Who Goes Nazi? – The Anchoress, via Assistant Village Idiot. Suggested further reading: The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements.

Masterminds or Muddlers? - the glittering eye.

The prototype for a mastermind would be Napoleon, someone who with a combination of brilliance, insight, savvy, guile, and the urge to power was able to bring complicated plans with many moving parts to fruition.

Letting Go: What should medicine do when it can’t save your life? — The New Yorker, by Atul Gawande. And… as I see it, a complete misunderstanding of that article by Megan McArdle and most of her commentariat. That misunderstanding is further displayed in this McArdle post:  Does Medicaid Kill? Though not easy to identify, there are multiple points where medicine becomes harmful rather than helpful. Part of this has to do with the way we evaluate drugs — by choosing an endpoint (ie, blood pressure reduction) without evaluating whether that leads to longer life, much less the quality of that life.

That’s enough deep thought for a while. I will now return to my regularly scheduled whining, ranting, silliness, and non-blogging.

Of course there is a law saying foreign nationals do not have all the rights of political free speech granted to natives, both corporeal and corporate. And despite what some (our President, for example) are saying, the recent Supreme Court ruling doesn’t say that restriction is unconstitutional.

But… I have long had misgivings about interference of simple speech, ie speech not directly tied to a cash contribution, in our political shenanigans. For example, I thought the Guardian’s Operation Clark County was astoundingly arrogant, but not illegal.

In this same light, I felt it both legal and “OK” to express my desire that Scott Brown beat Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race. I did not feel that it was right for me to donate money to him. I’m not a Massachusetts resident — I am a foreigner to Massachusetts. (on several levels!)

While I am completely comfortable with the idea that cash — however generated — enables free speech, I’m not comfortable with cash from outside the boundaries of the election. I would be highly irritated if Bossier City residents poured money into the campaigns of Shreveport mayoral candidates, for example.

I’m not entirely comfortable with Lech Walesa openly campaigning within this country in a governor’s race also. He’s definitely a foreign national and he’s raising money for a candidate in a U.S. race? That does not set well with me.

But, more importantly… is it legal?

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections. (Applause.) I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. (Applause.) They should be decided by the American people. And I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.

Full text of 2009 State Of The Union address

Alito’s reaction

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (pdf)

You know my opinion. Read and view the above links and decide for yourself.

Yup. I often feel as if I should blog more about politics but when I get that feeling and look into it a bit, I’m repulsed. Plus, I usually (always) find another blog or article where someone else has written essentially what I am thinking much better than I could write it.

However, one thing I am disgusted with is blind partisanship and I haven’t really seen a lot written about that. The fact that Coakley — arguably the worst senate candidate from any state in decades — got as many votes as she did can only (in my mind) attributed to a willful blindness. See here.

It’s hard to imagine a worse candidate than Martha Coakley for any office. Even her defenders are having a hard time with her record. See this question and answer post at Bitch Ph.D.: Just Doing My Job?  

It’s almost enough to render me speechless, but not quite.

Basically, a reader of that blog wants to feel better about having decided to vote for Coakley, but can’t quite dismiss Coakley’s insistence on keeping an innocent man in jail. Basically, M. LeBlanc answers that all prosecutors do that so don’t worry about it.

So, what’s the moral status of advocating that someone who is likely innocent remain in prison? It’s a tough question.

Is that a tough question for my few dear readers?

Usually when you hear a lot of bad stuff about a political candidate, someone on his/her political team comes out screaming “it’s not true”. But that isn’t the case here. Coakley’s supporters are acknowledging some pretty awful acts and inactions, yet voting for her simply because… because why?

Does partisanship trump morals? Ethics? Everything? If so, we are truly doomed.

Read it all here.

I am SO glad I got all the complaining out of my system earlier this week. But just in case something else comes up, I have a week left to complain.

Am I the only person who now feels compelled to complain about something through Nov. 25th?

Get used to it, OK? Even the President has mostly nothing important to say. What I lack is his ability to say nothing eloquently.

What could possibly be said meaningfully or eloquently about poor Meghan McCain’s twitter castastrophe… and why is everyone so upset that she has boobs? I have boobs. Some people are boobs. Boobs are ubiquitous, right? Then… the feminist side of me jumps up screaming why are boobs associated with foolishness and ignorance, er… I mean dumb and blonde?

Is there an actual association between hair color and boob size? Or is there an association between women of average or better intelligence who happen to be blonde and have big boobs who have “made hay” of a perceived link?

As a big-boobed blonde of above average IQ who has given birth to a redhead, blonde, and brunette of above average IQ (and I won’t comment either on the boob size or gender…) I gotta ask… does penis size correlate with IQ? Is smaller smarter?

If I remember correctly, women with bigger boobs have more trouble breastfeeding than to do women with smaller ones. In some way this makes a lot of sense since lower primates and mammals do not develop big boobs. So is this smaller breast size and greater ability to breastfeed a sign of greater evolution or a sign of the productivity of lesser evolution?

At what point in human evolution did the appearance and associated utility of mammary development become  important? If only nourishment of the next generation were considered, small breasts with large nipples would be the norm.

Where did humans go ‘wrong’ in their preference? And did males have anything to do with it?

And what are we to do with the incredibly stupid JP in Tangipahoa Parish who will not marry “mixed” race couples?  It’s fairly obvious that this man opposes only black/white marriages. How would he decide on an Asian/Caucasian marriage or on an Native American/Caucasian marriage? An Hispanic/Caucasian marriage?

While we are given little information on his opinions of “mixed race” marriages not of the black/white type, I am not reluctant to “guess” at his opinion of other mixed “race” types.

And… once again, I am compelled to remember my sharing of photos of grandchildren with a black woman. Her grandson had blue eyes and blonde hair while my granddaughter had black hair, near black eyes and “much darker than white” skin.

It’s rather ironic that my caucasian genes might lower the IQ of my Asian granddaughter and that the caucasian genes might raise the IQ of the black woman’s grandson… theoretically, at least…

And while we’re thinking about racism and it’s incomprehensible negative effects, do not forget those who think that Barack Obama’s black heritage is of a higher intelligence than those whose black heritage is through slavery.

There is a cognitive dissonance thing going on among those who think Obama’s blackness is more “pure” because he is descended from an “actual” African and those who think his “African” descendance is less pure than an American African descendant.

Frankly, as “post-racialist” I think it matters not at all. He chooses the background that most helps his agenda. Unfortunately, his lack of understanding of history confuses him in identifying his agenda.