Non-grafty arms deals

This one, I’m not sure it’s actually a story for the reason people might think it is:  What’s the actual nature of the quid pro quo, such that it appears?  There’s this requirement the State dept. sign off on arms deals to authoritarian regimes.   But they always sign off, don’t they?  That’s what we do in the US.  We have arms makers, and they supply a lot of despots… this has been going on a long time, its commerce, it gets approved….  It would be one thing if the State dept had been denying these deals before Hillary was Sec, and started approving them after, but no one demonstrates that and I have my doubts it’s the case.  There is the thing obviously where countries make donations to the Clinton foundation with some expectation that it’s ingratiating on some level but they are not actually getting favors from the Clintons…  the Clintons can be criticized for their role in this gambit to a point, but it’s not graft.  Which they’ve done, they’ve done graft.  Pardons for contributions, etc.  This ain’t that.

K, so while I was writing this yesterday, the Vox-like metric I had in mind was furnished.

Still, I could see increased approval of arms deals to ‘belligerents’ being more easily explained by this administration’s diminished deference to Israel, something like that.  Just to say, still not grafty though there’s a superficial correlation to the Clinton Foundation donations.  See, the donors think they are buying something with the donations, but they are probably not…

Jots w/ dots 5/27

I said that:  On Pedal Pub, Newscut cut goes with bullet point hot takes.  Like I did.  Related:  I like my answer better, a churlish lefty bicyclist thing.  And I implied that, re disdain for suburbanites

Grubergate:   Olympia Snowe’s perspective isn’t persuasive, she’s too often the apostate used to rebut Republicans.

I want to have that discussion, where we debate the left’s plan to allocate how much of the economy gets devoted to sneakers and deodorant.  It’s a Mill’s utilitarian thing I think.  I’m against utilitarianism.  You need a lot of ostensibly frivolous commerce in the economy such that you can float pacemaker and antibiotics research on the churn, stuff like that.  You need abundance.

Might be fair to say  This nostalgic lament is typical, but it was the case for me like quite a few others.  The thing that made me love it and prepared me to play at a (…very low) organized level was thousands of hours of unorganized sandlot ball in my youth.   My kids don’t play BTW, they were bored to tears and then failing to hit the ball and being challenged by it is not something they were ever consumed with…

Well, ESPN mlb does think the Twins are vapory and will regress to the mean.  IE, the baseline metrics are mediocre and given a big enough sample size the teams performance will reflect that…. Good golly, last night with the relief pitcher change in the 9th… that was something unique.  Perkins comes in to close with runners on, he’s a lefty.  Sandoval is a switch hitter.   It’s almost a commandment like rule that the batter in this case goes to the side where he has the assumed platoon advantage, which would mean right handed for Sandoval.  But he doesn’t, cuz lefties are oddly hitting like .300 against Perkins with righties hitting .150 or so.  So Sandoval bats left.  He did hit an infield single or something with no runners scoring.  Twins did win.  But… that’s what they do with stats these days, convinces them to violate the commandments at times.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s