Congressional Pay Raise

A lot of people have been complaining about President Obama’s recent executive order, which will raise salaries of members of Congress by a pretty small amount next year. Technically, it’s probably better not to think of it as a pay raise but rather an end to a pay freeze for federal employees that has been in effect since 2010. (Members of Congress actually haven’t seen a raise since 2009.) And so it isn’t simply a pay raise for Congress; it also impacts all federal employees and that was seemingly the main motivation for the executive order.

Was it a not-so-subtle gambit in the fiscal cliff negotiations? Perhaps. Did it fail to make any difference? Perhaps.

This is, of course, the least productive Congress since the 1940s so I’d be happier if they actually had to start paying us instead of the other way around. But one way to deal with such historically bad legislating is to vote them out of office next time you have an opportunity rather than to keep voting for people who claim obstructionism as their primary legislative goal.

HT: Anonymous Question Asker

lazersilberstein asked: i kind of don't get your stance on nittel nacht. what do you expect people, who suffered for thousands of years under christendom, to do on the day its (false messianic, in their opinion) founder was born? there's a huge power imbalance that it seems you're ignoring.

I understand the historical reasons for the things that Jews did on Christmas Eve … especially not going out for a walk when people might attack you. In fact, here’s what I wrote in my original post:

I “get” the fact that Christmas Eve was once a bad time for Jews, an occasion for violence against them as part of the celebration of others.

But I can’t figure out two things:

1. As I wrote in my original post, why “anyone — especially a pious person — might depriving himself of the opportunity to perform a mitzvah in order to better deprive others of any good that might come of it.”

2. Why Jews, especially in America, would continue to “celebrate” Nittle Nacht today when repression and intolerance of Jews is (relatively) so low.

But to answer your question specifically, I suppose that I expect people to do what I did: Spend time with friends and family, watch a movie, read a book, and then head off to bed. I just don’t see any point to working against the spiritual well-being of others, whether or not one is on the receiving end of repression or intolerance.

Neal Stephenson

sivrt replied to your photo: Holiday Reading List

Have you read anything else by Stephenson?

I have.

I read Snow Crash back in college and really liked it. I have no idea how I found it or why I picked it up. I wonder whether it holds up at all now.

I also read The Baroque Cycle (Quicksilver; The Confusion; System of the World) several years ago; those were thousands of pages that took me a couple of years to push through but I’d say it was generally worthwhile even if I felt like I should have kept a chart in order to figure out where I was in history and what all of the characters were up to at any given moment.

Then I took a break for a few years and now I’m looking forward to Reamde.

I like the sweep of Stephenson’s books and, of course, the nerdity of it all.

Anonymous asked: I guess you won't answer the question. I was just wondering which side you leaned towards. Jeez.

I apologize for not directly answering your question about whether I lean toward the Democrats or the Republicans. I honestly thought you had been in a coma for the past couple of months.

You see, I write this blog. There are something like 2,500 blog posts here that are filled with my opinions about various matters relating to politics, philosophy, human rights, and pop culture. Somewhere in there, you will almost certainly find information about my thoughts on the recent election. Reading the blog is almost certainly the best way to find out what I think.

The easiest place to look for everything I’ve written about Obama is under the “Obama” tag. And the easiest place to look for everything I’ve written about Romney is under the “Romney” tag. Something or other might have been missed, of course, so there’s always my “Politics” tag too. There’s been a lot of it this year. That’s why I tag things.

So, explore; have fun; the blog is your oyster!

Anonymous asked: Are you an Obama or Romney supporter?

The election happened in early November. President Obama was reelected. It’s almost the end of December now and, as far as I know, Mitt Romney isn’t asking for anyone’s support for anything.

I’m glad that you’re out of the coma.

rightsided asked: Thoughts on Steven Crowder being assaulted by two union protesters?

I think hitting is not the way to solve problems, regardless of who’s doing the hitting or who’s being hit.

To reiterate, hitting is wrong.

shakespearean-insults-deactivat asked: Thou art a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy worsted-stocking knave; a lily-liver'd, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing, superserviceable, finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd in way!

So there’s a Tumblr devoted to insulting other Tumblr users with a bunch of amusing Shakespearean insults all mashed together?

Terrific.

Anonymous asked: Hi Dr Kohen, in response to a recent post, about the comments about "uneven" killing. I would say that pointing out the casualty disparity IS worthwhile, though not necessarily in this particular instance. Israel is the greatest power in the region, and I think the argument that their military responses can be dangerously disproportionate is a valid one. Thanks, also, for speaking more about this conflict. I agree with much of what you've been saying and wish more people would listen!

I don’t want to be read as suggesting that it’s unimportant to discuss Israel’s disproportionate responses to rocket attacks from Gaza (or suicide bombers or whatever).

As I’ve suggested before, it’s pretty clear that the Israeli government intends both to use overwhelming force as a deterrent (which they must know at this point doesn’t work) and to collectively punish Palestinians for the actions undertaken by militants in their midst. This is, I think, bad policy and a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

The mistake being made a great many critics of Israel is in the argument that Israel shouldn’t use airstrikes against Gaza in response to Hamas’ ineffective rockets because those rockets are ineffective. In other words, the argument implies, Israel shouldn’t respond to Hamas’ aggression because it will do so much more effectively than the aggression itself. Or, perhaps, Hamas just isn’t dangerous enough to merit a response from Israel (which would be, by virtue of their superior military technology alone, far more harmful to Palestinians than Hamas could ever be to Israelis). Or, as was definitely the case with one post I reblogged, that it would be good if more Israelis could be killed to balance out all of the casualties inflicted on Palestinians.

But it’s not illegal or even morally wrong to use your country’s weapons against a declared enemy, even if your enemy is far weaker. In fact, I can only assume that such a scenario would be every military commander’s dream and the hope of every citizen whose country is engaged in a conflict.

It’s far more important, I’d say, to talk about collective punishment and the Geneva Conventions than to point out that more civilians are killed in Gaza by Israeli airstrikes than are killed in Israel by Hamas rockets. The former is a serious issue that, at some point, might be used against Israeli leaders at the polls or even in a court of law; the latter is just the obvious byproduct of a strong defense and a strong offense opposing a weak offense and no defense to speak of.

jgreendc asked: Favorite whisky cocktail?

My favorite whisky cocktail is whisky by itself in a tumbler with nothing else.

excitablehonky asked: What are we to make of it if Staff Sgt. Robert Bales is executed for his role in the Kandahar massacre when there are not only doubts about whether he acted alone, but how the TBI and PTSD he sustained during three tours of duty may have contributed to his actions?

I’d say we ought not to be particularly surprised.

If we use the death penalty in this case, we’ll feel really fine about ourselves, telling ourselves that we care a great deal about justice — not only for victims in the U.S. but for people everywhere — and that we’ve rooted out the one bad apple from amongst the heroic men and women we’ve sent overseas.

We’ll be wrong, of course, but at least we won’t have to ask more challenging questions about the intersection of mental health, warfare, and criminal justice … which is what we like about the death penalty.