Subscribe via RSS Feed

Author Page for Robert Farley

rss feed


[ 0 ] April 4, 2006 |


Uh, I’m not sure how someone is supposed to react to this from Assrocket:

It’s too bad, I think. DeLay was an effective leader, albeit too liberal in recent years. It’s possible, of course, that he did something wrong along the way. But there is no evidence of that in the public domain; as I’ve often said, the politically-inspired prosection of DeLay by Travis County’s discredited DA, Ronnie Earle, is a bad joke. As far as we can tell at the moment, DeLay appears to be yet another victim of the Democrats’ politics of personal destruction–the only politics they know.

The english language lacks the verbs, nouns, and adjectives necessary to describe…

Instapundit clutches desperately for some centrist cred…

Inside Man

[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

Saw Inside Man on Saturday. I was quite pleased.

There were a couple of obvious problems. The score, until the very last scene, was intrusive and annoying. The payoff, admittedly, was good, but didn’t make up for the rest of the soundtrack. The last thirty minutes had a clunky, taped together feeling. Having already revealed everything important, Lee had trouble stringing the final act together. We knew about the important decisions made my Owen and Washington, and about the secrets that Plummer harbored. Not all that much left to say.

That said, lots of positive qualities. The performances by Washington, Dafoe, and Owen were predictably good. The plot was interesting enough, last act notwithstading. I liked Lee’s presentation of the NYPD; movies like this all too often descend into the Die Hard template of assuming the radical ineptitude of police organizations in the face of a major heist. The NYPD, however, looked extremely professional on every level. It’s not so much that I like seeing police department portrayed in a positive light as that it was genuinely different than the typical presentation in such a film.

Lee also displayed the eye of a New York filmmaker. On every visit I’ve had to Manhattan I’ve seen lots of scaffolding; lots of building are always under construction or repair. Even in Law and Order, I don’t think I can ever recall seeing scaffolding in a cinematic depiction of New York. Lee shows us scaffolding in the first ten minutes. Lee, unsurprisingly, also shows an eye for what New Yorkers look like. He did an amazing job of depicting the variety of shades of the citizens of America’s most diverse city. Unlike some filmmakers, he was able to pull this off in a completely believable and unselfconcious way. It never felt as if the director was trying to [insert stereotypical black character here] or [insert stereotypical hispanic character here].

Scott is quite right in his evaluation of Lee:

The secret to Lee is that he’s an extremely gifted director who is a mediocre-to-poor (and always uneven) writer.

Inside Man is a pretty solid effort.

Opening Day

[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

Thank goodness I don’t have Barry Zito on my roster…

In other news, congratulations to Mr. Keith Adams on winning the LGM Tournament Challenge. As soon as Mr. Adams sends me his e-mail address, I will be happy to present him with a genuine LGM Championshipness-worthy certificate, suitable for framing.

Was it just my imagination, or did UCLA play about the ugliest championship game I’ve ever seen?


[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

AG and Kingdaddy have both commented on this article on Libya by Dafna Hochman. Hochman demolishes the argument that the invasion of Iraq had any effect on Libya’s decision to end its nuclear weapon program. It’s well worth reading.

In the 1980s, Qaddafi occupied the narrative space that Saddam Hussein assumed in the 1990s and Fidel Castro held in the 1960s. Qaddafi did a bunch of genuinely bad things. He adopted the Soviet Union as a patron, and just about every terrorist organization under the sun as clients. Terrorists operating with Libyan assistance, training, and perhaps under Libyan orders carried out a number of high profile and deadly attacks against Western targets. Libya invaded neighboring Chad, an operation that ended in a humiliating defeat at the hands of poorly equipped Chadian militias. Libya also had several military encounters with the United States, including a fighter scrum in the Gulf of Sidra and a series of air attacks intended to decapitate Qaddafi’s regime.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union things went poorly for Libya, and Qaddafi decided to move back toward the West. Libya toned down the terrorism angle, eventually handing over those responsible for the Pan Am 103 bombing. Libya rebuilt its relations with the rest of Africa, eventually achieiving a prominent position in African diplomatic circles. Finally, as early as 1999, Libya offered to shut down its WMD program, including the nuclear program. It gave up the last of its program in late 2003.

Conservatives were quick to declare Libya’s decision to give up its nuclear program as evidence that the Iraq invasion had had its intended effect of intimidating US enemies. If you had been paying no attention, this make sense. To anyone who followed Libyan foreign policy during the 1990s and early 2000s (an admittedly small number), the argument was absurd. Libya began moving toward the West well before the United States attacked Iraq or even began to seriously threaten moving against it. Moreover, the Libyan decision was made in the absence of any plausible military threat on the part of the West. While US rhetoric toward North Korea and Iran has been characterized by bluster and a strategy of “keeping all options on the table”, no one has talked about using military force against Libya since the early 1990s. It would be curious indeed if the invasion of Iraq frightened Libya, against which no threats were made, into giving up its WMD while apparently pushing Iran and North Korea, the target of very serious threats, in precisely the opposite direction. In this case, however, there’s no puzzle. The invasion of Iraq had no effect on Libya’s decision, which was made before 9/11.

Given the logical weaknesses of the reputational argument, it’s not surprising that no easy line can be drawn between Iraq and Libya. The Libyan example is also instructive regarding another right-wing fantasy, that of Iraq’s connection with terrorist groups. Stephen Hayes is making a career out of producing fantastic descriptions of Iraq’s connections with Al Qaeda, mostly based on a few documents that suggest some contacts in the mid-1990s. Let me suggest that if we had access to Libya’s intelligence archives we’d find a web of connections that would make Hayes most fevered dreams look like child’s play. Even in the 1990s, and certainly in the 1980s, Libya was a far more enthusiastic supporter of terrorism than Iraq. The same could be said of Iran, Syria, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Hayes doesn’t grapple with this because his purpose is not to study Iraq in a comparative context, a project that might determine Iraq’s connections to terrorism relative to its neighbors. This is the only useful way to study Iraq’s terror connections, as the invasion of Iraq can only be justified on terrorism grounds if Iraq was a relatively aggressive sponsor of terrorism. Hayes has done nothing to establish this, and with good reason; it’s preposterous. Relative to Iran, Syria, Libya, and Saudi Arabia (at least with regards to Al Qaeda) Iraq was a dabbler in terror. Hayes doesn’t deny this, and doens’t grapple with it, because his point is post hoc rationalization rather than serious journalism.

Termination and Employment

[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

Brad Plumer has an interesting discussion of whether making it easier to fire workers in France will actually decrease unemployment. I can’t really say that I feel strongly either way; both positions seem reasonable, although Brad presents some solid evidence on the contrary position.

During my short residence in Germany, what struck me as contributing to unemployment wasn’t so much personnel regulations as the collection of other regulations that limited German commerce, such as laws that prevented retailers from remaining open until late hours, open on Sundays, and so forth. On the one hand, these measures were extremely annoying to someone who had become accustomed to being able to hit the supermarket at 4am if the fancy struck me. On the other, they would really seem to contribute to unemployment by prohibiting the hiring of additional workers to occupy certain shifts. When I asked why these regulations were in place, I was usually told that the limits were intended to protect small, family businesses against large corporations.

I really have no idea of how accurate my impression was, if it stands up in comparative context, or what other obstacles there might be to increased employment in European countries. Nevertheless, it didn’t make any sense to me to prohibit retailers from selling product to customers based on the hour of the day. I wouldn’t be surprised if such regulations had just as much, if not more, impact on unemployment than those that concern hiring and termination.

One of these is not like the others….

[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

In the course of denouncing a University of Texas professor for making an environmentally apocalyptic statement, Sully gives us the following. See if you can pick out the problem:

In the long run, right-wing fundamentalism and left-wing fundamentalism end up in the same place.


You have John McCain’s new best friends, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, seeing the End-Times approach, when every homosexual, feminist and Jew will be roasted alive by Jesus. You have Marxists expecting the Communist revolution when all alienation will be dispelled. And you have the fundie enviro-left eagerly anticipating species annihilation. To my mind, it’s a very good indicator of whether someone is worth listening to from a political stand-point. Those who expect the end of the world relatively soon should be kept as far away from public office as possible. They can keep their apocalypses to themselves.

A pox on all their houses!!

But maybe, just maybe, John McCain’s new best friends are a slightly bigger threat than a few lonely, bitter Marxists and a UT professor who likes plagues. And possibly, lumping the former into a group with the latter really does a disservice to reality by failing to grapple with the fact that the right-wing extremists are members-in-good-standing of the Republican political machine while the left-wing extremists are in the wilderness and will continue to be in the wilderness for the foreseeable future.


[ 0 ] April 3, 2006 |

Apologies regarding slow posting as of late. I turned 32 on Saturday, and the impact of my accelerating decrepitude has become increasingly obvious. Sunday Battleship Blogging will return next week.

In other news, baseball has returned. My condolences to all those poor schleps out there who were counting on C.C. Sabathia. Recall that LGM has a Baseball Challenge league going again this year:

League Name: Lawyers, Guns and Money
Password: zevon

Axis of Evel Knievel is already in the lead.


[ 0 ] April 1, 2006 |

Read Matt’s thoughts on loneliness and the Seattle shootings.

[ 0 ] March 31, 2006 |

Friday Cat Blogging… Starbuck and Nelson


[ 0 ] March 30, 2006 |

Why has boxing become irrelevant?

Five years ago, ten years ago, fifteen years ago I was always able to name the heavyweight champion, a few of the major heavyweight contenders, and a few of the other major titletholders. Now, I find that the heavyweight title is divided among four different contenders, none of whom I’ve ever heard of.

Boxing is not such a bad sport to watch on TV. It has clear commercial breaks, and tends to be reasonably exciting. The possibilities seem to be as follows:

1) America has outgrown boxing: The American public can no longer, on a consistent basis, deal with the violence of boxing. This seems patently absurd.

2) There are no charismatic boxers: Was Mike Tyson charismatic? Lennox Lewis? Larry Holmes? Evander Holyfield? Doesn’t make any sense.

3) Boxing lacks a central organizational body: This one make a lot of sense. MLB, the NFL, and the NBA all devote an extraordinary amount of effort to marketing their product. The major boxing organizations seem to be most interested in competing against one another, and only tangentially interested in drumming up interest in the sport as a whole.

4) Bad Marketing: I also find this one plausible. I wonder if the major promoters and organizations were too greedy, too enthusiastic about seizing the revenue available from cable and pay-per-view, while remaining oblivious to larger considerations regarding developing a future audience for the sport. The NFL is smart enough to refrain from making the Superbowl pay-per-view, if only because it helps develop a younger audience.


The Most Insightful Comment Regarding New Mexico Lobos Football I’ve Heard All Day

[ 0 ] March 30, 2006 |

Somehow I am thinking that a diet consisting of something other than cheeseburgers might help this team suck just slightly less. Get Direct TV Albuquerque for all the latest Lobo action.

Book Review: Cicero

[ 0 ] March 29, 2006 |

My introduction to Cicero came in a Classics class my freshman year at the University of Oregon. We read Against Verres I, an early case prosecuted by Cicero against the former governor of Sicily, and the Second Philippic Against Antony, a speech written in the days following the assassination of Caesar. Cicero is an odd figure among those ancients still read today. He wasn’t a historian, or a philosopher, or a playwright, although he dabbled in the first two. Cicero’s surviving work is mostly about the practical diffculty of being a politician in Rome at the end of the Republic. Whereas you can read Plato or Thucydides without caring overmuch about local Athenian politics, Cicero is ALL politics, and an interest in Cicero depends, to some degree, on an interest in his times.

That said, Cicero’s life gives us one of the clearest possible windows into the political life of ancient Rome. Cicero was one of the four or five most important men in Rome during the civil wars, and the contours of his life are particular important to an understanding of that conflict. Although much of his work has been lost, many of his most important speeches survive, and we have a lifetime of correspondence between he and his friend Atticus. We know Cicero better than any but his closest friends. As with any political memoir, we are susceptible to Cicero’s deception, but only to the same extent that he deceived himself; the Cicero that comes down to us is not the writer of a self-serving memoir.

The existence of Cicero as a fully realized historical individual is one of the things that attracted me to his writings. Another is an amateur interest in his time and place. Probably most important, I liked Cicero as a politician. Although driven to save the Republic, he was also motivated by a powerful sense of the practical and the possible. In this sense he reminds me most of Edmund Burke, although his purpose leaned more to the institutional than to the social. The revolution in Rome was small potatoes compared to the French Revolution.

Cicero’s experience also demonstrates the inadequacy of a Burkean program. By Cicero’s day, the constitution of the Republic was simply not up to the management of an Empire and its consequent enormous urban capitol. Cautious reform is not a helpful program when one major faction is so entrenched that it resist any meaningful change, and the other is so radical that it rejects basic common ground. Cicero knew this on some level, which is why he was so reluctant to throw his support (and the support of the Senate) behind Pompey in the 50s or behind Octavian in the wake of Caesar’s assassination. The victory of Pompey over Caesar, Antony over Octavian, or even Brutus and Cassius over the Second Triumvarate might have altered the contours of the new Roman state, but would never have saved the Republic as it existed. The fall of the Republic serves to remind that simply because there MUST be a solution does not mean that their WILL be a solution.

Cicero: The Life and Times of Rome’s Greatest Politician
, by Anthony Everett, is a solidly enjoyable account of Cicero’s life. It’s not the most exhaustive nor the most accurate biography, but it is very readable. Everett is clear about the evidence that we don’t have, but still makes sensible decisions about filling in Cicero’s life with what we know of the typical existence of an upper-class Roman citizen.

It wouldn’t surprise me to discover that Anthony Everett’s account of Cicero has been used by the writers and producers of Rome. The depiction of the death of Caesar was very close to Everett’s account, and the book came out not long before the series was contemplated. One episode that Everett relates might be fun to depict in the series; although Brutus seems like a stand up guy and all, he once ordered his men to lock the senate of a small town in its building until several of the senators starved. “Nice guy” was a relative term in ancient Rome.