Observed on Australia's "centre right" blog

If I were the Queensland Premier, I'd be getting the police to give Sinclair Davidson a call:

I mean, we know the quality of the deep thinkers there:

but it's still no excuse.

Woody Allen considered

I'm not exactly a fan of Woody Allen, as I consider most of his work to be overrated.  Yet I did think Crimes and Misdemeanours was very good, and I can see why his two biggest hits (Annie Hall and Manhattan) were liked, even if they didn't speak much to me.

But I still find him interesting, and recommend this review of his autobiography at The Atlantic.  

Surely a popular take

Why does no political party actually take this up as a policy?   It is as clear as day that the government and community has for years been struggling to find nominees for the ridiculous number and category of awards that are given out.

Panic mode

Why is the populist, climate change denying, culture war fighting Right so bad at risk assessment?   Look at Andrew Bolt:

He has no imagination for the effects of 2 or 3 degrees average global temperature on "civilisation";  but some (I think) unexpectedly violent rioting in London that defaces statutes and injures police and it's meant to be civilisation crumbling before our very eyes.

It is, I suppose, all part of the culture war mentality - that their version of the Right is the only side on the side of goodness and light and the rabble is always just barely kept from destroying civilisation.   You see it at Catallaxy all of the time. 

A mustard cream sauce

Seems odd that I have never made one before last Saturday.  (My wife has, but not me.)

There are a million recipes for it out there, but I settled on a simplified version of this, from Epicurious:

Ingredients

1. • 1/2 cup dry white wine
   • 1/4 cup chopped shallots
   • 1 cup whipping cream
   • 2 tablespoons Dijon mustard
   • 1 tablespoon chopped fresh basil
   • 1 tablespoon chopped fresh dill

Preparation

1. 1. Boil white wine and shallots in heavy medium saucepan over high heat until liquid evaporates, about 4 minutes. Reduce heat to medium-high. Add whipping cream and simmer until reduced to 1 cup, about 2 minutes. Add Dijon mustard, basil and dill. Simmer 2 minutes to blend flavors. Season sauce to taste with salt and pepper. 
    

You might guess the simplifications:  used a finely diced half of a brown onion instead of shallots;  some dried herb instead of fresh.  Also, I don't think it matters much whether it's seed mustard, or dijon, or a mix of both.  I used dijon and some German sweeter mustard that was waiting to be used up.

Worked fine.  Not sure why the recipe says add a cup of cream and reduce to a cup.   I reduced a bit more than a cup. 

Anyway, it was very nice.  

Why didn't this happen within 24 hours of his death?

Axios notes:

Minneapolis has agreed to ban the use of police chokeholds and will require nearby officers to act to stop them in the wake of George Floyd's death, AP reports.

On Twitter today

I thought this was witty:

And if I were someone like Greg "look, I've been to America lots of times and racism is not a big issue" Sheridan, I would feel more than a little ashamed after watching the clip at this tweet:

Here's a link to the tweet.

Conspiracy watch

*  For those interested, Graeme is still making comments and I not letting any through, regardless of content.   He is sure, though, that there is some sort of coup against Trump being organised by the you-know-who's.   (Maybe that apostrophe is not technically correct?  But it needs something...)

To what end?  I don't think that matters to Graeme - it just always has to be the fault of the you-know-who's.  Even if they are the beneficiaries of pro-annexation policies under Trump they still want him replaced, apparently.   Huh.

* Poor old "my old friends won't talk to me anymore" Steve Kates is having another "the Left and the media! They're all constant liars and idiots and pure evil - why won't they engage me in genuine political debate?"  moment.  Of course, his post is headed by a Tucker Carlson clip, because Kates knows who to listen to as an objective and fair commentator on matters political.  The other 95% of commentators on TV are just pure evil liars, don't you know?  Their failure to support Trump and the Republicans is self evident proof of that.

Sinclair likes to let people post at his blog regardless of the embarrassment they cause themselves.  Did he never see that ad about how "mates don't let mates drink and drive"?    Sinclair gives them the keys, cuts the brake line, and gives the car a push towards the edge of the credibility cliff.  What a pal.

* Conspiracy and cult membership at Catallaxy is popular, though.   Again, it's a case of circles within circles, when you read things like this:

Oh I see.  Hadn't worked that one out - perhaps because I don't have a streak of paranoia a mile wide?

And, of course, it is possibly the end of the world as we know it:

Yeah, the progressive Lefies of the police forces bashing with abandon, I guess.

Self fulfilling police protests

Things are getting very weird in the US.  The original "black lives matter" justification for the protests seems to have broadened out to a general "why are all police jerks to everyone" raison d'etre due to the scores of videos of them unjustifiably roughing up protesters of any colour.

The latest example - the shove to the old guy in Buffalo who stumbles backwards and hits his head on the pavement (with blood obviously flowing out) - is very remarkable for the way the police just seem to look at him and don't jump in to offer immediate assistance.

But as if Trump would have any idea what to do to encourage widespread police reform.  As I posted recently (and had not realised before), the police unions had campaigned against Obama for (what I have read) were relatively modest reform initiatives.

As someone had written earlier this week (at Vox I think), the most accurate way to view it is that the police are counter-protesters.   Maybe they are getting really upset about how the ubiquity of phone cameras is interfering so much with their traditional tactics?

A unfortunate association

I've found I quite like Abbott's Village Bakery brand bread.  It is thicker cut than your cheaper loaves, and has "body" too.  Also seems to keep fresh quite a while.

But - every time I use it, I am reminded of Tony Abbott, which is off putting.   I would suggest a change name, for the same of removing an unwanted association in the minds of (probably) more than one Australian.

Thank you.

Google is trying to educate me (and succeeding)

Because Google knows a disturbing amount about me, it knew that I was recently saying how I knew next to nothing about ancient Indian history.   So when I was looking at recommendations on Youtube on my TV last night, it suggested a video about the Indus Valley civilisation.  

Sure, this channel (Cogito) seems made for (I guess) kids at about an late primary school/early high school level, but if you know nothing about a subject, there's nothing wrong with starting there.

I thought it was pretty good, actually:



I wonder, though, if the language is still a mystery, whether some of the claims of how they lived are really accurate deductions from archaeology, or not.

I then saw that they also dealt with the old Indian king Ashoka, who I mentioned recently, so I got myself a short education about him too:





Ah, the internet being used for the forces of good instead of evil and misinformation.  Warms the heart.  

About "neck restraint" in policing

Earlier this week, I questioned why people in authority in the USA had not immediately banned (what I now know is called) neck restraints as part of policing.   It's just obviously dangerous, no?

Well this article explains that, yes, it is considered dangerous and some police forces in the US had already banned it.  Look at this figure:

Since the beginning of 2015, officers from the Minneapolis Police Department have rendered people unconscious with neck restraints 44 times, according to an NBC News analysis of police records. Several police experts said that number appears to be unusually high.

Minneapolis police used neck restraints at least 237 times during that span, and in 16 percent of the incidents the suspects and other individuals lost consciousness, the department's use-of-force records show. A lack of publicly available use-of-force data from other departments makes it difficult to compare Minneapolis to other cities of the same or any size....

More than a dozen police officials and law enforcement experts told NBC News that the particular tactic Chauvin used — kneeling on a suspect's neck — is neither taught nor sanctioned by any police agency. A Minneapolis city official told NBC News Chauvin's tactic is not permitted by the Minneapolis police department. For most major police departments, variations of neck restraints, known as chokeholds, are highly restricted — if not banned outright.

The version of the Minneapolis Police Department's policy manual that is available on-line, however, does permit the use of neck restraints that can render suspects unconscious, and the protocol for their use has not been updated for more than eight years.

This article goes into more detail on how a few different cities' police forces across the nation have dealt with the tactic.  

It seems pretty ridiculous that there is such a lack of uniformity across the nation on this, for so long too.

More comedy

About that Mattis statement

Here's Allahpundit at Hot Air talking about Mattis's statement:

What makes me nervous is the possibility that he felt he *had* to speak up because he’s worried about what Trump might try to do with the military at a moment of national crisis, amid excited chatter about using the Insurrection Act. Tom Cotton, who’s clearly angling for the GOP nomination in 2024 and possibly Mark Esper’s job right now, has an op-ed in the Times today entitled “Send in the Troops.” Tucker Carlson has all but called Trump a pussy on Fox News for not sending in soldiers to start cracking heads. The hardcore nationalists really want to see Strength, red in tooth and claw, applied to American citizens here. They’re egging him on.

If Mattis is piping up now, it makes me think he’s legit concerned that Trump will do it — and legit concerned about how the military will act. What he, and Mike Mullen, and James Stavridis, are doing by suddenly cranking out op-eds denouncing him are using their legitimacy as respected former military brass to offer a counterweight of authority to the troops with respect to whatever Trump might do. I didn’t think in my lifetime we’d have the president and former military figures at the highest levels playing tug-of-war over whether American soldiers should carry out operations against Americans, but here we are.

I like this part too:

Mattis knows a fascist display when he sees one and he knows what’ll happen if it isn’t deemed beyond the pale by authority figures. He understands and values the civic culture of his country. Trump doesn’t, which is one of the most persistently strange things about him. He’s in his 70s, born and raised in the United States, a sworn nationalist known to physically hug the flag at events, yet his approach to power is roughly what you’d expect if you took an Egyptian policeman under Mubarak and suddenly made him president. “How can I enrich myself?” “How can I look strong?” “Let’s send the police into a public square to remove the people so that I can wave my religious book around for the cameras.”  

And talking about Trump:

As Ross Douthat said in a column a few weeks ago, he seems to crave power less because he has some burning desire on how to use it (trade war excepted) than because it brings him attention.

How to take a hint that your political instincts may be wrong

I presume that the likes of Claire Lehmann, and the other Australian and American Right wing-ish commentators who are complaining about how there is not enough condemnation of the rioting, property damage, vandalism, deaths and injury going on around the Floyd protests are somewhat flummoxed by Trump's increasingly poor polling despite his attempts to claim the mantle of "law and order" President. 

I think it likely is explicable by these factors:

a. they have no perspective of how damaging* and deadly past racially charged riots have been in American history (for which they should have watched last night's Planet America for a summary); and

b. reflects their politics of how much they dislike the Left for culture war reasons; such that they can't understand why the public is reacting not in alignment with their own assessment.



* I am tempted to also wonder whether they look at historical riots that were at their worst within black neighbourhoods and think they were less important than riots and thieves who vandalise more up market streets in New York and Los Angeles - but maybe that is ungenerous...

Russia and America observed

This week's Foreign Correspondent was well worth watching, not so much for the main story (about a Russian female doctor critical of the lack of PPE supplied to Russian hospitals, and therefore targeted by the government), but for the image it gave of how Putin's rhetoric (and that of his supporting media) tracks so closely to that of the Trump supporting Right in America.    

There was a clip of Putin calling news that didn't suit him "fake news", and a right wing broadcaster looking and sounding all the world like a Limbaugh (or similar.)   And I think other Putin friendly media featured too.

It's like you could transplant a Trump supporter into Russia and they would be completely comfortable and familiar with Putin's language (including his desire to extend his leadership for years - in the same way Trump has taken to "joking" about how much longer he wants to be President.)

I think the average wingnut Trump supporter would also have no idea how ridiculous it is that they have come to this.  They actually want to live under a Trump dictatorship (as illustrated in my previous post today.)  

Jason goes Gray again

Gee Jason, why do you think Gray Connolly makes for a good analysis of the current state of the world?   He makes excuses for Trump all the time, and has a pat over-simplification line that is too much orientated towards the culture wars (as you have to be to excuse the blatant authoritarianism inherent in the Trump's performance since day one.)

What's the evidence for this, for example?:

The Right that emerges from this time will be more orientated to families & workers, not big business. 

Really?  Where's the sign of that in America?   Or is this just theorising on the never never?

Connolly makes a lot of Trump having won due to appeal to those that economic (and cultural?) liberalism has left behind - he ignores things like the substantial majority vote win by Clinton; the actual failure of Trump to reinvigorate industries he said he would; the long term uncertain effect of his populist trade wars; the uncertain effect of long term massive increase in government debt; the boosting the military while at the same time saying he will use it less.  

You and Connolly seem to want to make a boogeyman of "liberalism", yet don't get into the nitty gritty of economic policy (well, Connolly doesn't.)    Because, let's face it, economics is complicated and populism in only benefiting your own nation's population is not all that moral if the rest of the world is in poverty.   Globalisation is supported by the Catholic Church because of the wealth generation in poorer countries it can create, if done properly.   Conservative Catholics, like Connolly, seem to ignore that and want to welcome the retreat into isolationism that ultimately hurts everyone.

If you and Connolly want to make a useful contribution, start critiquing actual economic policies:  what should happen with tax rates;  how to deal with corporations gaming governments out of tax by their international and financing arrangements;  how to respond to the "gig" economy;  and how all policy needs to be geared towards averting disaster climate change affecting huge parts of the world within a couple of generations.


All this bleating about "woke capital", and how the Left is more interested in lattes than appealing to the (increasingly hard to define) working class, and getting upset because of college students being too politically correct, is just fiddling around the edges of what's important.

I've been saying this to you for years now, as you seem to retreat more and more into the weird world of conservatives who are more interested in criticising the Left for not being what you want it to be, while ignoring what the Right is actually doing.       

The Mattis statement

While this is welcome, I do question the judgement of the guy for thinking he could successfully work with a President who was already sounding like a wannabe authoritarian dictator during the campaign:

James Mattis condemns Trump as a threat to the Constitution

Perhaps the best paragraph:

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.

Would be good if he would throw in some attack on the Right wing media which has created a cult around Trump, though. 

Update:   Ha!  Australian wingnut reacts calmly, not realising he's proving Mattis' point:

Update 2:   after being told that that there is no oath of loyalty to the President (and besides, he no longer works for him), our Maj expresses disappointment:

Makes it clear how this kind of populist Trump supporter actually wants him as an old style king, not as President.

Funny

And this classic happy look:

Claire is confused

Claire Lehmann is confused:

Err, maybe because it is that most of the protests are peaceful (and those that are not are sometimes clearly provoked by excessive use of police force) that public sympathy is actually pretty high with the protesters?:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A majority of Americans sympathize with nationwide protests over the death of an unarmed black man in police custody and disapprove of President Donald Trump’s response to the unrest, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Tuesday.

The demonstrations, some of which have turned violent, began last week after a Minneapolis police officer was videotaped kneeling on the neck of George Floyd for nearly nine minutes, even after Floyd appeared to lose consciousness. The officer has been charged with murder.

The survey conducted on Monday and Tuesday found 64% of American adults were “sympathetic to people who are out protesting right now,” while 27% said they were not and 9% were unsure.

She also seem terribly uninterested in the politics of this - how the Republicans are blithely letting their 200 word vocabulary President (and his media ra-rah team) play partisan politics with this - which is exactly the last thing you want to do if you want to de-escalate matters.      

In fact, really, I reckon this is what Lehmann is doing here herself disingenuously:   playing politics while pretending not to.