Interesting to think of what makes sorting possible...

1) information about where to find like minded people.
2) low transport costs (cheap oil) to get there
3) low transport costs (cheap oil) to visit relatives elsewhere.
4) a booming economy producing attractive jobs that pull some people toward them

Now imagine the world of the future.... it's still easy to know about that liberal or conservative haven... but it could cost you your connection to your parents and friends if you go there because it is too expensive to travel back and forth. Imagine the economy, wounded by oil costs, unable to generate those high paying jobs in major metro centers. Suddenly there is less difference between places, higher penalty for leaving one place for another, less incentive to move...

It all depends what you imagine the post peak oil world will look like. We're not talking MadMax here, just a world where transportation is slower and more expensive, incentives change, children have slightly less reason to move away (sort), slightly higher incentives to stay near their parents (unsorted.)

You could see a unsorting over time...

Posted at July 21, 2008 11:57 PM in response to A Simple Calculation

... and has the Supreme Court had much effect?

Impeachment is the only law that applies to the Presidency.... that and the conscience of the President.

Posted at July 4, 2008 2:48 PM in response to A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

They are not even guidelines. They are words on paper... sometimes useful when Congress chooses to exercise power.

But Congress does not need them to exercise power... and President is not bound by them either... absent Congressional willingness to impeach when its arbitrary and unfettered judgment it wishes to do so.

Congress doesn't need no stinkin' bill of rights to impeach... just the will to do so.

The President, now that we are in perpetual war, can do anything he pleases... subject only to Congress's willingness to impeach.

Welcome to America!

Posted at July 3, 2008 4:21 PM in response to A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

Obama, as President, and as established by Bush, will have unfettered (except by possible impeachment) power, once elected.

Therefore it REALLY doesn't matter if he supports or opposes retroactive immunity.

If we went after the phone companies (now or in the future) we'd have to go after the President... by impeaching Bush. We've already established that that will not happen, so while we could prosecute the phone companies, why should THEY resist illegal Presidential orders when CONGRESS ITSELF has not resisted illegal Presidential orders. It makes no sense.

Realizing this, Obama is not going after the telephone companies.

The only force that will prevent him from make illegal requests of phone companies is the same one that would have stopped Bush... the threat of impeachment. That threat is unlikely, so he has no reason not to make illegal requests (outside of FISA) just as Bush had no reason not to do so.

The President, we have clearly established (if there were any doubters) is NOT constrained by law. He is constrained by the threat of impeachment.

Therefore it matters not a bit whether we enforce the law in relation to the telephone companies... Presidential power is limited only by impeachment and by a Congress willing to impeach.

Therefore, finally, Obama's not backing retroactive immunity is designed to get him elected, and to prevent "weak on national security" attacks. The left, which should know better than your average middle American undecided voter, needs to figure out that the retroactive immunity issue is a great symbol, but because it is of ZERO practical significance is not a good reason not to support Obama.

Besides the threat of impeachment, the other limit on Presidential power is the conscience of the President, and I'd certainly trust Obama more than McCain to attempt to do the right thing.

peace, out

Posted at July 3, 2008 3:18 PM in response to A Time-line Of Obama's Statements On FISA

... the point of AOE is not to change sexual behavior... it is to put money in the pockets of people who think that AOE is a good idea.... it injects money into the conservative ecosystem.... and the more AOE fails and produces more pregnancies... the more AOE educators and the conservative ecosystem rallies around AOE and the right.

It's a perfect system... nothing succeeds like failure.

That's the larger premise of disaster capitalism and the Iraq war.... failing creates reasons to keep on doing more of the same...

Abstinence education works because it produces pregnancies which create a need for more abstinence education. I love it.

Posted at July 2, 2008 2:38 AM in response to Whoa! Hidden Message in Obama's Faith Based Initiatives Message.

Lying scumbags? Sure they are. But that's just standard language in a settlement... they are paying off in exchange for the victim agreeing that the pay off doesn't constitute an admission of guilt... and the victim agrees because he gets a sure thing (money, now) rather than a real victory in a criminal or civil court (later and maybe never.)

Posted at June 28, 2008 1:11 AM in response to U.S. Settles for $5.8 Million With Scientist Accused In 2001 Anthrax Scare

Actually, I don't think his policy proposals are any thing but vaguely relevant to winning this election.

It's his personality, his casual offhand remarks, his thematic positioning, whether he wears a tie with his suit, or not, who appears standing next to him and behind him.

That is the stuff that wins and loses elections... that plus the debates, plus enthusiasm and voter turn out, plus the smear campaigns....

But he's got to get the flow, the "personality", the presentation package, the "naturalness" rehearsed so well that he's even got himself fooled. Nobody gives a rats ass (unfortunately) about his alternative energy proposal. He's got one, McCain has one... who is going to figure out which one is better? Not one person in a thousand, and it doesn't matter how many times the NYTimes writes about it.

The successes he's had have all been in the area of feeling and emotion, but so have some of the failures. That's the ground where elections are won and lost.

Posted at June 26, 2008 5:39 PM in response to Can the Obama Campaign Shape the Agenda?

Well said Theda. I've not been impressed with my candidate's political strategy... or that of his campaign.

I don't have the answer, but he'd better figure it out!

The thing that he just keeps doing... stupidly... is talking about people in the third person. Just like he did when he said "they" are bitter, instead of "I understand that YOU are bitter... "

I heard another snippet where he was talking about "them"... people he was claiming to be sympathetic toward... but he was talking about them instead of TO them. Stupid stupid stupid. On such attitudes and mistakes elections are lost. Sociological analysis gets you advanced degrees but loses elections. I see no evidence that he's figured that out.

Keeping my fingers crossed that he will.

Posted at June 26, 2008 4:38 PM in response to Can the Obama Campaign Shape the Agenda?

The loss of all illusions and false hopes is the first step toward discerning what it is actually possible to be hopeful about.

Posted at June 22, 2008 11:40 AM in response to Obama Backing FISA "Compromise"

Newsflash... It IS all absurd and meaningless.

But within that context I think Obama would like to use whatever small room for maneuver the power structure provides to do something good, while the Republicans pretty much endorse the way it operates as "the way things ought to be."

Even if he can't make a difference it is valuable to have someone who feels he ought to try.

Posted at June 22, 2008 12:19 AM in response to Obama Backing FISA "Compromise"