Author: tristero

And Speaking of Probability 

by tristero

Digby’s recent post re: the GOP and the Monty Hall problem inspired me to unearth this wonderful article from the NY Times in 1990. The punchline is eerily relevant:

It takes just seven ordinary, imperfect shuffles to mix a deck of cards thoroughly, researchers have found. Fewer are not enough and more do not significantly improve the mixing. 

The mathematical proof, discovered after studies of results from elaborate computer calculations and careful observation of card games, confirms the intuition of many gamblers, bridge enthusiasts and casual players that most shuffling is inadequate. 

The finding has implications for everyone who plays cards and everyone, from casino operators to magicians, who has a stake in knowing whether a shuffle is random…

In Las Vegas, cards are shuffled from four to seven times… 

At Trump Plaza in Atlantic City, blackjack dealers shuffle eight decks twice at the beginning of each game, said Howard Dreitzer, who is senior vice president of casino operations. ”We’ve tested these shuffles and feel that they are random,” he said, adding that ”no one has ever complained.’’

That’s right. Screw the science because in Trumpland, it just feels right to shuffle twice and the rubes will never complain.

I have to admit I laughed out loud when I read that, but it was a very grim laugh.

Happy Pi Day, everyone!

If That Was a US Flight Instead of an Ethiopian Flight, Would the FAA Be Hesitating? 

by tristero

I assume you know the outlines of the tragic story re: the Boeing 737 MAX 8s. But Rachel Maddow pointed to this horrific detail tonight:

Boeing wouldn’t comment Tuesday on the delayed FAA discussions, but the company did confirm the upcoming changes to its MAX aircraft. They are expected to come sometime in April. 

According to the WSJ, US officials have also blamed part of the delay on this year’s government shutdown — saying it halted work for at least five weeks.

And once again, just as it does whenever I hear about those thousands of children in cages, nausea and disgust with the Trump administration reaches projectile levels.

Nancy, impeachment may not be on your table, but every day, Trump is giving the rest of us more and more reasons to demand impeachment immediately.

Venezuela 

by tristero

The usual suspects deny it, sometimes in oh-so-thoughtful pieces, but the power outage in Venezuela has “USA” and “Trump” stamped all over it.  Stuxnet, anyone?

As the article itself notes, “Cyberattacks against utilities have the ability to disrupt all facets of modern life and generate mediagenic imagery without undue risk to the initiating country, making them an almost perfect weapon.”

Yet the article concludes, without any evidence, that the US likely wasn’t involved.  And the US denies it, of course.

I believe the Trump administration is behind it but even if I’m wrong, it’s so plausible that a vast number of Venezuelans will believe the US did it. They will blame the US for the deaths and suffering it causes.

More enemies. Just what this country least needs.

What Are We Gonna Clutch When They Take Away Our Pearls? 

by tristero

Back in the late  70’s, the NY Times ran a front-page article with the lede:

The sharp right turn in the Republican Party and the rise of hard-right presidential candidates are unnerving moderate Republicans who increasingly fear that the party could fritter away its chances of beating President Carter in 1980 by careening over a conservative cliff. 

Ok, I lied. The NY Times never wrote a lede warning Republicans they were going over a cliff by becoming too conservatives. It’s inconceivable that they ever did, or will. Despite the fact that Americans are far more liberal than the mainstream press seems to think we are.

But here is what the Times actually published on the front page today:

The sharp left turn in the Democratic Party and the rise of progressive presidential candidates are unnerving moderate Democrats who increasingly fear that the party could fritter away its chances of beating President Trump in 2020 by careening over a liberal cliff.

Recently, I read a wonderful book, Leadership in Turbulent Times by Doris Kearns Goodwin (actually I listened to it, great readers including Goodwin herself). The number of progressive policies FDR passed in the first 100 days of his administration was astounding. The positive impact on American society of all this unleashed progressivism — cultural impact, economic impact, moral impact, and so on — was simply breathtaking.

So I have a question for the “moderates” setting editorial policy at the Times: does the American economy have to crash again, do we have to see breadlines and economic suicides again, before this country and its presses will come to its senses and stop belittling liberalism and progressivism?

I hope not.

Oh, Grey Lady 

by tristero

As an ancient bard once said,  Don’t criticize what you don’t understand:

And on a rainy Saturday in Spotsylvania County, Va., one woman stood up in a town hall to remind Representative Abigail Spanberger that while she was the first Democrat to hold that seat in nearly 50 years, the majority of the rural enclave had voted Republican. 

“Since the Democrats are now the party of death and taxes,” the woman said, as Democratic supporters scoffed and grumbled, “just how do you propose to effectively represent the taxpayers of Spotsylvania?”

This was clearly a Republican plant, as are the other examples. It wouldn’t be the first time the Times has been punked.

Moving the Goal Posts 

by tristero

Some telling micro-rhetoric, courtesy the Times, which really should know better, y’know?

Mr. Cruz, now a Texas senator and a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination, rarely invokes the 2000 race and recount. He has largely disavowed the comparatively moderate Bush wing of the Republican Party in pursuit of conservative ideological purity.

Comparatively moderate? George W. Bush? The president that flew back to Washington to intervene on the side of rightwing religious lunatics during the Schiavo madness? That countenanced torture and went to war at the behest of far-right neocon ideologues?

Holy Overton Window, Batman! In a world where a man as extreme in his opinions as George W. Bush is described as comparatively moderate, anyone with a sensible foreign policy, a reasonable level of religious observance, or even simple commonsense can only be thought a commie radical.

by tristero

For years and years, I’ve been saying that Scalia’s jurisprudence is incoherent, inconsistent, and bizarre, with a strong bias towards justifying the oppressive potential of the majority and and an equally strong contempt for the rights of minorities. But what do I know?

Here are two folks that do. Their conclusion: Scalia’s jurisprudence is incoherent, inconsistent, and bizarre, with a strong bias towards justifying the oppressive potential of the majority and and an equally strong contempt for the rights of minorities.

A taste of the op-ed. The entire thing is worth reading:

In a recent speech to law students at Georgetown, he argued that there is no principled basis for distinguishing child molesters from homosexuals, since both are minorities and, further, that the protection of minorities should be the responsibility of legislatures, not courts. After all, he remarked sarcastically, child abusers are also a “deserving minority,” and added, “nobody loves them.” 

Not content with throwing minorities under the bus, Justice Scalia has declared that Obergefell marks the end of democracy in the United States, stating in his dissent that “a system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.” 

The logic of his position is that the Supreme Court should get out of the business of enforcing the Constitution altogether, for enforcing it overrides legislation, which is the product of elected officials, and hence of democracy. The model he appears to be embracing is that of the traditional British Constitution; until recently, Parliament was deemed to be Britain’s “supreme court.” It could overrule judicial decisions, but courts could not invalidate parliamentary legislation. 

We doubt that Justice Scalia would go that far, for he has repeatedly voted to strike down statutes that he believes violate the First Amendment and various federalism provisions of the Constitution, as well as affirmative action measures that he thinks are in conflict with the 14th Amendment. 

But who knows? Maybe he’ll now cease voting to strike down statutes under any provision of the Constitution, as otherwise he might be thought of as one of those “unelected lawyers” who so threaten our democracy. Not only an unelected lawyer, but — a patrician. For he said in his Obergefell dissent that “to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

by tristero

WaPo:

Despite heavy French bombardment of the Islamic State’s self-proclaimed capital of Raqqa this week, damage to the extremist group appears to be minimal, according to analysts and Syrian activists. 

The airstrikes — retaliation for Friday’s attacks claimed by the Islamic State in Paris — hit such targets as a command post and militant-training center in and around the Syrian city, French officials said. 

But after over a year of U.S. coalition airstrikes, the Islamic State has learned to secure its weapons, communications systems and fighters in fortified bunkers or densely populated residential areas where bombing would inflict intolerably high civilian casualties, analysts and activists said.

And every single civilian casualty radicalizes an entire family and wide network of friends.

But for some people boy, oh boy, does it feel good. Never mind that that good feeling is utterly delusional if not downright self-destructive.

Stock Up Now, Boys ‘n Girls! 

by tristero

Now, this is going to be loads of fun to watch:

Seething with anger and alarmed over Mr. Rubio’s rise, aides to Mr. Bush, the former Florida governor, and his allies are privately threatening a wave of scathing attacks on his former protégé in the coming weeks, in a sign of just how anxious they have become about the state of Mr. Bush’s candidacy. 

Their looming problem: In trying to undercut Mr. Rubio as unaccomplished and unprepared, Mr. Bush is a flawed messenger. Over the years he has repeatedly, and sometimes lavishly, praised the younger lawmaker, often on camera.

 Time to kick back, get a big bucket, and buy in bulk!

From the Times Letter Section 

by tristero

Third letter:

As a Bill Buckley conservative, I’m embarrassed by the naked partisanship of these hearings. 

As if being a “Bill Buckley conservative” is some kind of great example of non-extremist thinking and rationality.