Heinlein:

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

I’m not quite sure where this is from originally.

“Now, I know folks think I’m a ‘city boy,’ but I do appreciate listening to country music because like all Americans, I appreciate the broad and indelible impact that country has had on our nation. It’s touched countless lives, it’s influenced all genres of music, it’s helped us make the American people more hopeful, it’s captured our restlessness and resilience, and told so much of our story in the process.
“After all, that’s what country music is all about — storytelling. It’s about folks telling their life story the best way they know how — stories of love and longing, hope and heartbreak, pride and pain. Stories that help us celebrate the good times and get over the bad times. Stories that are quintessentially American. After all, name me any other country that would have produced a Hank Williams or a Willie Nelson.
“And like all great art, a great country song also has a commitment to truth — to telling the truth like it is, without pulling any punches. And generations of performers have honored that commitment. Harlan Howard proclaimed country music “three chords and the truth.

But she has no cause, unless it is not to make a mistake, and has no passion, unless it is not to show any, and lacks intellectual brilliance, unless it is disguised under a veil of soporific competence until she takes her seat on the court. We shall see.

I think it’s obvious that the political game that is the judicial nomination process precludes candidates from expressing actual views on issues such as capital punishment and affirmative action and, especially, abortion. “Soporific competence,” then, increases a candidate’s likelihood of confirmation. I’ve made this point before, but it seems unfair to interpret nominee’s apparent blandness as a sign of “lacking passion or intellectual brilliance.” It’s rational behavior given the circumstances.

This is the sad state of both liberalism and American politics. First-class legal brains are not even nominated lest some senator break into hives at the prospect of encountering a genuinely new idea. The ceiling is further lowered by the need to season the court with diversity, a wonderful idea as long as brilliance is not compromised. The result has been the rout of sexism: The women are as mediocre as the men.
From all we know, Sotomayor is no Scalia. She is no Thurgood Marshall, either, or even a John Roberts, who is leading the court in his own direction. She will be confirmed. But if she is not, liberalism will not have lost much of a champion or a thinker.

I can grant Cohen that many of our best legal minds are bypassed because they do not fit the narrow mold of acceptability (though I’d love to see some evidence, either that the excluded are really that special or that our current Justices are really that mediocre). But this a failing of the Senate confirmation process, not the candidates themselves. Sotomayor is thorough and cautious, and has proven to be exceedingly well-prepared for the unnecessary three-day confirmation circus. Does her sidestepping of controversial issues on two cases show a lack of intellectual capacity? Does a judge need a ‘cause’ to be considered brilliant?

Timothy Egan has an article about the methamphetamine epidemic in small towns in America, which poked holes in the myth of small town righteousness:

In truth, neither of these images does justice to the complexities of small-town life. And neither version does anything to advance the cause of an honest rural policy, something that might help some of the worst casualties of global economic tumult. People in small towns are more likely to be poor, more likely to lack health insurance, more likely, if they are young, to move out, according to government statistics. In the invisible margins off the interstate, the story about decline takes place in slow motion, rarely attracting a headline.

The sad part is that the “small town virtue” meme really does a disservice to areas that are getting poorer, and losing jobs and population. From a national perspective, these social problems are cloaked by a nostalgic vision of football and apple pie, and crime and drug abuse are disregarded because, stereotypically, they are “urban” problems.

In the meantime, a cynical group of people exploit the ignorance and fears of rural, under-educated Americans for personal and political gain.

Using my basic knowledge of economics, it seems that these players have an incentive to win, yes, but a bigger incentive to put up gaudy home run and RBI numbers. Though modern statistical analysis dismisses these tools as outdated, they still are what get players recognition, MVP honors, and huge paydays.

Unfortunately, the situation becomes one where each individual acting in their own interest actually hurts the team. In the Rangers’ case, it’s a matter of the hitters swinging for the fences rather than working walks, getting on base, avoiding a strikeout, etc. The answer? Align financial rewards with better metrics, of which there are many. Or align rewards with the team’s performance.

The latter suggestion is unheard of in baseball and in all sports. Simply put, players are paid for their individual achievements, not their teams’ success. There is the old free-rider problem: a player is tempted to benefit from the exploits of others rather than pulling their weight. Some teams do offer contracts with incentives for championships, but more are incentives for individual honors, such as MVP and league leader awards.

If I were the owner of the Rangers, I’d sign offer sheets to all my players with a playoff bonus of $500,000 per series. Or I could prorate those bonuses to reflect the contributions given by each player. I’d use the revenue from playoff attendance and advertising to pay these bonuses.

Hank Williams – the grandfather of country music. During his hard, short, and booze-soaked life, his unmistakable twang and unironic lyrics are unmatched. His best songs are genre staples, often covered yet still powerful in their simple urgency and sorrow: “I Saw the Light,” “Lovesick Blues,” “Your Cheating Heart,” “You Win Again.”

Townes Van Zandt, Live at the Old Quarter
Poet and Texas singer/songwriter. His songs are complex, thoughtful, and understated. Though his studio and live albums can be uneven, Live at the Old Quarter in Houston, Texas and Rear-View Mirror are magnificent renditions of his best-known songs, and I think his self-titled album includes some lesser-known classics. His “Pancho and Lefty” was a big hit for Willie Nelson and probably his most famous track, but merely scratches the surface of his lyric prowess. My personal favorites include “To Live is to Fly,” “Our Mother the Mountain,” “Lungs,” and “Be Here to Love Me,” especially the live versions.

Guy Clark, Old No. 1
With Townes and Steve Earle, Guy is one-third of the triumvirate of Texas musicians who exemplify what I think are the best things about country music and about music in general.

Steve Earle, Train a Comin’
I love the evolution of Steve Earle’s musical career, from the angry and confused young man who created Copperhead Road and Guitar Town, endured a downward spiral of drugs and jailtime, and came back even better. The acoustic, stripped-down Train a Comin’ is probably my favorite album, with “Hometown Blues,” ‘Mercenary Song” and “Tom Ames’s Prayer.” Transcendental Blues explores novel styles and genres, and his newer The Revolution Starts Now and Washington Square Serenade contain political songs such as “Steve’s Hammer (for Pete)” and “Rich Man’s War.” Also, his tribute to Townes van Zandt “Fort Worth Blues” is worth listening to.

Johnny Cash, At Fulsom Prison
Everyone knows and loves Johnny Cash. One of the purposes of this page is to enlighten those who think of country music as the Man in Black and a bunch of hillbillies. Still, At Fulsom Prison is rightly considered one of the best country albums ever, and you can’t get much better than “Cocaine Blues” or “25 Minutes to Go.”

Wayne Hancock, A-Town Blues
Wayne “the Train” Hancock is officially (yeah right) classified as “juke joint swing,” which combines western swing, honky tonk, blues, and big band. His songs are old-school: driven by steel guitar and bass, they involve drinking, dancing, and life on the road. His voice has a sharp edge and his easy rapport with the back-up musicians reminds me of Bob Wills. I like “Thunderstorms and Neon Signs,” “A-Town Blues,” and “Johnny Law.”

Dale Watson, Cheatin’ Heart Attack
Dale is a familiar sight in the Austin music scene, playing regularly at the Continental Club and Ginny’s Little Longhorn. It seems as though he’s very into being ‘authentic’ and carrying on the Austin honkytonk tradition, especially in songs such as “Nashville Rash.” His live shows draw heavily on western swing and are great two-steppin’ fun.

Hank Williams III, Straight to Hell
Hank 3 highlights the next generation of country outlaws. His brand of aggressive, metal-infused music struggles to break free of his status as country royalty even as he remembers “the legends” in songs like “Country Heroes.” His anti-Nashville, pro-drug stance of Straight to Hell comes to the forefront in “Dick in Dixie” and “Crazed Country Rebel,” but also falls flat in other places. Sometimes I wonder if Hank 3 will become more mature and nuanced as he ages, a la Steve Earle.

Gary P. Nunn, Viva Terlingua!
An important secondary figure in the Texas country scene of the 1970s, Gary P. Nunn recorded with Jerry Jeff Walker, Willis Alan Ramsey, and the Lost Gonzo Band. His “London Homesick Blues,” the last cut off JJR’s Viva Terlingua!, is as close to an anthem for Austin, Texas as it gets: “I wanna go home with the armadillo/Good country music from Amarillo and Abilene/The friendliest people and the prettiest women you ever seen.”

Not surprisingly, the larger American media outlets have focused on President Obama. Will he stand behind Mousavi’s supporters? Should he remain neutral? How will this affect his administration’s diplomatic policy? I don’t think this is really the most interesting angle, but it’s hardly surprising.

Instead, I prefer the exhaustive, even tedious investigation that most people skip past. I want to dissect the arguments and assumptions behind the thorniest problems that confront our society. So, here’s my proposal: I’m going to start a weekly investigation on a complex topic. Preferably, these will be real problems, on which people hold strong and opposing positions. I’ll spend the first day brainstorming, then the rest of the week researching, parsing, collecting data, and teasing out distinctions and intuitions. By the end of the week, I’ll try to have a full-length essay on the subject that will shed new light on the matter. I will challenge people to examine their strong beliefs in new ways, and hopefully jump-start stalled dialogues.

Subject Brainstorm:

Abortion
Capital Punishment
NCAA Amateur Athletics
Healthcare Reform
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
American Public Education
Philosophy

I also take requests.