Sadly, No!

Sorry for the slow posts, it’s now our other dog’s turn to be sick and in need of ’round the clock care. Here’s hoping the little guy can get better soon.

In other news, there’s a new Star Wars movie out and it’s like 1977 all over again. I assume all of you are wearing corduroy pants and velour shirts with collars big enough to be makeshift airplane hangars, and tube socks up to the knee, to really get the full effect. I saw the new film, I liked it, and I think it’s just about the best Star Wars movie, one could expect out of JJ Abrams. Although I’m still kinda sad they passed over Jodorwsky again. And David Lynch, Woody Allen, Quentin Tarantino,and Werner Herzog too.

So just for fun, how come they can’t show a planet that doesn’t have earth standard 1g of gravity? What about a scene set with the characters wearing spacesuits in space? (the answer to that one is probably “they have droids for that sort of thing”). Now that we’ve seen desert planets and water planets and planets entirely covered by a single city, to extend the single use per planet zoning, are we going to see the strip mall planet? The light industry planet? The offsite data storage planet? The suburb planet? The farm planet? The amusement park planet? The call center planet? Since the Galactic Republic has existed for thousands of years, there have been spacecraft for thousands of years, and more than a few giant space battles, how come these planets aren’t covered by craters from falling space wrecks? Orbital velocity for a planet the same mass and size as earth is 17,000 mph. What keep all those wrecked spaceships, some of which are miles long, from hitting the planet below like the Chixulub meteor that killed the dinosaurs? And that’s not even counting hyperspace accidents, a ship traveling at light speed could pulverize a planet just as well as the Death Star for one billionth of the cost. Or are planets being popped like an overripe pumpkin every other week or so and it’s so common it doesn’t make the news? Why do bad guys keep thinking that blowing up planets is the ultimate expression of military might given that any jackass with an extra hyperspace capable spaceship and a brick to lay on the gas pedal could do the same?

How come every redneck can afford a spaceship, but computer graphics are stuck in the 1970s while at the same time droids are rolling around with human level intelligence and the capability to (for example) speak in six million different languages? They can clone up an entire army but not a hand for Luke Skywalker, or if he had moral qualms, for Darth Vader who sure wouldn’t have?

Other people have already offered up quicker and no doubt more comprehensive coverage of the massacre in San Bernadino. And yet I am still going to write a post on it because people still kept painting after Leonardo daubed out the Mona Lisa. And if I didn’t keep trying to prop up the moldering remnant of Sadly, No! my supply of theoretical Soros bucks would dry right the hell up.

So a few people shot up a county building in San Bernadino CA yesterday leaving 14 dead and leading to a pair of shootouts with the police that left 2 people dead. I’m told it was actually the second mass shooting yesterday, but I haven’t been able to find details on the first. This is exactly the kind of shit we will see more of until we can control access to firearms in this country. I’ve got some ideas. 100% tax on all firearms and firearm accessories (and devices similar to firearms like bows, crossbows and spear guns) and 1000% tax on ammunition including tools and supplies to manufacture ammunition, and using the proceeds to fund the BATF for more enforcement. Impose the same restrictions on firearm advertisements that already exist for tobacco products. For firearms owners, a maximum of two hunting firearms with a magazine capacity of five or fewer rounds. If they want handguns or non-hunting weapons, that’s where the “well regulated militia part comes into play” they have to qualify on their own dime annually at BATF ranges to a level equal to or exceeding that expected of infantry recruits and maintain a fitness level equal to that of expected of soldiers their age in the National Guard. Owning a firearm should be subject to similar licensure and insurance liability rules as owning a vehicle. Shut down gun shows that sell firearms without a background check. Clamp down on “firearms dealers” that only have the license so they can own a machine gun, or sell out of their home. Require a firearms dealer to operate a storefront, meeting minimum standards of security and record keeping. Gun buybacks. These are we should be doing. These are all examples of concrete action to reduce gun violence and the availability of deadly weapons. That is what we are demanding of our elected leaders, not stale platitudes and or hypocritical appeals to god to reduce violence.

Naturally calls for action from our elected leaders instead of prayer, have Rod Dreher in a tizzy. He calls it ‘prayer shaming’. Prayer Shaming: The View From Jesusland

We have reached the point in our culture in which leading voices on the Left feel compelled to shout from the rooftops condemnation on Christians for offering something as ordinary and decent as prayers for atrocity victims as a first response to news of the killings.

Despite his theatrics, “people” aren’t being shamed for offering prayers. Elected leaders who chose to do nothing but publicly pray instead of doing their goddamn jobs are being shamed. People being paid off by the merchants of hot leaded death are praying in public for healing and an end to violence and think that’s all they have to do. I don’t think the American Left cares that Republicans are appealing to god on this issue like they do on every other freaking issue, it’s who they are, it’s what they do. But on other issues like, for example, abortion or access to affordable health care, they back up their tedious god inspired moralizing with legislative action. Granted, leftists and Democrats are horrified by that legislative action, but they aren’t praying and calling it a job well done. On issues where they actually want to make a change, elected Republicans are happy to pound a Bible and vote. So today Rod Dreher has a sad because people aren’t putting up with that kind of hypocrisy anymore, and once again he pulls out his ‘persecuted christian’ narrative to prove it’s all about him and his hurt feelings, and not the ongoing war on non-bulletproof Americans.

Yesterday, Turkish F-16s shot down a Russian SU-24 attack aircraft that they claim violated Turkish airspace. There are conflicting reports on whether or not the crew survived, but right now, the consensus seems to be “no”. We live in interesting times my friends. The niggling fear that Moscow might escalate a touchy international incident into a full blown war, just takes me back to the heady carefree days of the 1980s when shoulder pads were huge and apocalyptic nightmares of nuclear annihilation were the hot retro craze.

From what I gather, Russian forces had been bombing Turkmen (ethnic Turks living in Syria) villages for weeks, and been warned by Turkey for weeks to stop. So, yesterday, the Turks proved they weren’t bluffing. There is an armed group in Turkey formed of mostly of Turkmen, and they have been opposed to the Assad regime since the beginning of the civil war, and according to Robert Farley, ISIS is nowhere near the site. (I Will Send an Su-24 Fencer to Remind You of My Love)
So, what I see here is that for all of the chaos and ill will that ISIS is generating, Turkey and Russia spend more time pursing their own agendas in Syria (for Turkey that means bombing Kurds, for Russia that means dropping dumb bombs on the population centers that oppose the Assad regime) than they do actually fighting ISIS.

Here’s hoping that cooler heads will prevail and that in 20 years time veterans of all sides of this conflict can continue the struggle in a series of hotly contested beach volleyball games organized by humanitarian charities.

Some people just want to watch the world burn

It’s a new day, a new week and a weekend full of deadly bombings. And in the wake of bombings and massacres in Paris, Beirut and Baghdad and a week ago in Kenya, we have to wonder, is this leading up to something? Were these the actions of a few dozen or so wanna-be Gavrilo Princips hoping that they could spark off another great war? I can’t know. I’m just a dumb guy in the Midwest. The only time I’ve ever been to Paris was about nine months before I was born. So, I have a connection to Paris, albeit a remote one. My views on this situation are unlikely to be surprising, i.e. treat it like a criminal investigation, gather evidence arrest people, and repeat until the whole bunch have been rolled up. My advice on what not to do? bomb people indiscriminately. I’m sure the usual gang of right wing idiots are out there saying idiotic shit, but I really don’t care to wade through it and give them the page views.

Just remember, people revert to type when they are scared. Violent people will advocate violent courses of action. And violent courses of action empower violent people. So as a thinking person, am I just the fun house mirror of people like Charles Krauthammer who thinks that every crisis means only two things, that Obama is bad and that we should bomb somebody, preferably Iran? I don’t think so. While I do think that all wars are bad, I also think that some wars need to be fought. I think that western aggression will only serve to make Daesh more legitimate in the eyes of the Muslim world. How many times are western nations going to fall for the “start a war after a terrorist attack” gambit? Does anyone remember WWI? The Second Gulf War? Any kind of plan will last about 20 seconds after the bullets start flying. I don’t freaking understand the people whose first instinct when they see a fire is go grab a can of gasoline and start pouring as fast as they can.

[Sneaky photo edit by OBS]

“I am not a crank. Also, there are too many states these days. Please eliminate three.”

[Credit to, well, everybody since we’re laughing all over the internet, but AFAICT, a M. Bouffant comment at alicublog was the first reference to Ben’s wonderful idiocy.]

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

So, life continues to be rough, although ever so slightly smoother than a week ago. Someday I hope to be able to visit South Africa in time to eat the strawberries. That day will not be soon. Unless one of my loyal readers is able to hire me for the all expenses paid position of world traveling seasonal produce taster. Which would be a pretty good gig, I imagine. However, here, in this world, I get the opportunity to offer my thoughts on one of David Brooks’ latest columns

A sensible version of…

David Brooks wants to vote for a political outsider. But not the actual political outsiders that are running, No, they are far too populist, far too crass, far too willing to try and get actual Republican voters to send them money and eventually vote for them. David Brooks has fashioned a Mary Sue political outsider that has all of the opinions and policy preferences of David Brooks, and he’s eager to throw his vote for this being of pure David Brooksian wish fulfillment. So let us play in the ivory tower of David Brooks’ fondest imaginings and track mud all over the carpets.

As a Broderesque windbag from way back, David Brooks has a naive faith in the power of bipartisanship, that would be understandable in a bright ten year old, but is utterly inexcusable in someone who has watched politics in action in the US for more than one election cycle. As he imagines candidate Totally not David Brooks would say:

But I’ve been paying close attention and it seems to me that of all the problems that face the nation, two stand out. The first is that we have a polarized, dysfunctional, semi-corrupt political culture that prevents us from getting anything done. To reverse that gridlock we’ve got to find some policy area where there’s a basis for bipartisan action.

The second big problem is that things are going badly for those in the lower half of the income distribution.

Well, there’s his first problem. He thinks that the two big problems in the US are 1)bipartisanship and 2)tough times for the poorest half of Americans. The big trouble is, no one agrees with him. Republicans variously think the biggest threat to America, is in no particular order: the perfidy of Democrats, secular humanism, socialism, immigration, ISIS and or Muslim terrorism, Obamacare, Social Security and Medicare, etc ad nauseum. Democrats tend to think the biggest problems are in no particular order: the terrible state of education, the terrible state of infrastructure, income inequality, the corruption of Republicans, racism & sexism, maintenance and expansion of the social safety net including the expansion of Medicare, Social Security & Obamacare. David Brooks imagines there is a broad overlap of issues upon which legislators of good will can agree. The biggest mistake of this approach is that he imagines there exists a majority in congress of legislators of good will. Legislators of good will can’t get the time of day from much of the American electorate. There is much less agreement on the issues facing America than he imagines. Hell, even the conservative half of the lower 50% of incomes in America probably think they are a lottery ticket or one oppressive government regulation away from getting rich.

He goes on to say that getting families out of “bad neighborhoods” and into good ones will improve their incomes. You know what? he says a lot of superficially sensible horseshit. He found a study that says taking people out of bad neighborhoods and putting them in more affluent neighborhoods eventually makes them more prosperous. Which he thinks is some kind of answer to poverty. And it might be if poverty in America was a guy named Doug and his wife and two or three kids. But the poorest half of Americans number over 150 million people, and people live where they do for reasons sometimes they’d be delighted to move to a place with more economic opportunity, sometimes they will cling to their homes with a tenacity that borders on suicidal. What do you suppose David Brooks has to say to convince people to move whose families have been living in the same house for more than a century? What could he offer to induce people to move away from their beloved relatives? People aren’t as mobile as some giant bank’s hedge fund’s investment portfolio. There are non-trivial barriers to moving, and its rare that households can pick up and go on a whim (or on the advice of David Brooks which amounts to even less than a whim). Mr Brooks imagines that there is bipartisan consensus on improving the lot of the poorest Americans when an entire party gets reelected in landslides promising to cut services to that exact same demographic. Has he ever lived in a suburb? Has he ever heard the term ‘block busting’? how does he imagine the wealthy suburbanites will react to the arrival of the very same people their parents and their grandparents fled the cities to avoid?

He spouts more advice:

This will mean doing some things Republicans like. We’ve got to devolve a lot of power from Washington back to local communities. These neighborhoods can’t thrive if they are not responsible for themselves. Then we’ve got to expand charter schools. The best charter schools radiate diverse but strong cultures of achievement. Locally administered social entrepreneurship funds could help churches and other groups expand their influence.

Where the hell does he get this? How does he go from wanting to improve neighborhoods to imagining that charter schools are the answer? And as an atheist, I gotta object to his “empowering churches” crap, churches already get far too many giveaways from the government, and in any kind of benevolent utopia such as David seems to want to construct, they’d be paying income and property tax just like everyone else. If churches want to do things commonly described as charity like feeding the hungry and healing the sick, that’s fine they can get a tax deduction for that, just like everyone else.

I could fisk the whole thing, but I find the thought more than a little depressing. His whole dream could be popped by watching 10 minutes of C-span when they show congress in session, but he can’t be bothered. He’s like professor Harold Hill in the ‘Music Man’ only instead of bewailing the morals of a pool playing public and trying to sell musical instruments, he’s bewailing the fact that society doesn’t mirror the land of frictionless sphere-people of uniform density that live in his head and trying to sell us straw men.
So, play to your strengths David Brooks, go in with a computer game publisher and write sim-suburb where the only way to win is to build the most heteronormative, theocratic, charter-school-attending, gated community, little Galt’s gulch that you can. In the meantime, could you stop telling us how to win the game in your head?

It’s time again. Victor Davis Hanson wrote another column. To be fair, he writes columns faster than I can compose my criticism of them, but I never said he was lazy. His most recent column “Moral Equivalence in the Middle East” Moral Equivalence in the Middle East should start ringing warning bells at the first word. If VDH has shown any understanding of morals more sophisticated than “winners write the histories” I haven’t seen it. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that’s his only understanding of morals, and he thinks it’s a statement of how reality is defined rather than a sad commentary on the veracity of the histories we read and a reminder that the so called ‘bad guys’ of history rarely get a chance to put their version of events in front of the serious student of history. So anyways, VDH is very concerned that when Palestinians assault Jews in Israel, and are machine gunned down in response, that it makes Israeli security and police look like bloodthirsty butchers in the eyes of the newsreading public. Here is a representative paragraph from the column, it will provide us more than enough to go on.

In short, the present U.S. government — which is subsidizing the Palestinians to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year [1]— is incapable of distinguishing those who employ terrorist violence from the victims against whom the terrorism is directed. [2] But why is the Obama administration — which can apparently distinguish those who send out drones from those who are blown up by them on the suspicion of employing terrorist violence — morally incapable of calling out Palestinian violence?[3] After all, in the American case, we blow away suspects whom we think are likely terrorists; in the Israeli instance, they shoot or arrest those who have clearly just committed a terrorist act.[4]

So [1] since when does the US government send a dime to Palestine? OK, fine 20 seconds with google tells me that in recent years we send about $400 million in foreign aid annually to Palestine. But to be fair, we have to look at the other side too, because right now we are in the middle of a ten year aid package to Israel with a total value of $30 billion, much of which is allowed or even encouraged to be spent on weapons.

[2] Now we go to his claim that the US can’t tell the difference between terrorism and victims of terrorism. Has he seen what Gaza looks like these days? Do a Google image search for Gaza. you’ll see piles of rubble, you’ll see explosions, you’ll see corpses, and you see victims. How are they terrorists and the Israelis that are determined to level the place terrorists? Is he letting the victors write the histories again? does he think that the Israelis can magically turn the corpses of families into dead terrorists with a single disingenuous press release? Dead civilians are dead civilians and no amount of Palestinians attacking Israelis with knives is going to turn them into the Wehrmacht part II. But what about the rocket attacks? don’t those count as terrorism? Well they sure are scary. But when hastily erected launchers manage to do more than wreck someone’s garage give me a call. The Gaza strip is tiny. If Israel spent a tiny fraction of the money they spend on “Iron Dome” and air raids on a few hundred guys with binoculars and maybe night vision goggles, they could stop each and every rocket attack in the setup phase.

[3] He’s got the Obama administration dead to rights here. Drones are even less discriminate that some goon with a machine gun. Killing the occasional wedding party or family gathering is too high a price to pay for maybe killing a some guy unreliable allies tell us is a terrorist once in a while. Even VDH isn’t wrong all the time.

[4] Way to hand wave away the difference between assault and attempted murder and terrorism. Or better yet, show that there isn’t a difference. The press are highlighting a pointless murder circle jerk where radical Palestinians react to violent oppression with violence and inspire even more violent reaction from their oppressors. This is the kind of violence that would have made Al Pacino’s Scarface call for a time out followed by a nap and some level headed discussion.

VDH is trying to explain that genocide is a perfectly acceptable response to terrorism. VDH is not using any kind of moral code that I would recognize as such. According to him, the only answer to violence is more violence. And to him I say “Way to go, jackass.” Now it’s Palestine Delenda Est. What’s next, Lebanon, North Korea, Russia? Way to excuse conquest and oppression, and way to call for the peace of “no one left alive.” That isn’t peace, that’s a call for the war to end all wars, and human life on earth.

I’m having a rough time. but enough about me, how are you doing? And more importantly, how are the people to whom we entrust the solemn duty of serving us the preferred propaganda of their corporate masters and the crackpot billionaires that own them?

Here’s Jonah Goldberg being a hack again.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425158/obama-gun-control-politicizing-not-politics?target=author&tid=897

Obama has called for us to take common sense measures to reduce gun crime, especially mass shootings. He points out that Great Britain and Australia have virtually eliminated gun crimes, and have had no mass shootings in decades. Jonah correctly points out they did this by registering all firearms, banning most handguns and “assault” rifles, and confiscating all of the ones they could find. Jonah argues that somehow this isn’t a common sense solution, because a few hundred thousand Americans would disagree. So, in Jonah’s world, the rest of us must remain hostages to the paranoid fantasies of the NRA who see tyranny hiding behind every effort to reduce the 30,000 gun related deaths every year.

Victor Davis Hanson has looked in his tea leaves and discovered that the Iran deal guarantees war in the middle east. Of course this is VDH we are talking about, to him everything means war in the middle east, oil prices going up? war in the middle east. Oil prices going down? war in the middle east. the sun rises in the east? war in the middle east. Lunar eclipse? war in the middle east. And while it pains me to say it, given the history of the last 3000 years, he may not be wrong. There will be war in the middle east. It’s kinda their thing. Historically they haven’t been helped much by the successive invasions of Egyptians, Romans, Mongols, French and English, and any others I may have missed. But Obama has done nothing uniquely dangerous. He’s taken an increasingly unpopular and unsustainable sanctions regime and ended with a multilateral commitment to an inspection regime that will verify the cessation of Iran’s nuclear weapon program. That was probably the best deal Obama could get. Iran has convinced the international community that the sanctions were unjust and it was only a matter of time before the already creaky sanctions regime would have collapsed completely when Russia or China decided to trade openly with Iran.

http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/?p=8704

There will be war in the middle east for a long time. Off the top of my head, there’s a civil war in Syria, there’s a civil war in Yemen, there’s Sunni/Shiite strife, there’s Israeli/Palestinian strife, there’s Wahhabi/21st century strife and that’s without checking any sources. People are dying in the middle east because of oil, because of colonialism, because of religion, because of realpolitik. If Obama nuked Iran to glass on his first day in office, Israel would be no “safer”, the middle east would be no more peaceful and the only person in the world who wouldn’t be horrified would be VDH, who would be screaming to nuke China or Russia next. I worry about him, really I do. The VDH I know from his columns is a man who see no use for humanity other than as toy soldiers to fight his fantasy battles. He seems to only understand politics through the lens of 2000 year old triumphal propaganda. I’m going to blockquote his last sentence:

In sum, the region is North Korea cubed, an Islamic shoot-’em-up Tombstone or Dodge City where punks with nuclear six-guns, not sober classical deterrence, will make the rules.

This is not a man from whom anyone should be taking military or political advice. This is a man who has learned everything he knows about politics, psychologoly and the military by reading the 2000 year old equilavent of SGT Rock comic books.

So, I had thought to do a monumental takedown of this excrescence Which is just a lengthy litany of reasons in which the Liberals and Democrats are the real racists, including, of course, a reference to the Democratic party as a Plantation and suchlike other IsoTropes™. What the hell then, take a look at the opening:

If black lives matter to liberals, they sure aren’t showing it.

Really caring would require treating African Americans as fully capable citizens, and liberals have never been willing to do that. Feeling sorry for blacks is far more rewarding, especially at the polling place.

And it gets ooogahdee booogahdee all the way down.

Anyway, I’m checking the site notice something in moderation, and thought, “Damn, what have we here?” And thought, “Fuck that other thing, this will do just fine. I’ll let Praetorian Prefect take it away…

You liberals are society’s lowest common denominator. You and your ilk believe all of the ignorant lies the leftwing media sprouts, particularly on the issue of race.

Right outta the gate with the othering, insults, condescension, and presumption of a hive-mind. Well done, you hit the wingnitwit perfecta!

But now that you mention it Sparky, a handfull of leftwing media sprouts sounds like an excellent addition to my arugula salad with a Dijon mustard vinaigrette that you know all of us Liberals are gonna eat tonight.

Now that we have been properly addressed, and dressed down, grab your hair-shirts and lets see if there are any other nuggets of wisdom *cough*dingleberry comb*cough*.

But just for fun lets look at America without most of the black population.

Not only does this promise to be educational, it promises to be fun, and you know how wingers love their fun, also, too, how clever, insightful, and yes, funny, they are. So lets play now!

taxes would be minute compared to what they are today because most of the handouts are given to blacks.

If this wasn’t an exercise resembling a cat playing around with a mortally wounded mouse, I might actually bring up the hard and fast numbers. Stuff like the military budget for example, or the fact that vastly more welfare, I mean handouts go to white people in this country than black people, including I am nearly certain people in the Prefect’s own family, and possibly even under his very own subsidized roof.

Gotta say, if there is anything I have learned from this Praetorian feller, is how much fun it is to pull shit out of my sass! I suspect an OOOGGGAAAASM coming on.

The violent crime rate, including murders, would be cut in almost 2/3. The school systems would be so much better because the the teachers wouldn’t have to teach down to their level. The number of children living in poverty would be cut by 2/3. People like the Clintons and Obama’s couldn’t win an election for dog catcher.

Yayup! So it has been said, so therefor it must be. To ask for any citation supporting any of these claims would be ridiculous, but I have a game of my own in mind. If Praetorian Prefect actually wants to back up the assertions pulled out of his personal Library of Asselexander, with something that we all can review, he will be welcome to do so in the comments below.

Also noted: 2/3rds is the new 3/5ths

Obviously these are horrible Racist statements in todays world but can only state the facts. Maybe if blacks and liberals would spend half the time that they spend on worrying about racism on these issues the country would be a much better place to live.

Because of your candor PP, you get a cookie. Everything that appears after the word world, resembles something that flies out of the salad shooter that writes for Sarah Palin.

Oh and PP, just to flip it back at you with a bit of truth; if you conseervatives would not spend so much time worrying about what people chose to do with their pp’s and hoo-haws and got some of their own from time to time, the world would be a much better place to live.

Thanks for dropping by. It is not often that one walks in through the back door in this place only to end up on the front page, so pat yourself on the back.

Meanwhile, I gotta salad to make….Mmmmmmmmm Liberal media sprouts….
…

I am very disappointed. I wrote, what I thought was a stirring and insightful blog post, and here we are two weeks later, and the world is still gripped by a refugee crisis. It’s almost like the most powerful minds in the world don’t hang on my every word. In any case, now that I have a little more time, I was hoping to include a little more actual data with my invective.

But first, an example. One hundred fifty years ago a country crushed by oppression and wracked by famine, lost a million people to hunger and sent a further million out into the world to make their way as best as they could in the face of the rest of the world’s hostility and indifference. That country was Ireland, and my three-greats-grandfather came here to the United states, put on a blue uniform and fought for the union in the civil war. He’s buried today in a soldier’s cemetery in Milwaukee Wisconsin. And it is because of his service and the service of thousands more immigrants like him that there is a United states of America today. Even in the the 1840s 50s and 60s in a country far more dependent on immigration than the America of today, the Irish were not welcomed with open arms. As a group they were called ignorant drunken violent and worse, Catholic. But where there was a railroad to be built or a mine to be dug, or a fight to be fought, the Irish were right there in the thick of it.

And that’s why we need immigrants today. To help us face the challenges we don’t even see coming. To help us actually be the country we have claimed to be all along, a shelter for the oppressed and an example of freedom to inspire the world.

So, I’m not a reporter, and I am probably no better at searching google than any of you. But here’s a few informative links that show the scale and context of the problem right now:

Some quality reporting from the Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/04/syrian-refugee-crisis-why-has-it-become-so-bad

CNN if you must (warning, video may auto-play): http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/07/europe/europe-migrant-crisis/

Here’s a person that wants to defeat both Assad and ISIS as a military “solution” that would be similar in magnitude to the previous two gulf wars I included this because another war on the scale of the second Gulf War would cost another $6 Trillion. Which makes the $8 billion price tag the UN puts on dealing with the refugee crisis a bargain by anyone’s accounting.

And given that Carly Fiorina has been wrong on every issue in her professional career, the fact that she wants us to highly restrict the number of Syrian refugees we accept is a convincing argument for throwing the gates open: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/06/fiorina-warns-us-be-very-careful-about-keeping-out-terrorist-while-allow-in/

And here’s the ever more useless New York Times focusing on the difficulties of accepting more refugees instead of making the case for accepting more refugees: ttp://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/05/us/many-obstacles-are-seen-to-us-taking-in-large-number-of-syrian-refugees.html?_r=0

And lastly, here’s what Mercycorps has to say, and how you can help.

Even if it’s just five or ten dollars, that buys more grain or rice than you’d think when you’re buying in bulk. Think of it as picking up lunch for a friend you haven’t met yet.