Obama says nice things about LBJ

He is on Fox News, making a speech about how great the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was. And how great LBJ was for pushing it thru the Congress, over the dead bodies of the Southern Democrats.  And I agree, it was a good thing.
   On the other hand I remember  LBJ was the man who took the country to war and worse, to defeat, in Viet Nam.  That was a bad thing. 

Greeks selling new bonds

This was on NHPR this morning.  For the first time in five years, the Greek government is offering bonds.  And people are buying them.  I'd like to interview some of those buyers, just to see if they are as stupid as they look.  Greece is still an economic disaster, 25% unemployment, a vast civil service drawing their pay to impede economic growth, with a neo Nazi party (Golden Dawn) gathering strength, and a mountain of debt equivalent to many years of GNP.  And these "investors" think they will get paid back?  And are willing to accept this kind of risk for a mere 5% interest?  When they can buy the soundest investment on the planet (US T bills) for 3%?  They are willing to take all the risks in Greek bonds for a measely 5%?
  Lots a Luck. 

Boston Marathon goes off this month

Which sparked a few rehashes of the Tsaernov (the bomber) case.  In actual fact, the Russians tipped us off the the Tsaernov's were mixed up with Chechen terrorists, in fact had visited Chechnia and attended a terrorist training camp.  US authorities botched the tip.  Tsaernov was never investigated.  The feds didn't bother to talk to the Cambridge police (Tsaernov lived in Cambridge).  Fox News has been complaining that the Boston police were never notified.  Forget that.  Boston is another town.  I doubt a Boston cop would even know where Webster Avenue is, let alone know anyone to talk too in the neighborhood.  Whereas the Cambridge cops, local boys all, probably have a couple of guys on the force who went to high school with the Tsaernov brothers, or who lived on their street. 
  Anyhow, we blew a solid tip from the Russians. 

Words of the Weasel Part 39

We have been hearing "investment" as a replacement for "spending" from Democrats.  This morning I heard a new one from Steney Hoyer, House Minority leader.  He talked about "disinvestment" where real people would have said "spending cut".   Does "disinvestment" sound better than "spending cut"?   Depends I suppose, on whether you believe in more spending  or less spending. 

What's the matter with Common Core?

Beats me.  I took the trouble to find Common Core in the Internet.  It's wordy.  Written by Ed majors ignorant of  Strunk and White.  Since it was so wordy and so tedious, I just read the mathematics section.  I didn't see anything terribly wrong there.  It covered most of what I had in high school.  It was a little watered down from what I remembered, but then I was lucky to attend a truly top flight high school and I was happy with math. It's probably not the end of the world to set the bar a tad lower for a national standard.
   I've seen a lot of talk about who created Common Core.  Some say it's a state effort, some say it's a federal government effort.  This "origins" argument seems petty to me.  Doesn't matter where it comes from, is it any good?  Does anyone know?   Has anyone contrasted Common Core with what New Hampshire does now? 
  I've heard a fair amount of opposition to Common Core coming from teachers.  I tend to discount this, as many teachers dislike anyone setting any sort of standards to which they might be held.
   I've also heard talk that Common Core is a conspiracy among the publishing industry to sell books and test materials.  The sales pitch would be, "You need to supply your students with this up-to-date Common Core text book."  "You need to buy these Common Core compliant tests."  I suppose.  I still remember beginning school years with teachers handing out well worn textbooks from previous years.  I always felt lucky to get a copy that still had both covers attached to it. 
   Common Core seems to heating up.  Someone on Fox News commented the Jeb Bush might be hurt politically by his support for Common Core. 

Why the Roman Empire Fell.

 This chart by Dr. A.J. Parker shows the number of Mediterranean shipwrecks by date of sinking.  The number of wrecks is proportional to the number of sailings.  And the number of ship sailings is a measure of economic activity, especially so in an age when everything moved by water. 
  Most interesting is the dating.  Notice the steady, almost exponential grow that starts 500-600 BC and keeps growing strongly until the first century BC.  About then, the Roman Republic came unglued and the Roman emperors, Julius, Augustus and company take over.  Notice also the decline in shipping that sets in at about the same time.  By the time we get to Constantine, commerce is down by two thirds from its peak.  In short, Constantine, who starts the retrenchment of the Empire, had only a third of the wealth to pay his armies and support his government that Augustus had at his disposal. 
   With this chart one can make a good argument that the freer and more democratic institutions of the Republic encouraged commerce and industry, whereas the policies of the emperors was hostile. It is generally agreed that the Empire fell when it was no longer able to pay the professional Roman Army that had kept the barbarians out for hundreds of years.  
  

Fifty nervous heads, fifty loaded machine guns

Way back during the Viet Nam war,  I was assigned to a jet fighter wing in Thailand.  We were bombing North Viet Nam twice a day.  We had a poorly defended air base, lacking even a perimeter fence and about 5000 young airmen on base.  Some young troop wrote a letter to his Congressman saying "Here I am in a combat zone, and the Air Force won't let me have a gun."   In those days, Congressman spoke loudly AND carried a big stick, and so orders came down from AF HQ requiring every unit on the base to draw enough M16's out of base supply to arm every man in the unit.  More orders from the base commander, requiring each unit to build an arms room and keep the M16's locked up therein.  I remember taking the squadron pickup truck up to Base Supply and loading 400 brand new M16's, still in cartons, and 1200 new magazines, all full of ammo, and driving back to squadron headquarters,  feeling VERY well armed.  Meanwhile the men had built gun racks out of Dexion, and a gun room out of 3/4 inch plywood, and all the guns were safely locked inside. 
   And they stayed locked up for the rest of my tour at Korat Royal Thai Air Base.  And a good thing too.  I can still visualize the scene if we had been attacked and issued all those guns.  It would happen after dark, of course.  The troops would take shelter in the numerous sand bag bunkers we had in case of attack.  In each bunker you have fifty nervous troops, fifty nervous heads sticking up and looking all around, and fifty loaded machine guns.  These were the old style fully automatic M16s, pull the trigger and BRAP, 20 rounds are gone.  Sooner or later, someone's gun would go off, he forgets to put the safety on, he drops it, he's fiddling with it.  BRAP.  Over in the next bunker,  they hear the firing.  Someone shouts "They're over there, let 'em have it."  BRAP.  Someone else shouts, "They're shooting at us from over there."  BRAP.  I figure firing would continue until the last round was expended.  Should I have survived that night, the next morning would have been bad.  Bullet holes everywhere.  All the aircraft shot up.  All the hootchs full of holes.
  Fortunately it never happened, but it could have.
  So, when I hear that the military forbids the troops from carrying guns on base, I can understand where they are coming from.