The Ambrosini Critique

I’d laugh if I wasn’t crying… Hitchens at it again, “I can’t remember what the excuse of the Jew-killers was on that previous occasion, but it most certainly wasn’t their hatred for regime change. Maybe they didn’t come up with an excuse, imagining that the action spoke for itself. Anyway, why bother with a justification when there are so many peace-loving and progressive types willing to volunteer to make the excuses for you?”

Delong has a non-answer to Andrew Sullivan…  The problem is a little thing called term limits.  He can’t run and I can’t vote for Clinton.  Give me someone I can vote for in 2004!

Andrew Sullivan despairs when he contemplates the future of America:

www.AndrewSullivan.com – Daily Dish: I know I’m a broken record on this but we truly need some kind of third force again in American politics – fiscally conservative, socially inclusive, and vigilant against terror…

It was called the Clinton Administration, Mr. Sullivan.

 

Hey, I’m 188 centimeters tall. And I’m 80 Kilograms. (Wait, are you x kilograms or do you have x kilograms…)

When an Economist says something like “stock markets do better under Democratic presidents” can you assume that that difference between the performance of the stock market when there’s a Democratic versus a Republican president is statistically significant. I mean, can you assume that that conclusion (given without context or substantiation) was made after much analysis. Should you be able to assume that?

This is the Fallacy of Authority… You assume an authority in a particular area has done his/her homework; you assume that there is some substance behind their conclusions. The fallacy says that you can’t make these assumptions and therefore you shouldn’t trust authority.

At the same time, this seems inefficient. I should be able to trust statements made by authorities, such as “stock markets do better under Democratic presidents”, are made objectively and with rigorous analysis. If I had this trust, I could use that conclusion as a given in future arguments I might make.

Partisanship (Krugman and Delong are two examples) has ruined my trust in Economists as authorities and as a whole any of their conclusions as givens. It’s too bad.

South Knox Bubba asks: “How would allowing two people who love each other to have the same rights and obligations as any other two people who love each other somehow diminish the rights and responsibilities of any two people who love each other?”

I agree and back when the Supreme Court decision came out in July I wrote: “If marriage is so damned important, why would making more people eligible to participate in the institution be a bad thing?”

I have to copy/paste this whole paragraph from this story… I literally lol’d:

“Given that they’ve now revised their [estimates of Iraqi civilian death] figures downwards by 98 per cent, it would be nice to think the protesters might reduce their budget for gallons of Dulux Mesopotamian Burgundy Gloss by a commensurate amount. The rest of us should pelt Medact with rotten tomatoes symbolising all the blood that wasn’t spilt. Alternatively, they could symbolise Harold Pinter’s graphically leaking rectum. In this paper before the war, Mr Pinter assured us that millions of Iraqi children’s rectums were chronically leaking blood – something to do with depleted uranium from the Yanks. In every medical facility I visited in western and northern Iraq, I inquired about this phenomenon and found no one who knew of a single sufferer.”

MORE:

“The fanatical Muslims despise America because it’s all lapdancing and gay porn; the secular Europeans despise America because it’s all born-again Christians hung up on abortion; the anti-Semites despise America because it’s controlled by Jews. Too Jewish, too Christian, too Godless, America is also too isolationist, except when it’s too imperialist.”

What if the counter-culture is really a post-modern discovery of culture itself?

It’s done!

I scored 780 on the math section and… well, actually I was so excited I forgot my verbal score. Dumb ass. I think it was in the low 600’s, 620, 640 or something. Anyway, I’ll know for sure in a couple weeks when they send the score report.

What a long, hard slog that was. The sneaky bastards snuck in an extra verbal section. I think the extra section doesn’t count in your score. ETS uses it to test new questions. The bad news is you don’t know which of the two sections was the ‘real’ one. I repeat, bastards!

Next step, complete my math and econ courses. From the Berkeley Grad program guide:

“Applicants must have knowledge of multivariate calculus, basic matrix algebra, and differential equations; completion of a two-year math sequence, which emphasizes proofs and derivations, should provide adequate preparation. All applicants are expected to have completed intermediate math-based economic theory courses. Further education in economics and economic theory is helpful, but not required. Finally, some knowledge of statistics and elementary probability is highly desirable.”

This quarter, I’m busy getting an A in Math 1b at DeAnza College. (Cocky, you think?) I plan to finish the 1 series of Calculus (which includes Multivariable Calculus) this academic year. They offer linear algebra and differential Calculus as separate classes but I’m not sure if the community college will have an emphasis on “proofs and derivation”. I’ll need to decide if I should take that course at a state college or a UC. Additionally, I’m not sure about what Economics courses I need.

Of course, now that I’m not studying for the GRE, I’ll begin reading more Economics books and such (in addition to the weekly Economist ritual). I’ve Amazoned Krugman’s book. It sits upon my pile. In case that pile is looking dangerously small (not likely), Mike Moffatt has a list of books that are useful for folks like me (i.e. the sort that wanna go to grad school for econ). And there’s more.

This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named, . . .
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names. . . .
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhood cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

- Henry V – Shakespeare

The Observer on fallen soldiers: “I am staggered that in 2003 we continue to require their sacrifice. We, who no longer believe that the dead live on, and that those who die have, therefore, lost everything.”