won" the War on Terror. At best, we (the west) achieved a stalemate at great cost. Bin Laden achieved his strategic goal of creating strategic overreach and pushing our societies into a more authoritarian direction, and ultimaely, only Russia and Mainland China profited from it.
I agree with Der Oger
The worst thing about the aftermath of 9/11 was watching Bush do everything that Bin Laden wanted him to do
duncan cairncross said...
"As soon as somebody says "cryptocurrency" - I think SCAM"
"The worst thing about the aftermath of 9/11 was watching Bush do everything that Bin Laden wanted him to do"
I've said both of those things so often I did a double take when I came across your comments.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/us/politics/republican-party-leadership.html
Even as Donald J. Trump rarely leaves his Florida home in what so far appears to be little more than a Potemkin presidential campaign, Republicans have failed to quell the anti-establishment fervor that accompanied his rise to power.
It still blows my mind that Republicans are now identified as the anti-establishment party. Would they now be on the side of the "dirty hippies" of my youth? Would they protest the war in Vietnam?
Maybe they need to get a job.
Speaking of lack of imagination...
This is from yesterday morning, but nothing has changed.
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2023/Items/Jan05-1.html
There is, of course, another option for McCarthy. He could sit down with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and ask: "What will it take for me to get 30-40 Democratic votes for speaker?" The Democrats don't like McCarthy at all, but they would certainly be willing to play ball if some rather serious concessions could be worked out, like "no silly investigations" and "no playing chicken with the economy." These negotiations would be challenging, since McCarthy has proven himself untrustworthy, and it's not so easy to force a speaker to follow through on their promises if they later say "I changed my mind." But it could be done, and if you were McCarthy, wouldn't you rather be beholden to moderate Democrats, who are generally reasonable, as opposed to MAGA maniacs, who are generally not? Unfortunately, you're not McCarthy, whose lack of imagination is so profound that he hasn't done anything to even begin exploring this possibility.
@Larry Hart:
There is, of course, another option for McCarthy. He could sit down with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and ask: "What will it take for me to get 30-40 Democratic votes for speaker?"
Beau of the Fifth Column made a video about exactly that question.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/us/politics/mccarthy-house-speaker-republicans.html
Ahead of the first speaker vote, Mr. McCarthy had offered some key concessions, including a return to a rule that would allow rank-and-file lawmakers to force a snap vote on ousting the speaker
I'm not sure I understand the rule, but wouldn't that allow Democrats to oust the Speaker as well?
I think the country's only hope--a slim one at best--is that the "growing concerned" Republican members strike a deal with Democrats to elect a speaker who isn't beholden to the MAGA crowd.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/us/politics/mccarthy-house-speaker-republicans.html
Representative David Valadao, Republican of California and a McCarthy ally, said more moderate members of the conference were growing concerned that the deals being cut would give too much leverage to the far right.
* * *
For anyone who remembers the iconic "Dark Knight Returns" graphic novel from the 1980s which single-handedly revived the concept of Batman, McCarthy is reminding me of the deputy mayor who keeps sniveling about how he is still willing to negotiate with any members of the "Mutant organization", even after the incarcerated Mutant leader had ripped the mayor's throat out with his teeth. What sane Republicans seem to need is a Batman to remind them that the power is, and always has been, in their hands.
What happens on January 6, 2025 if we're doing this same thing all over again, and there is no House of Representatives to certify the electoral votes for president?
If the president-elect is Ron DeSanctimonious, I'm sure the Republicans would settle on someone who could get that count going, but what if Democrats are in the newly-elected majority? Could they prevent a swearing in of DeSantis by keeping the House from functioning all month?
Seeing "January 6" on the calendar this morning is just as disconcerting as "September 11" was for many years.
Seeing "January 6" on the calendar this morning is just as disconcerting as "September 11" was for many years.
To lighten your mood:
I usually refer to this day (Holy Three Kings in the Catholic Church) as the day when Western Civilization celebrates three potentates* from the Near East who donate gold from unknown sources and psychoactive substances to a minor.
*arab crime clan chiefs or esoteric fortune-telling gurus works as well.
Der Oger:
I usually refer to this day (Holy Three Kings in the Catholic Church) ...
"Treason's Greetings"
“The worst thing about the aftermath of 9/11 was watching Bush do everything that Bin Laden wanted him to do”
I agree. And our victory is a system under which there are no longer Bushes in power or any of their factotums and the FBI/CIA/Officer Corps shifted away from doing any of that crap every again. They certainly minimized cooperation with Trump and pretty much cauterized him. And while the War on Terror had no victory parades, um, you can actually claim is wasn’t pragmatically won? For now at least?
“These negotiations would be challenging, since McCarthy has proven himself untrustworthy…”
McC could not strike a deal with dems without fracturing his caucus. Anyway, what makes Gaetz etc. think they can trust him re the snap vote One Member Speaker Decapitation Vote Rule? Once McC is Speaker there will be no way to enforce his promise. I doubt it will be in House Rules, since then Dems could do it too. No, it is a CAUCUS rule and unenforceable. on the floor.
The most massively horrid possibility is if the Presidency ‘goes to the House” and the vote is BY STATE. Even if dems have a majority of members… Goppers would have a majority of states.
Dr Brin:
The most massively horrid possibility is if the Presidency ‘goes to the House” and the vote is BY STATE. Even if dems have a majority of members… Goppers would have a majority of states.
Certainly true in 2000. However, the House is still constrained to choose from the top three electoral vote-getters. They can't just pick whoever they want. So if DeSantis was going to win anyway, what does it matter?
Also, if the House hasn't yet chosen a Speaker by Jan 6, 2025, then there is no House for the election to go to.
So this may be a moot point, but if the Congress hasn't counted the electoral votes yet (because the House hasn't yet chosen a Speaker), then are there even a "top three electoral vote-getters" for them to choose from?
I said:
Certainly true in 2000
But I (obviously) meant 2020.
I also said:
Also, if the House hasn't yet chosen a Speaker by Jan 6, 2025, then there is no House for the election to go to.
I'm no constitutional lawyer, but if this is the case, then I believe the Senate could choose a vice-president, who would then be at least the acting President until a President was elected. Otherwise, there is no president, Veep, or Speaker, so the next in line is the president pro-tem of the Senate. Hopefully, a Democrat, but the 2024 map isn't great for the good guys.
Not clear on whether the Senate by itself can count the electoral votes on Jan 6 without there being a House.
Here's an idea! Dems should suddenly provide 30 votes to make McCarthy speaker and refuse to answer any questions why! Let Fox and repubs ASSUME it means McC made a secret deal with them! Nothing on Earth would so weaken him and ignite intra-GOP fury!
Lloyd,
For their friends and relatives who are around the corner, you won't know. As for the rest... that's why you do this wager demand in public. Insert yourself in their ego bubbles as best you can and then ask for the wager.
If no one knows one is a coward, then cowardice isn't really in play. Courage is a virtue that must be demonstrated socially. It's absence or excess must be a social event too.
Yes. This takes work to set up. That's why David talks about laziness on our side. We don't have to be making this effort every waking moment, but an occasional attempt that peels away a non-crazy aunt from her nutty husband helps. Even if she choses a neutral or non-vote next time, not siding with him matters.
Dr Brin:
Let Fox and repubs ASSUME it means McC made a secret deal with them!
That's so stupid it might work. :)
Too bad it's probably too late. Looks like McCarthy has made deals giving the "disruptors" everything they want, including the ability to abandon Ukraine and to destroy the US credit rating. They might as well just make Vladimir Putin the Speaker and be done with it.
Does a corporation ever elect a board of directors or a CEO whose stated mission is to destroy the company?
We're seeing a tragic weakness in our system of government. The Constitution was designed with many checks and balances which insure that actions don't get taken without broad consensus and buy-in. But a corollary to that is that a small, determined subset can easily obstruct whatever they want by denying that broad consensus.
Hamilton and the boys apparently didn't envision a congressional caucus whose only aim is to collapse the system, and a large enough contingent of voters who sent them to Washington to do just that.
Interesting and important distinction...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/opinion/america-kevin-mccarthy-great.html
...
But while the spectacle has been amazing and, yes, entertaining, neither I nor, I believe, many other liberals are experiencing the kind of glee Republicans would be feeling if the parties’ roles were reversed. For one thing, liberals want the U.S. government to function, which among other things means that we need a duly constituted House of Representatives, even if it’s run by people we don’t like. For another, I don’t think there are many on the U.S. left (such as it is) who define themselves the way so many on the right do: by their resentments.
And yes, I mean “resentments” rather than “grievances.” Grievances are about things you believe you deserve, and might be diminished if you get some of what you want. Resentment is about feeling that you’re being looked down on, and can only be assuaged by hurting the people you, at some level, envy.
...
Larry,
Does a corporation ever elect a board of directors or a CEO whose stated mission is to destroy the company?
Yes. During takeovers and big restructuring events.
Hamilton and the boys apparently didn't envision...
I suspect he did. It is useful to recall we were a nation of states back then. If the central government wasn't functioning efficiently (they designed it so it wouldn't) then the States would continue with their normal business.
We'll manage... up until we reach the debt ceiling. Having the nation slip into default is playing with nuclear fire, though.
Alfred Differ:
We'll manage... up until we reach the debt ceiling. Having the nation slip into default is playing with nuclear fire, though.
Brexit was nuclear fire, but assured destruction was no deterrent. To the insane Republicans, an American default is something they'd do just to see what happens next. Probably with a "What harm could come of it?" attitude.
And I have to believe that one of the concessions that McCarthy gave the crazies to get their support was some aspect of control over spending that would give them the ability to force a default by way of the debt ceiling.
Exhibit A...
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/06/us/house-speaker-vote-mccarthy
Part of the talks between Mr. McCarthy and his detractors have focused on curtailing government spending, though the details have yet to be made public. Here’s a blistering statement, however, from Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee: “This backroom deal not only contradicts Republican calls for transparency, but it also kills the 2024 government funding process before it has even started, all but guaranteeing a shutdown.”
"Does a corporation ever elect a board of directors or a CEO whose stated mission is to destroy the company?"
Lok at Sears.
A brilliance of our system is that it is NOT majority rules but scaled minority veto. 51% can only impose its will on 49% when the minority is shrugging and yawning or else extorted a concession it wants. The smaller the minority, the more angry it must be, in order to get that veto.
Alas, this only works when neogtiation is possible and has not been excluded by a treason like the Hastert Rule. Pelosi was a miracle worker to corrall the dems to get stuff done in 2021-2.
The whole purpose of the current GOP House majority is to obstruct rather than legislate. They aren't even yammering about rpealing Obamacare anymore. The one central, raging purpose, other than the Hunter B laptop, is to defund the IRS.
Dr Brin:
"Does a corporation ever elect a board of directors or a CEO whose stated mission is to destroy the company?"
Lok at Sears.
That wasn't his stated mission. He really thought that following an Ayn Rand-inspired idea would be profitable. He was wrong on two counts, not the least of which is that making departments compete against each other was something that Rand's villains did, not something she advocated. But the fall of Sears was due to the CEO's failure, not to a successful attempt at destruction.
The one central, raging purpose, other than the Hunter B laptop, is to defund the IRS.
I'd say that's just one example of their desire to shrink regulations on the powerful in general.
But their one central raging purpose is to use the debt ceiling to force the US to default on debt payments. Some of the Republican foot soldiers probably think the goal is to save money. But the puppet masters behind it all want the system to crash and burn. Brexit was an appetizer, and Trump was an hors d'oeuvre. The "freedom caucus" is angling for the main course.
Republican holdout Bob Good (R-VA) writes in the NY Times...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/opinion/kevin-mccarthy-republicans.html
It is also important to remember that the American people voted for a new Republican majority in the House, albeit a small one, as a check on the Biden administration. As such, Republicans in the majority must have total confidence in our leader to fight President Biden’s agenda.
It's more accurate to say that a small majority of heavily gerrymandered districts voted for Republicans. But if one accepts that that means "the American people voted for a new Republican majority," then it is also important to remember that the American people voted for a Democratic Senate and for President Biden's agenda. Can't have one without the other, dude.
Hey, this morning when the House was about to give McCarthy his twelfth loss, Stephanie Miller suggested they go for "a Bakersfield dozen." Even the mooks on her show were impressed with that ad-lib.
Side note: Just finished watching Star Wars Andor on Disney.
Excellent action, writing, acting directing, cinematography, special effects.
A great story
It's a SW that even Dr. Brin would love because there are no special aristo Jedis, just ordinary people fighting against oppression and for a restoration of their freedoms.
OpenAI is seeking a $29B valuation. I really need to dust off my old AI company.
One congressperson must be absent. There are 216 votes for McCarthy and 216 for "other candidates" including the Democrat. That's not a majority.
2 voted present. That still leaves one who must not be there.
McCarthy thought he had it wrapped up, but they're apparently bad at math (or trust).
Un-freakin' believable.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/01/06/us/house-speaker-vote-mccarthy
...
This is a tense moment for Republicans, who thought they had this locked up. It looked like one lawmaker had to be pulled back from Gaetz earlier as tempers flared.
...
McCarthy was fairly jubilant just hours ago, telling Manu Raju of CNN that he was confident he’d have the votes to win the speakership tonight. When Manu asked him why he felt so confident, McCarthy responded that he “counted.”
...
Please AOC use your squad to vote in McCarthy ! It will boggle everyone! It will drive the right CRAZY howling that McC made a 'deal with the far left!' Every denial you issue will make them more hysterical. Their coalition with explode in conspiracy madness and Kev will be unable to even go potty without a QAnon theory raging!
Looks like they're not going to adjourn. Not sure why Democrats are opposing the motion. I'm concerned that McCarthy will give even more of the store away to the deplorables to change their votes. I had hoped he'd have a chance to realize that "There's no pleasing some people", and cut a deal with the moderate Republicans and the Democrats.
Now, the floor is cheering the fact that they're about to start the vote all over again.
I don't know who to root for.
MSNBC thinks McCarthy has a deal with Gaetz. Whatever it is can't be good.
We have a House Speaker. But at what cost?
Several of the [Republican] holdouts, including those who did end up voting for McCarthy, are not clapping and have stayed seated.
They know this is not a good deal too.
What have you got?
A House Speaker, if you can keep them.
To slightly misquote Sting...
But what might save us, me and you
Is if the Republicans love their children too
More realistically, if their corporate masters put the hammer down on defaulting on the US credit line. And if those corporate masters haven't lost control over their monsters.
Heard on Hal Sparks's radio show:
"Freedom Caucasians"
"Cave-In McCarthy"
"Squeaker of the House"
"Speaker In Name Only"
Part of the deal, I hear, is to cut off aid to Ukraine. This won't affect much in the near term - Biden should be able to keep money and weapons flowing - but if true, it does highlight who actually runs the Republicans these days.
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer:
it does highlight who actually runs the Republicans these days.
On MSNBC last night, they were saying that Trump called the holdouts after the 14th ballot and told them to support McCarthy. I was thinking, "Why would Trump care that much? If anything, he'd be enjoying the drama."
Then it occurred to me. If Trump was encouraging the Republicans to take the Gaetz deal, it was because Putin had ordered it.
Pundits discuss McCarthy's long list of concessions-to-radicals, in order to squeak into Speaker with a minority of members' votes, e.g. Hunter 'investigations' and jibberers on the Rules Committee. Plus at least 5 'contract' promises to slash spending and balance budgets. One problem. Despite blowhard spews, Republicans have never - across 40 years - been as fiscally responsible as Democrats. Ever, even once. They do have one huge cut in mind. No, it's not repealing Obamacare; that goal is never mentioned now that the ACA is hugely popular and effective. No, it's to eviscerate the IRS which got full funding last year, after decades sabotaged by the GOP on behalf of oligarchs, whose Cayman grift accounts will now get scrutiny.
So, if the IRS finds scandalous crimes that include GOP pols, might that shred McCarthy's coalition? Get some nutters jettisoned? Get others to finally find their nerve to make that Goldwater Party of decent conservatism?
Hey, I am a science fiction author. But clearly, I also do fantasy.
https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiWGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9uYXRpb24vMjAyMy8wMS8wNy9kcmFtYXRpYy1tb21lbnRzLW1jY2FydGh5LXNwZWFrZXItdm90ZS_SAQA?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen
Supposedly there is a movement by the "moderate" GOP House members to team up with the Dems to shoot down the rules package that was promised to the Freedom Caucus. We'll see if wiser heads prevail and they put the new Speaker in a bind.
Also, reporting out there that Mark Meadows was the person responsible for the strategy / messaging / coordination of the Freedom Caucus rebels. We are seeing an organized 3rd party within the GOP.
Shenanigans with the House rules may see the fracture of the GOP monolith even more. Stay tuned.
Dr Brin,
Curious to you and others on this blog's take on the behavior of India. Are they just taking advantage of the war to buy Russian oil on the cheap? Are they propping up Russia as a bulwark to check China?
Are Russia-India-China each playing one against the other?
This war seems to have similarities to the US civil war in the sense that it's become a test ground for the weapons of foreign powers. The world is rapidly arming - that scares me.
Your second sentence is probably accurate. Countries don't veer swiftly from established foreign policy. India has long viewed Russia as a hedge against Chinese territorial ambitions - recall that China overran Tibet, becoming India's neighbor, and then fought a sharp little war (1962) in the Himalayas to seize more territory. Soviet equipment helped India in several wars against Pakistan along an even more troublesome border. Cheap oil must be nice, too, considering India's own lack of energy resources (except uranium).
Pappenheimer, who spent part of his childhood in India, and was in country during one of the wars (1971).
P.S. Is the Great Game being replayed? Well, it never really stopped.
Never got to see Everest, though, clouds that day. (pulls out Bucket List again, grumbling)
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer:
Soviet equipment helped India in several wars against Pakistan along an even more troublesome border.
As far back as the 80s, I could never understand why we allied with Muslim/authoritarian Pakistan and disdained secular/democratic India. It bit us in the but on 9/11, and it's doing so again now.
India will do what benefits especially the upper castes of India. I will not let myself get bent outta shape by their purchase of cheap RF oil. So long as it depresses prices all around and undermines Moscow & Riyadh and Tehran.
Hakeem's list of platitudes was deeply disappointing. In similar speeches, Obama spoke ALSO of vital matters like:
Facts
Science
An ability to change one's course based upon those things and a willingness to negotiate.
By not laying claim to those things, HJ showed a deeply worrisome lack of Obama level insight,
Onward
onward
Post a Comment