I think you’ve tapped into something — my deep jealousy of the man. When I was on law review I actually had to write and publish something, but he, well....Originally Posted by concerned
I think you’ve tapped into something — my deep jealousy of the man. When I was on law review I actually had to write and publish something, but he, well....
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Bingo. That is just what Nixon would say--Kennedy didn't really write Why England Slept or Profiles in Courage. The similarities are profound.
Well, you’re reaching there because at least Kennedy had something in print with his name on it. Anyway, you’re leaving out Obama’s privileged upbringing (once his grandparents took over), which should really tick off my less-privileged self, but it doesn’t. I’ll have to work on that one. Didn’t his grandfather have communist leanings? Now that would be the icing on the cake. If I am channeling Tricky Dick I could do something with it.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Not much of a reach apparently. Nixon thought Kennedy was an intellectual fraud who got by on his wealth. You think Obama is an intellectual fraud who got by on his minority status (I suspect). That you would even remember that he did not write a law review note might be telling (I assume you are right but i have never heard this.) This significance is what? That he pulled a fast one? That he didn't deserve to be eic/president of the law review? or a professor at Chicago law school?
P.s. I wrote several drafts of a note that never got published because it was superseded by a new circuit opinion shortly before it would have gone to press. There are lots of reasons notes don't get published.
I think he's clearly a smart, sophisticated thinker. I suspect he may have been lazy in college and law school, just like John Kerry, whose GPA at Yale was lower that GW Bush's, but Kerry could come across as articulate so people thought he was really smart. Maybe he was, but was not an accomplished student. Pres. Obama has never released his grades. He was president of the Harvard Law Review but that is an elected position, and I understand it includes no editorial duties.. How does one get to such a position without publishing something during two years on the staff? So I'm just skeptical. I'm also pretty jaded about presidential intelligence claims anyway. Eisenhower, Ford, Reagan, GHW Bush, GW Bush were all called dummies by your compatriots on the left side of the aisle and in the news media. So I am tweaking you. But I will bet that no matter which candidate the Dems nominate, that person will be heralded for his/her high intelligence.
Last edited by LA Ute; 04-29-2019 at 12:10 PM.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Well if a lazy guy can graduate magma cum laude I’d hate to see what he did when he was motivated.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I just think it's lazy to be on law review and never publish anything. That's what law review students do. But I could be wrong. Maybe at Harvard Law the law review staff isn't expected to publish. Maybe Pres. Obama actually did publish something but it was unsigned.
He was a lazy student as an undergrad. Doesn't mean he's not smart. This fact about him is not widely known, just like Kerry's Yale GPA. I think it would be very well known if a Republican had such an academic record.
But I'm mainly trying to jerk concerned's chain, with only middling success.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
then why don't we know about Trump's academic record? I will give you this--there is no question that the dem nominee in 2020 will be seen as smart, at least compared to the Republican nominee. I think you are 1000% right on that one.
You are making a lot of guesses about Obama's academic record based on your assumptions.
I think Trump is cunning but I don't think he's very bright so I won't argue about that.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
This is a snip of the controversial cartoon — not a perfect shot but you get the idea:
Richard Fernandez comments:
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Here's a photo of LA Ute's RV.
redneckrv.jpg
You’re not showing the license plate: COVFEFE
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Speaking of license plates, McNaughton has a new thing out. I’m not sure which one of these guys are more looney.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not seeing a Harley logo on the bike, and the cracks in the pavement must be part of the infrastructure package Nancy and Chuck said Trump agreed to.Speaking of license plates, McNaughton has a new thing out. I’m not sure which one of these guys are more looney.
McNaughton... I wonder if some of his stuff will end up in the Museum of Bad Art (which is an offbeat diversion, if you've never seen it): http://museumofbadart.org/
Last edited by Ma'ake; 05-01-2019 at 07:30 AM.
A new McNaughton piece of.... well... work.
It's not a Harley. It's left over from the short lived Trump Trikes venture in the 80s. I've never been so happy about seeing someone on a motorcycle not wearing a helmet.
Joel Kotkin, my favorite Democrat:
https://quillette.com/2019/04/30/our...ites/#menuopenThe French nobility, observed Tocqueville in The Ancien Regime and The Revolution, supported many of the writers whose essays and observations ended up threatening “their own rights and even their existence.” Today we see much the same farce repeated, as the world’s richest people line up behind causes that, in the end, could relieve them of their fortunes, if not their heads. In this sense, they could end up serving, in Lenin’s words, as “useful idiots” in their own destruction.
Although they themselves have benefited enormously from the rise of free markets, liberal protection of property rights, and the meritocratic ideal, many among our most well-heeled men and women, even in the United States, have developed a tendency to embrace policies and cultural norms that undermine their own status. This is made worse by their own imperious behavior, graphically revealed in the mortifying college admissions scandal in the United States, where the Hollywood and business elites cheated, bribed, and falsified records to get their own kids into elite colleges.
At the same time, these same people continue to boost their own share of the world’s wealth, as a recent OECD report reveals, largely at the expense of the middle and working class. The embrace of inexorable “globalization”—essentially shifting productive work to developing countries—may appeal to the progressive rich even as it, in the words of geographer Christophe Guilluy, “revived the citadels of Medieval France.”
Sometimes the elite policy agenda is justified as part of a “green” agenda that impoverishes the lower and middle classes by expelling basic industries, thereby boosting housing and energy prices. This in turn has set the stage for the kind of peasant rebellions—from Brexit and Trump to the rise of illiberal regimes in eastern Europe as well as the re-emergence of socialism—that threaten their hegemony.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
There are interesting ideas in this piece by a professor of Econ and English at Chicago. She seems to lean libertarian, and some of her statements are uncomfortable for both progressives and conservatives in America.
Sweden Is Capitalist
https://www.nationalreview.com/magaz...is-capitalist/
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I sense LA is going JD Williams on us... and I love it! The reading assignments are great food for thought.
Joel Kotkin - nobody can accuse this guy of beating around the bush. Or, "I can spot alarmism when I see it, because that's my gig!"
My take: much of what Kotkin is alarmed about, "Elites" sowing the seeds of their own demise, is really more about a lot of the affluent recognizing that things will change - things must change - as we've been in a synthetic reality (pun intended) where cheap, high energy & resource consumption isn't sustainable over the long haul, after we're all gone. The secondary theme is that once you get to a certain point, once you've achieved 'escape velocity', it's impossible to *not* make enormous sums of money.
Kotkin's alarm reminds one of the chasm in thought on the topic of taxes between the more seasoned, sage wealth of Buffett, Gates, et al, vs the dogmatic "taxes are theft!" libertarianism of the nouveaux riche, who are trying to achieve their first $Billion and really don't see/care much about broader social & environmental landscape.
Gates & Buffett are well beyond recognizing they can't take their Billions with them past the grave, so they wonder what their legacies will really amount to.
Maybe I’m going J.D. Williams, R.J. Snow, and Bruce Mayfield on you all. They were all my biggest influences when I was an undergraduate.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
I’m no expert on the Arab/Iranian/Muslim-Israeli conflict but I am more sympathetic to Israel. Unlike many of my Jewish friends, I do not think Israel has blameless in the matter. Nor do I agree with many of my (mostly) liberal friends that Palestinians are innocent victims of an unjust occupying force. I’m attracted to the statement by a British statesman (whose name I forget), who describes the issue as “two forms of justice in conflict.”
In that light, I am alarmed at the current trend, which seems to be mostly on the left, to excuse or even promote positions that can only be described as anti-Semitic. Here’s the news that prompted this post:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...haven-for-jews
She’s entitled to her opinion and she’s been elected to Congress, so she’s answerable to her constituents. What truly puzzles me is that no one in her party denounces her statements, except in a half-hearted way. The Dems seem to lack a John McCain who is willing to rock his own party’s boat.
Last edited by LA Ute; 05-12-2019 at 04:16 PM.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Her statement is certainly historically inaccurate. Is the desire of Palestinians for a one-state solution with the Palestinians governing the area different than the desire of many Israelis to maintain the current one-state solution with the Israelis governing the the area. If it is the same, why is it okay for Americans to label the former anti-Semitic, but embrace the latter as what should be supported?
I don't think your scenario is as symmetric as you think it is. The former involves the dissolution of an existing nation, and the latter does not. The former is also often associated with genocidal plans.
The statement that started this little discussion was some stupid idea by Tlaib that Arabs helped Jews establish their homeland. At least after 1947, that was definitely not true. Prior to 1947, the Jews in Palestine and in other areas throughout the Middle East enjoyed mostly peaceful living conditions in Arab Countries.
This changed dramatically when the UN partitioned Palestine into two States - a Jewish State and an Arab State. Very few Jews lived in the areas which became the Palestinian State, but Arabs were a majority in the Jewish State. A consequence of that partitioning was the 1948 war. The result of the war was that many Arabs were removed from their homes and places of business and forced to leave the Jewish State. In 1967, the Egyptian President close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli flagged vessels and entered into a mutual defense pact with Jordan. Days later, Israel began launching missiles at Jordan. This war resulted in the occupation of much of the Palestinian State. So, while you might think that only one involves the dissolution of an existing nation, I totally disagree.
I am certainly opposed to genocide of any group of people or to discrimination against any group of people. I do, however, believe that the anti-Semitism card is played far too often and with respect to things that relate to political practices. For example, I am opposed to Israel's establishment of settlements in the occupied territories in violation of UN agreements. Does that position make me anti-Semitic? Can someone voice that opinion and not be called out as being an anti-Semite in some circles? AOC was accused of being anti-Semitic by suggesting that some Congressional leaders pro-Israel votes are bought by contributions of pro-Israel groups. She is probably correct, just as I believe votes on health care, guns, the environment, etc are bought by groups that support those causes.
"My Promised Land" by Ari Shavat is a very interesting book on the history of Palestine from the mid-1800's through more recent times. I think it takes a fairly balanced approach to various events that have occurred over time and how those events have taken us to where we are today.
Yeah, I know the history. I'm just saying that the current situation is not symmetric.
Spencer Cox announced his candidacy for Governor of Utah yesterday. He is someone I could vote for, and seems to do a lot to reach across the aisle. Of particular appeal to me is that he seems to be the rare politician to put principles over party.
It'll be sad when the lobbyists get hold of him and he turns to the dark side.
I agree. He used to come on X96 back in the day and was pretty grounded. Most politicians think their farts don’t smell and would not answer questions from those radio idiots.
I still don't follow. It is anti-Semitic to advocate a one-state solution in the area of Palestine under Arab rule. It is okay to advocate a one-state solution in the area of Palestine, including over the occupied territories, under Israeli rule. Is it only not symmetrical because Israel currently occupies lands that 50 years ago were the lands under Arab rule? Would a shorter time period of occupation make it symmetrical?
Yes. Israel won the war that was fought for that land, so they currently own it. That's the lack of symmetry. To have a single state under Arab rule would require the dissolution of an existing nation. To have a single state under Israeli rule would just be a continuation of the status quo. I don't know what should be done; it's certainly very difficult. I'm just pointing out that your hypothetical is not symmetric.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
