Monday, September 7, 2008.

In lieu of recent events on this blog and in the larger political community, and with an eye to the intense political debates that will no doubt be occurring in the next two months, I have decided to coin a term that may be helpful to us all.  That term is "partisan dissonance".  I'd suggest using the acronym PD in parenthesis as a citation.

It is my belief that this term has not been used before, which may make me something of a linguistic pioneer, though I do not claim to be as brilliant as Noam Chomsky (PD) in this area.

What is partisan dissonance?  It is a phenomena in which two intelligent members of society view an event, an idea, or the written word in two completely different ways because of their political beliefs.  I will now cite a few examples of this phenomenon to better illustrate the point (note: these are fictional examples):

PARTISAN DISSONANCE EXAMPLE A:

Partisan 1: Barack Obama has no experience at all and is completely unprepared to be President.
Partisan 2: Obama has a large number of experiences which make him well qualified to be president, including his legal career, his time in the Illinois State Senate, his experience as a US Senator, and his leadership during his campaign.  How can you not see how experienced he is?  It is so obvious!
Partisan 1: None of these experiences are sufficient to show that he is prepared to be President.  He did nothing when he had these jobs, so he doesn't have the qualifications to be president.  How can you possibly think someone so inexperienced actually has enough experience to be president?  It is so obvious that he doesn't!
Partisan 2: Oh yeah?  Well Sarah Palin was in the PTA and then the mayor of a town the size of Hoopeston.  Sure she is a governor, but only for a year-and-a-half and that state is one of the smallest in the country.  Obviously she is completely unprepared to be vice-president!
Partisan 1: What are you talking about?  She is a governor and therefore has more executive experience than Obama.  If anything she is more qualified to be president than he is!

At this point, further discussion of these points is useless.  This is an unfortunate case of partisan dissonance.

PARTISAN DISSONANCE EXAMPLE B:

Partisan 1: I can't believe we've had to suffer through eight years of conservative rule.  It is time for a change!
Partisan 2:  What are you talking about?  Sure we've had eight years of George W. Bush, but he isn't a conservative.  If anything, he is more liberal than conservative.  Just look at the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan, or NCLB.  Obviously these are not the creations of a real conservative.  What we really need this year is a return to traditional conservativism.
Partisan 1:  What planet are you living on?  Are you really saying that a president who slashed taxes for the richest Americans and deregulated almost every federal agency is not a conservative?  You're nuts!
Partisan 2:  I'm nuts?  You don't even know what conservativism is.  Please provide 25-50 concrete examples of the "conservative" decisions Mr. Bush has made so I can refute them all.
Partisan 1:  I'm not going to bother listing all of the things that Bush had done that can be considered conservative.  You should provide 50-100 examples of "liberal" decisions made by Bush so I can refute then all!

At this point, further discussion of these points is useless.  This is an unfortunate case of partisan dissonance.

PARTISAN DISSONANCE EXAMPLE C:

Partisan 1:  The media is biased against Republicans.  It is obvious from the way they treated Sarah Palin.  They hate Republicans and are determined to make sure McCain doesn't win this election.  I am disgusted by the media!
Partisan 2:  The media is biased against Democrats.  Look at the way they are fawning over Sarah Palin.  Obviously these people want to make sure their corporate boss's party (the GOP) wins.  I am disgusted by the media!

At this point, further discussion of these points is useless.  This is an unfortunate case of partisan dissonance.

PARTISAN DISSONANCE EXAMPLE D:

Partisan 1:  Sarah Palin's speech was so negative and full of lies.
Partisan 2:  Palin's speech wasn't negative or full of lies.  She was telling it like it is!  She is a pit bull with lipstick on and you have no right to call her a liar.  You're a sexist pig.
Partisan 1:  Well, the Democrats would have never given a speech that stretched the truth like Palin did.  And she made fun of community organizers!  What is wrong with her?  Does she hate America?
Partisan 2:  She was not making fun of community organizers!  She was just pointing out, in her pit-bull-with-lipstick way, that Obama thinks he is ready to be president because of his experience as a community organizer.  Obviously you don't understand politics.  There is a big difference between criticizing a candidate or a party's experience and criticizing an entire group of people.
Partisan 1:  No there's not!  She was totally making fun of community organizers!  And why wouldn't she?  Did you see that there were only like three minorities at the entire convention?  Republicans have a major race problem, so "community organizers" are obviously fair game.
Partisan 2:  What?  You just called me a racist!  How dare you say I am a racist.  Why do you hate Republicans so much?
Partisan 1:  I didn't call you a racist, I said your party has a race problem.  Though I would add that several Republicans are now using racial terms to try to bring down Obama.  But that doesn't mean you are a racist!  There is a big difference between criticizing what the party does and criticizing an entire group of people.
Partisan 2:  No there's not!  You are calling all Republicans racist!

At this point, further discussion of these points is useless.  This is an unfortunate case of partisan dissonance.

Researchers have yet to find a cure for partisan dissonance.  Until that day, psychologists believe sufferers should band together to share their experiences with this disease.  Maybe if we all work together to listen to each other's struggles with PD we can make the difference in the spread of this horrible disease.  And maybe, just maybe, our children won't be forced to suffer as we have.

I'd like to make this thread a place for those us who suffer from PD to share our stories, our struggles, and our triumphs.  From one sufferer to another, I say welcome!

Thursday, September 4, 2008.

Friday, September 5, 2008.

I'm shocked to see this comparison.  I thought - indeed, I was told - that no decent human being would ever consider doing so.

In May, cbs2chicago.com began tracking city shootings and posting them on Google maps. Information compiled from our reporters, wire service reports and the Chicago Police Major Incidents log indicated that 123 people were shot and killed throughout the city between the start of Memorial Day weekend on May 26, and the end of Labor Day on Sept. 1.

According to the Defense Department, 65 soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq. About the same number were killed in Afghanistan over that same period.

Shocked, I tell you.

UPDATE:  Instapundit beat me to it.

From Real Clear Politics:

The McCain campaign must be giddy with this news, just out from Nielsen: Sarah Palin's speech generated 37.2 million viewers, just a 1.1 million viewers fewer than watch Barak Obama's Invesco Field acceptance speech. As Nielsen notes, only six networks carried Palin's speech compared with ten for Obama's.

That's remarkable. 

To me, from a political perspective, and without the benefit of seeing any polling, it seems that Palin has been a solid choice for McCain.  I had assumed that McCain's VP choice would be largely irrelevant, given the dynamics of the race.  Instead, he chose somebody who, because of the laughable coverage of her selection, has largely united Republicans behind his cause. 

She may not win him an extra ten percent of independents, but that's always been his job, not his running mate's. 

She may very well win him an extra ten percent of conservatives/Republicans, where unity was a huge concern a week ago, and which may be enough to keep this thing close. 

And if she helps him narrow the gender gap, it may be enough to win.

McCain's speech tonight is still do-or-die.  If, like Palin, he gets Obama-level viewership, it won't matter if he comes across as a condescending curmudgeon.  He has to hit a home run.

I'm watching the Republican convention right now, and Rudy Giuliani is just awesome.  Huckabee was pretty good earlier, but I thought Romney was awful.

But Rudy is just awesome right now, and it's making me a bit bittersweet now, as I wish his own campaign had displayed any of the competence he's showing tonight in support of McCain, and it looks like he's getting a great response.

The MSM is starting to sense their overreaction, and walk it back a bit:

A front-page story in The New York Times on Tuesday and articles in other news media reported that Ms. Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party for two years in the 1990’s.

The information in the Times article was based on a statement issued Monday night by Lynette Clark, the party’s chairwoman, who said that Ms. Palin joined the party in 1994 and in 1996 changed her registration to Republican.

On Tuesday night, Ms. Clark said that her initial statement was incorrect and had been based on erroneous information provided by another member of the party whom she declined to identify. The McCain campaign also disputed the Times report, saying that Ms. Palin had been registered consistently as a Republican.

After checking the party’s archives, Ms. Clark said that she could find no documentation that Governor Palin had been a member of the party.

Oops. 

Unlike some people, Sarah Palin does nothing to make me more likely to be enthusiastic about John McCain, mostly because I've been saying for some time that this election isn't really about McCain, and I stand by that. 

But the media's idiotic reponse to her selection (Meme:  "It's the vetting."   Really?  Do you want to put some more thought into that?), echoing that of the worst elements of those on the left and in the Democratic Party, is making me absolutely more enthusiastic about supporting McCain.  And I'm starting to sense I'm not the only one.

I doubt Palin, or the overblown and transparent media bloviation surrounding her, will seriously impact the dynamics of the race - it's still Obama's to lose, as it has been all along.  But I wonder, as I have for a while, if at some point the public tide will turn on this obvious and over-the-top media worship of Obama.  Will it happen before November?  Or will it happen after, during the first scandals of an Obama administration, when the public starts to ask, "Why didn't we know more about this stuff when this idiot was running?"

The MSM may very well win this election for Obama - they certainly won the Primary for him - but I also wonder if they're hastening their own decline into irrelevancy in the process.

Today's News-Gazette:

The city council voted Tuesday to convey three city-owned lots to not-for-profit groups that want to build affordable homes on them, including a lot that currently houses a mini-park across the street from King Elementary School.

Council members voted to convey the mini-park lot, at 1201 W. Beslin St., and a lot at 1405½ W. Beslin to Habitat for Humanity of Champaign County, and a third lot at 901 N. Division Ave. to Ecological Construction Laboratory for Affordable Housing Development.

The city is providing the lots for $1 each, expecting that the groups will build affordable homes there, said John Schneider, manager of the city's grants management division.

The minipark lot at 1201 W. Beslin has been the site of large gatherings and concerns about drug use, and council members didn't want those activities near a school, said Eileen Gebbe, executive director of Habitat for Humanity.

Discuss.

Yesteday's News-Gazette (forgive me, I'm still catching up...):

The city is prepared to buy several properties at the southeast corner of Neil Street and Bradley Avenue from the Urban League of Champaign County, with eventual plans to redevelop the property.

The city council will consider Tuesday authorizing the purchase of six properties for $250,000....

The properties include the former Community Day Care center, formerly operated by the Urban League, which is experiencing financial difficulties and needs to sell the properties.....

The city isn't sure what it wants to do with the properties, but will likely seek requests for proposals at some point "to see what developers have in mind," said Greg Skaggs, community development specialist with the city.

Before the city seeks proposals, it will conduct a study this fall of Neil Street between Interstate 74 and downtown, said Rob Kowalski, assistant planning director for the city.

"The zoning of that property is residential," Kowalski said.

"Although it's on a big arterial street, it's located in a residential area."

Multifamily zoning that would allow smaller apartments is a potential future use, he said.

"I don't think we're giving serious consideration to zoning it commercial, but it's still early and we have to study it," Kowalski said.

Interesting.

UPDATE:  The purchase was approved.  Rather than post another thread with today's NG article, I thought I'd just do an update.

City council members aren't sure what type of development will eventually arise on properties along Neil Street and Bradley Avenue that they agreed to purchase Tuesday night.

But they said they believe the city has a better chance of ensuring a quality development by temporarily owning the six properties at the southeast corner of Neil and Bradley.

"We want something attractive for the corridor," said council member Marci Dodds. "We don't want a bunch of junk."

Council members voted 6-2 Tuesday to authorize city officials to purchase the properties for $250,000 from the Urban League of Champaign County. Mayor Jerry Schweighart and council member Ken Pirok were opposed.

I'm trying out Google Chrome today. It seems stable enough, and very fast, but feature-lite compared to my extension-heavy install of FireFox. For IP.com, for example, it doesn't use the WYSIWYG editor for IP.com, which is also a problem with Safari.

Anybody else have any impressions yet?

Wednesday, September 3, 2008.

Today's News-Gazette:

The judge overseeing the Champaign school district's consent-decree case will hold a status conference Wednesday to discuss the progress toward meeting the goals of the decree.

The conference at the U.S. District Court in Peoria will be held in Judge Joe Billy McDade's chambers and is closed to the public.

The conference is being held at the request of the plaintiffs in the case, to update the judge "on efforts to ensure the last scheduled year of the consent decree will enable the district to accelerate progress."

The plaintiffs also requested the hearing be held in chambers rather than in open court. Last week, McDade granted the request to hold the status conference in chambers "to facilitate discussion."

Carol Ashley, the attorney for the plaintiffs, said previous hearings in 2002 and 2006 were open to the public.

"The community's presence was very valuable. Our request was not dismissive of that," she said.

But with this the last school year before the consent decree is scheduled to end, she thought the two parties could work together better and do more problem-solving in a smaller, less formal, less adversarial setting.

Discuss.

From Saturday:

Alan Kurtz of Champaign has been tabbed by county board Chairman C. Pius Weibel to fill the District 7 seat vacated by Carrie Melin, who moved out of the district....

After coming to town in 1979 to run the Bergners' department stores here, he owned and operated a Blimpies sandwich store at Fourth and Green streets – the site of repeated floods in the 1980s and 1990s.

Kurtz was a leader in efforts that eventually established the Boneyard Detention Basin.

Congratulations to Mr. Kurtz.

This is one more example of why I argued that it was irresponsble for Sen. Frerichs and Rep. Jakobsson to once again follow their leaders by passing an unbalanced budget and defering critical spending decisions to Gov. Blagojevich:

The governor was given an unbalanced budget, Quinn said, and "he did the responsible thing."

"These aren't decisions we take lightly," she said. "We didn't want to make them, but given a $2 billion deficit we have little choice."

Quinn said the governor met with each agency and developed a management plan as part of making up the deficit.

Overall, four state agencies will cut their work forces this fall because of the $1.4 billion Blagojevich took out of a state budget he said wasn't balanced.

The cuts include 179 positions at the Department of Children and Family Services and 73 at the Department of Human Services. Another 127 DCFS workers will keep their jobs but be moved to positions or areas where there are vacancies.

As for the parks and historic sites, the decision to close them is one that will not change this year, Quinn said.

Several historic sites, including Lincoln Log Cabin near Charleston and Bryant Cottage in Bement, are scheduled for closure Oct. 1.

Kickapoo State Park near Oakwood, Moraine View State Park near LeRoy and Weldon Springs State Park near Clinton are among the parks scheduled for closure Nov. 1, according to information from the governor's office.

I notice that the article had no quotes from either Democratic legislator who had originally voted for this budget.  I hope someone - if not the media, then their constituents - will ask them why they wanted the Governor to make these sorts decisions, and why doing so was good for their districts.

Tuesday, September 2, 2008.

Labor Day open thread...

David Frum from NR has been a critic of the Palin choice.  He put up an e-mail Saturday that contained a nugget that I really liked and to a large degree agree with.

My final thought is that (as you know), the GOP is in desperate need of re-branding. Palin does bring that ... my only regret is that McCain had to reach so far down into the GOP talent pool in order to accomplish that. That says volumes about the state of the party. 

Since there isn't one today yet, I'll create one.