Trump's wrath with Khan (sorry...)

No doubt someone else has already made that pun somewhere, but never mind.

Everyone except the stupidest, and those who comment at Catallaxy (what a Venn diagram that would make) can see that Trump badly hurt himself with his inane comment on the Muslim parent's appearance at the DNC.   I thought this Vox commentary really got to the heart of it:

The second thing, as Salam says at the end of his argument, is that Trump is easily baited. He couldn’t swallow his hurt and anger over the Khan’s speech, he had to lash out, to fight back, to smear them in response. This doesn’t make sense if you understand the goal of an election as getting elected, but it does make sense if you understand the goal of an election as playing out an endless series of dominance games.

This is a point TPM’s Josh Marshall has repeatedly made about Trump. A need for dominance, Marshall writes, "is the key to understanding virtually everything Trump does. Whatever is actually happening he tries to refashion it into a dominance ritual or at least will not engage before performing one. You saw that in those numerous examples where he said he would participate in a debate but only after the other party wrote a major check to charity. It's primal."

The Khans’ speech hurt Trump. He watched it. He read the coverage of it. He felt slighted, inferior, humiliated. And so he needed to rebalance the scales. He needed to regain his dominance. He seems confused that anyone faults him for this — isn’t it obvious that they attacked him, and so he should get to attack them back?

This is the logic of a schoolyard bully, which Trump is. But it’s a dangerous mindset for a president.

Putting Trump in the Oval Office would open a huge vulnerability in our national security. It’s much easier to bait Trump than it is to attack the United States. Our enemies’ aim is often to provoke us into overreacting and overcommitting abroad because they can’t hope to seriously hurt us here. With Trump in control of the armed forces, the path to manipulating us into that kind of overreaction would be clear.

By the way, monty, if you're reading.  Could you pass on a message over at an open thread that this piece made me realise why CL has such sympathy towards Trump - he's psychologically the same in this key respect.

Update:  sorry monty, had you done the "wrath of Khan" reference already?  

Meanwhile, in Siberia...

There's been an anthrax outbreak, with a possible global warming connection:

Russian army biological protection troops called in amid warnings 'utmost care' needed to stop deadly infection spreading.

The concern among experts is that global warming thawed a diseased animal carcass at least 75 years old, buried in the melting permafrost, so unleashing the disease.

A total of 40 people, the majority of them children, from nomadic herder families in northern Siberia are under observation in hospital amid fears they may have contracted the anthrax. Doctors stress that so far there are NO confirmed cases.

Up to 1,200 reindeer were killed either by anthrax or a heatwave in the Arctic district where the infection spread.

Specialists from the Chemical, Radioactive and Biological Protection Corps were rushed to regional capital Salekhard on a military Il-76 aircraft.

They were deployed by Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu to carry laboratory tests on the ground, detect and eliminate the focal point of the infection, and to dispose safely of dead animals.

The move confirmed the seriousness with which the authorities view the anthrax outbreak, the first in this region since 1941. 

Nearly spring

I usually post some photos from the garden at this time of year; and the type of flower hasn't changed much recently.  But some - like this daisy - even if you've seen similar before, I just like the strong contrast with the black behind it:

And this bee may not be perfectly lined up against a contrasting background, but you try taking photos of bees and see how often they stay still for a shot:

And there's always a scruffy dog to try to get to stay still, too:

And finally for now: nothing too spectacular, but nice enough:

He really likes his soy sauce

Make sure you get to the last paragraph: 

'Kioke': The secret ingredient of soy sauce | The Japan Times: Shodoshima, the largest island in the Seto Inland Sea, is not only covered in thousands of olive trees, it also holds half of Japan’s remaining wooden soy sauce barrels. Though the island has produced olive oil for about 115 years, soy sauce has been made here for centuries — and has weathered many changes.

After World War II, soy sauce makers across Japan were encouraged to modernize their 1,000-year-old tradition by fermenting in stainless steel tanks rather than kioke (wooden barrels). But Shodoshima’s residents — like many islanders — don’t always do what they’re told by mainlanders. They decided not to use stainless steel, and today there are still 20 soy sauce makers on Shodoshima who ferment the old-fashioned way. Yamaroku Shoyu is one of them.

“In the hot and muggy summer, the shōyu moromi (soy sauce mash) becomes active, making gurgling sounds as the fermentation accelerates,” says Yasuo Yamamoto, the fifth generation head of Yamaroku. “When I walk the planks between the wooden soy sauce barrels, the moromi in each barrel becomes noticeably more active, as if it is talking to me, telling me it is happy to be in my presence. We have a mutual love for each other.”

The submarine cyber hacking we don't hear much about

America uses stealthy submarines to hack other countries’ systems - The Washington Post

This is pretty fascinating:

"There is a — an offensive capability that we are, that we prizevery highly," said Rear Adm. Michael Jabaley, the U.S. Navy's program executive officer for submarines. "And this is where I really can't talk about much, but suffice to say we have submarines out there on the front lines that are very involved, at the highest technical level, doing exactly the kind of things that you would want them to do."

The so-called "silent service" has a long history of using information technology to gain an edge on America's rivals. In the 1970s, the U.S. government instructed its submarines to tap undersea communications cables off the Russian coast, recording the messages being relayed back and forth between Soviet forces. (The National Security Agency has continued that tradition, monitoring underwater fiber cables as part of its globe-spanning intelligence-gathering apparatus. In some cases, the government has struck closed-door deals with the cable operators ensuring that U.S. spies can gain secure access to the information traveling over those pipes.)

These days, some U.S. subs come equipped with sophisticated antennas that can be used to intercept and manipulate other people's communications traffic, particularly on weak or unencrypted networks.

"We've gone where our targets have gone" — that is to say, online, said Stewart Baker, the National Security Agency's former general counsel, in an interview. "Only the most security-conscious now are completely cut off from the Internet." Cyberattacks are also much easier to carry out than to defend against,  he said. 

One of America's premier hacker subs, the USS Annapolis, is hooked into a much wider U.S. spying net that was disclosed as part of the 2013 Edward Snowden leaks, according to Adam
Weinstein and William Arkin, writing last year for Gawker's intelligence and national security blog, Phase Zero. A leaked slide showed that in a typical week, the Navy performs hundreds of so-called "computer network exploitations," many of which are likely the result of submarine-based hacking.

"Annapolis and its sisters are the infiltrators of the new new of cyber warfare," wrote Arkin and Weinstein, "getting close to whatever enemy — inside their defensive zones — to jam and emit and spoof and hack. They do this through mast-mounted antennas and collection systems atop the conning tower, some of them one-of-a-kind devices made for hard to reach or specific targets, all of them black boxes of future war."

Rousseau and Trump?

I was enjoying this essay in the New Yorker which argues that the origins of the anti-elitism of Trump supporters can be found in Rousseau (although I would have appreciated an explanation as to how - apart from stupidity - they can pin their hopes on a member of the pretty elite club known as "American billionaires"), when this paragraph came out of the blue:

Rousseau’s denunciations of intellectuals may have acquired an extra edge from the fact that Voltaire exposed him, in an anonymous pamphlet, as a hypocritical proponent of family values: someone who consigned all five of his children to a foundling hospital. Rousseau’s life manifested many such gaps between theory and practice, to put it mildly. A connoisseur of fine sentiments, he was prone to hide in dark alleyways and expose himself to women. More commonly, he was given to compulsive masturbation while sternly advising against it in his writings.

This makes me want to re-read Paul Johnson's chapter about him in Intellectuals - where I am sure I would have read about his kids before, but don't know if it covered his, shall we say, sexual issues.  

Book sales hard to believe

Speaking as I was about Pauline Andrew Bolt, once again I raise the mystery of why there has been such an effort by him, and the IPA, to promote and sell his book, especially when it was simply a collection of his already published columns from a newspaper and magazine.  Why would you even expect that to sell well?  All the words have been read by his fervent followers before:  it's not as if there was any effort put into creating something with original content.

And some sites have been mocking its initial small sales, and say that it has been pushed onto newsagents  who didn't actually order it.

Today Hanson Bolt  is claiming that there are only "a few" left out of its initial print of 15,000 - and that it is being reprinted. 

This seems a very surprising result for a political book (and surely it would count as that) with no fresh content.  Sales of over 10,000 for any political book in Australia seem fairly rare - according to this list, there were three that sold over 10,000 last year, and one of those was only 12,000.

Given the previous articles about how slowly it initially sold, I strongly suspect something funny is going on here.  Has the IPA (with staffer Bolt Jnr) snapped up a large number to send out for free if memberships are renewed?  Did Gina Rinehart have a particularly large gap on her library shelves that she decided to fill up just to make it look like reads a lot?   That's two possible theories that immediately spring to mind.

I await some commentary to appear on these implausible sounding sales figure to appear in the media soon.    

About political panel shows

Jack the Insider: Why I quit TV

Here's an amusingly written piece by Jack the Insider about what it's like to appear on TV political panel shows.

The only thing is - while I do think that in principle that it's a good thing that different party politicians sometimes remain on friendly terms despite opposing policies, I'm in a way disappointed that panellists on these shows routinely do likewise.  The difference being that politicians are sometimes running positions that they feel they have to and may personally regret.   TV commentators, though, argue for stupid, immoral or otherwise odious positions completely voluntarily.   So they have less excuse, and overlooking their positions for the sake of a drink later seems a bit of a cop out. 

Or am I saying that just because lately I'd like to throttle Andrew Bolt?  OK, maybe just throw a sauvignon blanc at him.  

Australian Trumpkin nutjob watch

You can guess which blog has this comment about  Trump:

Yes, it’s uncanny – he’s right so often. Yet many here can’t see a real leader when they see one. Most comments on Trump matters here are about him being “the lesser of two evils” or “Klin Ton is worse”.
President Trump is a game changer, a paradigm shift, away from the degenerate Marxism that has infected the West.
Get real Cats&Kittehs – Trump is the only choice. If only we had someone in his image in this gay political backwater.

Don't export trouble

So, the government has been wondering whether to nominate Rudd as a candidate for UN Secretary General.

As a person who long picked Rudd as a dud before the rest of the nation caught up with the idea, I really cannot see why the government should hesitate in not nominating him.   Honestly, a politician dumped from the top job by his own party for having a disastrous  management style should have no reasonable expectation that his nation would nominate him for such a high profile job where management is a key issue.  That he got a second run at the top job was out of sheer party desperation as to how to resolve internal conflict, and not  due to any significant re-assessment of his talents.

Besides this, his actual performance when meeting world leaders when he was PM was embarrassing.

And furthermore, on recent media appearances, he has looked to me to be very pale and very puffy faced - and while I think Right wingers are often ridiculous and immature in honing in on odd personal appearance in a single photo, I genuinely got the impression that Rudd does not look very healthy (and we know he has had significant health problems in the past.)  In all honesty, despite any temporary hurt to his ego, Turnbull would probably be doing him a long term favour by not nominating him...

Update:  so Rudd doesn't get nominated, although it looks like Malcolm may have led him to believe he would be.

Big deal, Kevin:  do you know how much the public will care about this - not one iota.  So you may have wasted a year or two in flying around the world trying to schmooze the right people.   Meh - you had a hobby, and now it's ended.  Go do something full time for a charity, or learn to paint in watercolours, or anything:  we really don't care.  You're not short of a quid - but here's a suggestion:  find a hobby that doesn't depend on people liking you.

I also endorse Jason Soon's tweet on this:

Rudd's response to not being supported is a perfect example of why he should not be supported.  

A good summary of what's happened with the conventions

Democrats have stolen the GOP's best rhetoric — and Republicans have noticed - Vox

It seems everyone, except Trumpkin nutters, can see that the Democrat convention got its mojo back (so to speak) on this third day of extremely well received speeches.

Hey Trumpkins: If the country is a disaster, why is Obama quite popular?

Obama Approval: Can it Help Clinton? - ABC News: President Obama will address the Democratic convention tonight from an unusually strong position; for the last two months straight he’s held the highest job approval rating in ABC News/Washington Post polls since early in his presidency. Fifty-six percent approve of his job performance, up from a career-low 40 percent just in advance of the 2014 midterm elections.

Obama’s in a particularly enviable position in comparison with George W. Bush at this time in his presidency: His approval rating was a dismal 28 percent in July 2008, a year in which Bush was perceived as a drag on John McCain’s unsuccessful effort to succeed him.

Scott Adams and his precious bodily fluids

In "what is nutty not-so-crypto Trump lover Scott Adams saying about US politics now" news:  he's worried that the DNC is having a bad effect on his hormones:

I watched singer Alicia Keys perform her song Superwoman at the convention and experienced a sinking feeling. I’m fairly certain my testosterone levels dropped as I watched, and that’s not even a little bit of an exaggeration. Science says men’s testosterone levels rise when they experience victory, and drop when they experience the opposite. I watched Keys tell the world that women are the answer to our problems. True or not, men were probably not feeling successful and victorious during her act.

Let me say this again, so you know I’m not kidding. Based on what I know about the human body, and the way our thoughts regulate our hormones, the Democratic National Convention is probably lowering testosterone levels all over the country. Literally, not figuratively. And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men, I think the Democratic convention is making men feel less happy. They might not know why they feel less happy, but they will start to associate the low feeling with whatever they are looking at when it happens, i.e. Clinton.

On the 2D playing field – where policies and facts matter – the Democratic National Convention is doing great. And when it comes to exciting women, it might be the best ever. But on an emotional level – where hormones rule – men have left the building…that they built.

 Is he still married?  Being recently dumped by his wife would explain a lot...

Update:  I just happened to catch much of Obama's pretty sensational convention speech - although some American writers are saying Biden was even better.  Can poor old Scott feel his hormones rising again, I wonder? 

Happy Stagflation Anniversary (and what it's an example of)

OK, so I am a day early:  but tomorrow will be the 5 year anniversary of the Sinclair Davidson stagflation warning.   I am reminded too that my lengthy post about this in 2013 attracted a comment from a Catallaxy reader (they're the only ones who address me this way) as follows:

You can wait Stevie, perhaps stagflation will happen, or not. Certainly there is a recession around the corner.

Maybe this won't affect you, but there will be about 1.5 million people who will be effected.

Not sure how long I have to wait to declare that prediction wrong too - how far away is "a corner" in economic terms?  

Anyway, how's inflation going?   It is very low. Now true, this might not be the best sign economically - but it is not "stagflation".   (I presume that the economic doldrums that do not incorporate high inflation would still be claimed by Sinclair to be "the consequence of pursuing Keynesian economic policy" - because that's the beauty of being ideologically committed to a view against government spending - everything's the fault of Keynesian economic policy!) 

Catallaxy also no longer features any posts by the Prof about the "pause" in the global temperature record - presumably because the long term temperature/modelling record now looks like this:

In fact,  his series of posts about "the pause"; his stagflation warning (which seems to have been inspired by a very short term bump in CPI);  his (more recent) attempts to decry tobacco plain packaging as a failure by analysing some post introduction short term data about tobacco consumption; and his blog's (though not his own) posts about the dire state of renewable energy because of a very high but very brief spike in South Australian electricity prices - all show up a clear pattern.   Namely, a continual rush to make claims out of obviously limited short term data.   But look at the longer term and the claims either have collapsed entirely, or look extremely wobbly.

Do the threadsters of Catallaxy appreciate this pattern?  Of course not.   Ideology and short term evidence trump long term results every day.  (Oh yeah, and speaking of Trump - most of them are on board with him being better than Hilary.   What a bunch of jokers.)

Is he still the GOP candidate?

Trump’s news conference was chock-full of outrages and lies - The Washington Post

Must be near full blown panic amongst establishment Republicans about how they can't stop Trump giving disastrous press conferences like that one. 

Bad Zika news

Florida investigates four mysterious Zika infections - BBC News

Reasonable advice from a playwright I don't care for

David Williamson's advice to playwrights - write like a TV writer | Daily Review: Film, stage and music reviews, interviews and more.

I don't know that I have ever seen anything by David Williamson that I've really liked.  Yet, oddly enough, his comments in the talk at the link about the issues he sees confronting Australian theatre seem all pretty sensible to me.

The vague appeal to me of trying to write a play is that there are not that many words involved, compared to writing a novel, or movie script.  The difficulty of my doing so is that I freeze up with the thought that I don't really know how people talk when I'm not there.  (Actually, that stops novel writing stone cold, too.)   Does that make sense?

More on stupid Julian

At WAPO, an article about Assange's deliberately timed attack on Clinton includes this part:

In the interview, Mr. Assange told a British television host, Robert Peston of the ITV network, that his organization had obtained “emails related to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication,” which he pronounced “great.” He also suggested that he not only opposed her candidacy on policy grounds, but also saw her as a personal foe.

At one point, Mr. Peston said: “Plainly, what you are saying, what you are publishing, hurts Hillary Clinton. Would you prefer Trump to be president?”

Mr. Assange replied that what Mr. Trump would do as president was “completely unpredictable.” By contrast, he thought it was predictable that Mrs. Clinton would wield power in two ways he found problematic.

The first was to do with "freedom of the press" (because she wants Assange indicted):   yes I can just imagine Donald Trump being much more conciliatory towards those who partake in security leaks.

The second was to do with her being a "liberal war hawk":  in this respect, Assange would prefer to have someone who is "completely unpredictable", and who contradictorily promotes himself as a new strongman who will "smash" ISIS (in contrast to the "weak" Obama), while at the same time suggesting that the US should stay out of the Middle East (and, by the way, hints that some NATO countries may not get protection they were expecting, either.)

Assange is a twit. 

In Trump We Trust 2

Trump Time Capsule #57: Russia, and Taxes - The Atlantic

James Fallows argues that the media has been way, way too soft on the matter of Trump refusing to release his tax returns, especially in light of suspicion that Russians were involved in the Wikileaks hack.  (Assuming it was a hack, I suppose - I had first assumed it was probably a leak by Sander's sympathisers.  But no, it does seem to have been an outside hack into the system.)

In Trump We Trust

Those Freedom Kids Who Performed at a Donald Trump Rally Are About to Sue Him | Mother Jones