Keith Burgess-Jackson

10-19-87 Monday—or perhaps I should write “Black Monday”. The Dow Jones industrial average dropped a record 508 points today. This is the worst one-day decrease in history, greater even than the drop in October 1929 that ushered in the Great Depression. In percentage terms, today’s decrease (twenty-two percent) was the second-largest in history. There was a day in 1914 when the percentage was slightly higher. As for the cause of today’s market crash, we can only speculate at this point. Some observers say that it was caused by an impending tax increase. Others blame computerized transactions. You see, computers have been programmed by brokers to buy or sell when certain stocks reach certain prices. This causes a snowball-like effect on the market—an effect that seems out of human hands. Fortunately, I have no stocks. [The stock market fell 684.81 points on 17 September 2001, the first day of trading after the terrorist attacks of 9-11. The percentage decrease, however, was only 7.13.]

. . . 

Ron Milo corralled me late this afternoon to ask a favor. It seems that the three Arizona universities (UA [the University of Arizona], ASU [Arizona State University], and NAU [Northern Arizona University]) will be awarding distinguished professorships to two percent of their faculties. One of those up for the award is Joel Feinberg [1926-2004]. In support of the nomination, Ron has to put together a set of letters—some from current colleagues, some from other experts in his field (Ron mentioned Ronald Dworkin, for instance), some from former students (Ron mentioned Jules Coleman and Michael Bratman), and at least one from a current student. You guessed it; I’m the “current student”. I told Ron that I’d be flattered to write such a letter, and would get right on it. But I can’t breathe a word of this to anyone, especially Joel. He apparently has no idea that he is up for the award. So I’ve told nobody, except those who read this journal, and that will be well after the fact. Needless to say, I’m honored to be selected to make a pitch for someone to whom I’ll always be indebted. Joel is a fine teacher, a warm, witty, and pleasant person, and a great scholar.

This song by Living Colour will get your blood pumping. According to Rolling Stone, Vernon Reid is the 66th-greatest guitarist of all time. How many of you remember this one? Here is the song that got it all started for me back in 1973. Don’t listen to this or this if you have a bad heart. “Shoot to Thrill,” “Looks That Kill.” This is a truly great song. The guitar solo, which begins at 2:27 and lasts nearly a minute, is mind-blowing. This is one of my all-time favorites. I’ll bet most of you remember this 1972 classic. The guitar, for its day, is incredible. This one, also an oldie, has great bass guitar and a memorable riff. I saw this song performed on HDNet the other night by the latest incarnation of the band. I’ve always liked it. Just to prove that my musical tastes vary, I love this song. I leave you this fine evening with a beautiful song by Icehouse.

This review of Paul Krugman’s* new book, by eminent historian David Kennedy, says many of the things I’ve been saying in this blog for the past four years. To repeat something I’ve said many times: Krugman is the most intellectually dishonest person I’ve ever known. That he is the darling of progressives tells you everything you need to know about progressivism.

* “Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults” (Daniel Okrent, “13 Things I Meant to Write About but Never Did,” The New York Times, 22 May 2005).

Here is a review of a book about running.

Here are the 100 most powerful people in the world, according to Vanity Fair magazine. I must be 101st.

Here is Peggy Noonan’s latest column. Here is Peg Kaplan’s latest post.

Here.

According to wire reports (as published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram), New York Yankee manager Joe Torre was offered a contract for 2008 worth $5,000,000. This is $2,500,000 less than he earned in 2007. Torre, who is the highest-paid manager in the history of baseball, declined the offer. The wire report says that he was “essentially forced out.” How can he be forced out when he was offered a contract? Yes, it was for less than he previously earned, but he could have accepted it. And why should he not take a pay cut? He hasn’t led his team to a World Series title since 2000, despite having the best players money can buy. This year, he couldn’t even beat the Boston Red Sox. What does he expect, a raise? Suppose the Yankees had told Torre, “Retire or we will break your legs.” That would be forcing (i.e., coercing) him out.

Every so often the philosopher must become again as a child, and contemplate the world as if he knew nothing about it, had no names for it and no idea of what is happening.

(Alan Watts, “Philosophy Beyond Words,” chap. 12 in The Owl of Minerva: Philosophers on Philosophy, ed. Charles J. Bontempo and S. Jack Odell [New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975], 191-200, at 200)

The 2008 presidential election is more than a year away, but it’s not too early to make predictions. Who will be the next president? I’m not asking for your preference; I’m asking for your prediction. Those who predict correctly will have bragging rights come election day 2008. Those who mess up will be subject to merciless, unrelenting ridicule.

Addendum: Please don’t ask for my prediction. I, qua God, am omniscient, so I already know the identity of the next president, just as I know the identity of the first president. I want to see how well you mere mortals do.

To the Editor:

Re “Lifers as Teenagers, Now Seeking Second Chance” (front page, Oct. 17):

There is a curious phenomenon that takes place in cases in which one human being kills another. In the time immediately after the killing, the public rallies around the victims and demands justice. As time goes on, however, the focus begins to shift from the dead to the living—the murderer.

For whatever reason, people begin to talk of “second chances” for the convict and how he or she should not endure the full weight of the sentence handed down as a result of the killing. They speak of the rights of the convict and forget about the lives lost as a result of the murderer’s actions.

It’s important to remember that the victims didn’t get a second chance. They remain dead. Their families never fully recover from the loss, and the havoc wreaked in their lives never fully subsides. The voices of the victims cannot protest or complain about “justice,” as the murderer has silenced them forever.

There is a [sic] axiom in our constitutional criminal scheme that dictates that it is better to let a guilty person go free than to wrongly imprison an innocent one. There is a flip side: it is better to keep a rightfully convicted person in prison than risk that he or she will inflict similar harm in the name of a “second chance.”

Chris M. Nielsen
Seattle, Oct. 17, 2007
The writer is deputy prosecuting attorney, King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

Note from KBJ: If you murder, you forfeit your life. If you don’t want to forfeit your life, don’t murder. Why is that so hard to understand?

On the off chance that you want to know more about the Clintons, read this. Will Nehs reliably informs me that if Hillary is elected president, she will purge universities of conservatives, beginning with philosophers. Will you defend me from her?

I found this website yesterday. You’re welcome.

Here.

Should atheists send their kids to Sunday School so that they are “exposed” to religion and more likely to “get along” with kids being steeped in its dogma?

Will doing so better enable your kid to properly select/reject religion at some point down the road?

Should both sides to every story be taught even during highly impressionable early years?

Should every child be exposed to religion (e.g., Sunday School) even though his/her parents are atheists and consider it a lie that cripples?

Will Nehs