COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

Russian military threat may be blown out of proportion.




13 comments:

  1. I'm afraid that's what our equipment will amount to once Obumble gets done.

    ReplyDelete
  2. From my rooftop I just heard reveille being played. Probably at the military academy or cav school.

    Odd, all the early mornings I've been out on the terrace, and this is the first time I've heard it. Maybe because it's perfectly calm out and half the city has bolted for the week.

    Brings back memories, it does.

    Have I been missing retreat and taps as well? I'll have to keep an ear peeled.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Look at it this way, bob: Were that to actually happen, mat would have one less thing to rant about.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't you just love Latin America at Christmas and Easter?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Like an extended Sunday morning, it is.

    And I told the housekeeper to go home til next Tuesday, so it's quieter still.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I hear the Mexicans and others take food to their dead. My aunt used to put flowers on Memorial Day on the family graves. These days we're all into cremating ourselves. I took what was left of her out to the old farm where she grew up and scattered her there. I stumbled a little and some went on my boot. Ah well...

    ReplyDelete
  8. The NYTimes offers these easy outs, with regards the Stevens trial.

    The most important question that remains largely unanswered, said officials and veteran lawyers, is whether the corner cutting, especially the serial concealment of information damaging to the government, was a result of flawed judgments and heavy workloads or an intentional step by prosecutors to increase their chances of a high-profile conviction.

    While not even considering their willful misconduct as a way to spare the Senator any jail time or even the blemish of a conviction, on his permanent record, while remonving him from office, for taking those kick backs.

    Justice being served with his defeat in the election.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I doubt they had it figured that way. That violates Ockham's Razor. It's doubtful they'd put themselves in danger of sanctions planning it would come out saving Stevens jail time. I'd opt for the inept, or the really malevolent. But, only they know, and they're not saying, yet anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Could be, bob, but I think that the Federals misconduct investigations and prosecutions to allow the "favored" defendent an out.

    The Ayers case being another prime example.

    Explained away with the "over zealous" scenario, instead of the more corrupt reality.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't know. In a high profile case like the Stevens case, you'd think they would have looked it over pretty good, which would seem to exclude the inept. On the other hand, there is a lot of inept. Heck if I know. I hope the judge gets to the bottom of it. We need some reaffirmation of some trust in the system, sorely lacking these days, which the judge might provide.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We need some reaffirmation of some trust in the system, sorely lacking these days, which the judge might provide.
    ==

    Or perhaps Trish can provide it. Yeah, that's it, Trish will tell us stories.

    ReplyDelete