Just want to wish all my peeps a happy new year. Another year gone by, another set of adventures chronicled, another post added to the blog. May your New Year be be exciting and joyous!
I just found this to be absolutely hypnotic.
-Cheers
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
When the rage comes....
I am having one of those days. Rant incoming, spell check and proofreading be damned!
One of those days where virtually all the news I read makes me apoplectic. I managed to avoid most news shows over the extended weekend, but I knew that would not last.
The media freak-out over the Detroit-Airport ("fire-crotch of death") incident, has been something to behold.
One question that the reporters and most pundits never ever even remotely address is, "How much of an inconvenience are we willing to sacrifice for the perception of safety?".
Because that is really the only important question. There is no such thing as perfect security. There is no perfect defense versus a group of individuals who seek to sow mayhem and are will sacrifice their own lives in the process.
The expectation that those who work in the security services (TSA, FBI, Fire dept, Police), have to deal with a startling and oppressive reality. No matter how successful they are on a daily basis in executing their chosen duties, it is the inevitable failure that shall be remembered.
War on Terror? You can not win a "war on terror", with bombs or scanning devices. You win by minimizing the animosity that others feel towards you, and even that is not a perfect solution. There will always be someone, somewhere who wishes you ill.
The simple truth is terrorists and their ilk will succeed in executing some of their plans. But do not forget that their goal is to foment terror. Watch the news and tell me that even though Mr. Abdulmutallab was foiled bringing down the plane, he did not succeed completely on the terror front.
Nate Silver does a wonderful job of presenting the relative statistics.
Something that we as a country have never really come to grips with (though the founders understood this), the price of an open society under the rule of Law is always paid in the blood of its members.
The TSA has a horrible job that they must do. Yet they get no appreciation for the thousands upon thousands of flights that they provide security for. This is not to say that glaring errors are not made and security protocols should not be updated and reviewed. It is merely to point out that the job being asked is one that requires perfect execution, yet will inevitably fail
There simply is no reliable defense versus a person willing to cram explosives up there ass or strap plastic explosives to their genitals or otherwise kill themselves in furtherance of their agenda.
We stop those we can. Make it hard for them to succeed. Those that get by we investigate how they did so and take appropriate steps, not the political theater, meant to make the public believe their elected officials are doing something.
Here is a nice dust-up between Spencer Ackerman and Pat Buchanan, illustrating what reasoned and rational response looks like (Ackerman), and what unhinged histrionics look like (Buchanan).
This exchange is one I very much wish was repeated often (my emphasis added):
-Cheers
One of those days where virtually all the news I read makes me apoplectic. I managed to avoid most news shows over the extended weekend, but I knew that would not last.
The media freak-out over the Detroit-Airport ("fire-crotch of death") incident, has been something to behold.
One question that the reporters and most pundits never ever even remotely address is, "How much of an inconvenience are we willing to sacrifice for the perception of safety?".
Because that is really the only important question. There is no such thing as perfect security. There is no perfect defense versus a group of individuals who seek to sow mayhem and are will sacrifice their own lives in the process.
The expectation that those who work in the security services (TSA, FBI, Fire dept, Police), have to deal with a startling and oppressive reality. No matter how successful they are on a daily basis in executing their chosen duties, it is the inevitable failure that shall be remembered.
War on Terror? You can not win a "war on terror", with bombs or scanning devices. You win by minimizing the animosity that others feel towards you, and even that is not a perfect solution. There will always be someone, somewhere who wishes you ill.
The simple truth is terrorists and their ilk will succeed in executing some of their plans. But do not forget that their goal is to foment terror. Watch the news and tell me that even though Mr. Abdulmutallab was foiled bringing down the plane, he did not succeed completely on the terror front.
Nate Silver does a wonderful job of presenting the relative statistics.
There were a total of 674 passengers, not counting crew or the terrorists themselves, on the flights on which these incidents occurred. By contrast, there have been 7,015,630,000 passenger enplanements over the past decade. Therefore, the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade. By contrast, the odds of being struck by lightning in a given year are about 1 in 500,000. This means that you could board 20 flights per year and still be less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be struck by lightning.Now this is not to belittle the events of 9/11 or any terrorist act, but is meant to show it in its proper context. A lot of what we do works. I actually applaud the President on his restraint. He was calm and in command of relevant facts. Wild histrionics are exactly what the terrorists want.
Something that we as a country have never really come to grips with (though the founders understood this), the price of an open society under the rule of Law is always paid in the blood of its members.
The TSA has a horrible job that they must do. Yet they get no appreciation for the thousands upon thousands of flights that they provide security for. This is not to say that glaring errors are not made and security protocols should not be updated and reviewed. It is merely to point out that the job being asked is one that requires perfect execution, yet will inevitably fail
There simply is no reliable defense versus a person willing to cram explosives up there ass or strap plastic explosives to their genitals or otherwise kill themselves in furtherance of their agenda.
We stop those we can. Make it hard for them to succeed. Those that get by we investigate how they did so and take appropriate steps, not the political theater, meant to make the public believe their elected officials are doing something.
Here is a nice dust-up between Spencer Ackerman and Pat Buchanan, illustrating what reasoned and rational response looks like (Ackerman), and what unhinged histrionics look like (Buchanan).
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
This exchange is one I very much wish was repeated often (my emphasis added):
Yes, lets not give the terrorist what they want, an over-inflated sense of import and the destruction of our free and law abiding society.ACKERMAN: So you're arguing for torture but with a different euphemism for it?
BUCHANAN: No, I'm arguing for the fact that this is an enemy soldier who's about to try to commit a mass atrocity, and the idea that you're treating him like some guy that held up 7-11, it seems to me preposterous. We are in a war on terror and American citizens is a different thing.
ACKERMAN: Except for -- sorry, go ahead.
GUTHRIE: Go ahead, Spencer, respond to that.
ACKERMAN: Except for all of the hundreds of terrorists that we've convicted in Federal courts over the years. They were able to hold. They were able to incarcerate successfully and they were able to get information out of. I mean, the fact is is that al Qaeda is a dangerous and really important threat. But they're also not a super army of supermen with Muslim Heat Vision and so forth. It's ludicrous to think that we should inflate how dangerous they are because that's exactly what they want us to do.
-Cheers
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Health Care Spending
When we talk about health care spending exploding, it is easy to decry that as fear-mongering. National Geographic (c/o Daily Dish) has a stunning graph (click on for full size) of the United states health care expenditures.
I must concur with Mr. Sullivan we are getting ripped off, and while I am not happy with the bill that has come out of the Senate. It is better then this. It at least is progress away from what you see above. We are being fleeced.
Those that think the status quo is fine are delusional. Though I do not blame them, if you have never bought insurance individually you have very little clue how much it actually costs you. It is almost single-handedly the reason wages are stagnant.
-Cheers
I must concur with Mr. Sullivan we are getting ripped off, and while I am not happy with the bill that has come out of the Senate. It is better then this. It at least is progress away from what you see above. We are being fleeced.
Those that think the status quo is fine are delusional. Though I do not blame them, if you have never bought insurance individually you have very little clue how much it actually costs you. It is almost single-handedly the reason wages are stagnant.
-Cheers
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Happy Holidays
Just a quick post to wish everyone a very happy holiday season.
I hope all of you have a relaxing and enjoyable time with your family and friends.
If I see you, we should share a pint.
I will be back to screeching polemic screeds next week. Till then....
-Cheers
I hope all of you have a relaxing and enjoyable time with your family and friends.
If I see you, we should share a pint.
I will be back to screeching polemic screeds next week. Till then....
-Cheers
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
A nice Primer on the Filibuster...
James Fallows, over at the Atlantic is working on a big article for the new issue. For those interested I thought I would pass that tidbit along. It was this tidbit, in his post, that caught my attention :
It was an informative read. I highly recommend it.
-Cheers
"That topic is supermajority rule in the U.S. Senate-- that is, the need to win more than a simple majority of senators to pass laws. Great checker and balancer though Madison was, this feature of American institutional life would probably have surprised him and might have distressed him....
"Automatic failure for bills not reaching the 60 mark. That is the current Senate practice, and in my view it has aroused surprisingly little interest or concern among the public or even in political science. It is treated as matter- of-fact. One might ask: What ever happened to the value of majority rule?
It was an informative read. I highly recommend it.
-Cheers
Monday, December 21, 2009
A bit of good news.
The President signed the Defense appropriations bill today. This was good thing. It had Sen. Franken's (D-MN) amendment in it. A good piece of legislation to deal with a horrible situation.
-Cheers
-Edit
-Cheers
-Edit
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Yeah....Sen. Lieberman is a Douche....
If there were doubts this clears it up.
So there you have it. "Teh libruls" made me do it!
-Cheers
[I]n the interview, Mr. Lieberman said that he grew apprehensive when a formal proposal began to take shape. [...]And he said he was particularly troubled by the overly enthusiastic reaction to the proposal by some liberals, including Representative Anthony Weiner, Democrat of New York, who champions a fully government-run health care system.
"Congressman Weiner made a comment that Medicare-buy in is better than a public option, it's the beginning of a road to single-payer," Mr. Lieberman said. "Jacob Hacker, who's a Yale professor who is actually the man who created the public option, said, 'This is a dream. This is better than a public option. This is a giant step.'"
So there you have it. "Teh libruls" made me do it!
-Cheers
This is the one where I defend Ezra Klein......
I was going to write a polemic screed on the perfidy, peevishness, and lack of probity of Sen. Joe Liebermen (I-Conn).
But instead of the ulcer that would cause me, I decided to post something in support Ezra Klein of the Washington Post. The young Klein has done a yeoman's work on the health care debate. It is hard to quantify the substantive contribution he has made. For that alone he is worth reading and earned a spot on my blog roll call.
But it is, his most recent post on Sen. Lieberman that has gained my respect. Young though he is, he has shown more gumption then most of his colleagues at the Post.
And for that he is being savaged. I will point out that not a single one of Ezra's points has been refuted. But I do not have to. Ezra does a handy defense of himself here.
At this point you may be asking yourself why defend Klein? Well he did a couple things here, attacked the egotistical motives of a powerful individual and put the issue in stark terms that rarely ever gets done in the liberal commentariat, but more then that he shows the lack of moral rectitude the Senator possess.
This is nothing new mind you. These things have been know about Sen. Lieberman for sometime, as Jonathan Chait points out.
But I think John Cole over at Ballon Juice has the right of it. These individuals now have the knives out for him. He has done good work, and showed the mendacity of a callow individual with many friends and such a great grievance versus "teh libruls" that all he thinks of is satisfying that pique even at the cost of his fellow Americans.
So yeah these are the sort of people who are responsible for our social well being. I do not care who runs against Joe. I will toss 50 bucks to whoever it is. Though I doubt he will. He has made a permanent enemy of many on the left. Count me as one of those.
-Cheers
But instead of the ulcer that would cause me, I decided to post something in support Ezra Klein of the Washington Post. The young Klein has done a yeoman's work on the health care debate. It is hard to quantify the substantive contribution he has made. For that alone he is worth reading and earned a spot on my blog roll call.
But it is, his most recent post on Sen. Lieberman that has gained my respect. Young though he is, he has shown more gumption then most of his colleagues at the Post.
And for that he is being savaged. I will point out that not a single one of Ezra's points has been refuted. But I do not have to. Ezra does a handy defense of himself here.
At this point you may be asking yourself why defend Klein? Well he did a couple things here, attacked the egotistical motives of a powerful individual and put the issue in stark terms that rarely ever gets done in the liberal commentariat, but more then that he shows the lack of moral rectitude the Senator possess.
This is nothing new mind you. These things have been know about Sen. Lieberman for sometime, as Jonathan Chait points out.
But I think John Cole over at Ballon Juice has the right of it. These individuals now have the knives out for him. He has done good work, and showed the mendacity of a callow individual with many friends and such a great grievance versus "teh libruls" that all he thinks of is satisfying that pique even at the cost of his fellow Americans.
So yeah these are the sort of people who are responsible for our social well being. I do not care who runs against Joe. I will toss 50 bucks to whoever it is. Though I doubt he will. He has made a permanent enemy of many on the left. Count me as one of those.
-Cheers
Friday, December 11, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Climategate
I have stayed away from this topic as of late. Not for any particularly good reason. It just makes me unreasonably angry.
Basically for those that are unaware, the CRU research group had e-mails hacked and published.
These e-mails as Brad Plumer details showed a variety of things.
The final straw from me was Sarah Palin getting Op-ed space to burnish her Luddite credentials. That was just a bit too much for this old horse to take. Luckily I did not have to blow a casket and break 8 keyboards, Marc Ambinder over at the Atlantic did an impressive job of fisking Mrs. Palin's drivel. In particular this bit was the most resonating:
Again, in a follow up piece Brad Plumer continues to put this kerfuffle in proper context. Also in case it is not clear enough. Climate Change studies and analysis are cross discipline. If there is a grand conspiracy out there explain these guys.
Until AGW (anthropogenic global warming) deniers produce some dis-positive analysis. They should be shunned.
-Cheers
Basically for those that are unaware, the CRU research group had e-mails hacked and published.
These e-mails as Brad Plumer details showed a variety of things.
The final straw from me was Sarah Palin getting Op-ed space to burnish her Luddite credentials. That was just a bit too much for this old horse to take. Luckily I did not have to blow a casket and break 8 keyboards, Marc Ambinder over at the Atlantic did an impressive job of fisking Mrs. Palin's drivel. In particular this bit was the most resonating:
Now -- the scientists may be guilty of misconduct for manipulating the UK's freedom of information act procedures. There is no excuse for that; that is not how normal science works. Let's assume, for the moment, that their actions do cast doubt on their data, because, perhaps, their motivations are suspect. The global warming consensus minus the East Anglia contributions is still a strong consensus, one that has been regularly, repeatedly and independently verified.There is just a lot to unpack on this subject, from the "missing" data to just the lack of understanding of basic scientific procedures denialist exhibit.
Again, in a follow up piece Brad Plumer continues to put this kerfuffle in proper context. Also in case it is not clear enough. Climate Change studies and analysis are cross discipline. If there is a grand conspiracy out there explain these guys.
Until AGW (anthropogenic global warming) deniers produce some dis-positive analysis. They should be shunned.
-Cheers
Thursday, December 3, 2009
No...I will not let it go!
I have come back to this story several times over the last few months. It seems that the Senate republican caucus is not happy as the Politico is reporting.
The problems seems to be, they are angry that they are getting angry questions from constituents about a vote that they made on the Franken amendment. This would be the main petty take away:
The Republicans are steamed at Franken because partisans on the left are using a measure he sponsored to paint them as rapist sympathizers — and because Franken isn’t doing much to stop them.
Got that? They are in a snit because people are holding them accountable for their vote. Interestingly enough if you read the article what you will find is, not one single republican Senator who voted against the bill, articulating a reason for that vote.
Craven bastards.
-Cheers
The problems seems to be, they are angry that they are getting angry questions from constituents about a vote that they made on the Franken amendment. This would be the main petty take away:
The Republicans are steamed at Franken because partisans on the left are using a measure he sponsored to paint them as rapist sympathizers — and because Franken isn’t doing much to stop them.
“Trying to tap into the natural sympathy that we have for this victim of this rape —and use that as a justification to frankly misrepresent and embarrass his colleagues, I don’t think it’s a very constructive thing,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said in an interview.
“I think it’s going to make a lot of senators leery and start looking at things he’s doing earlier on, because I don’t think it got appropriate attention ahead of time.”
In a chamber where relationship-building is seen as critical, some GOP senators question whether Franken’s handling of the amendment could damage his ability to work across the aisle. Soon after Tennessee GOP Sens. Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander co-wrote an op-ed in a local newspaper defending their votes against the Franken measure, the Minnesota Democrat confronted each senator separately to dispute their column — and grew particularly angry in a tense exchange with Corker.
People familiar with the Corker exchange say it was heated and ended abruptly — a sharp departure from the norm on the usually clubby Senate floor.
Got that? They are in a snit because people are holding them accountable for their vote. Interestingly enough if you read the article what you will find is, not one single republican Senator who voted against the bill, articulating a reason for that vote.
Craven bastards.
-Cheers
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Post Turkey Day...
Took a bit of a vacation from blogging this extended weekend, been immersed in Dragon Age Origins.
But that does not mean that I have not been absorbing some news. So here are a some of the links that have caught my attention or the "Krugman files" as I am calling them.
-Cheers
But that does not mean that I have not been absorbing some news. So here are a some of the links that have caught my attention or the "Krugman files" as I am calling them.
- Jobs!
- Things to Come
- Greenwald drinks Bayh's milkshake
- Rick Warren, kind of a douche
- James Fallows, making the world safe for journalism
-Cheers
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Like Her or Hate Her.....
Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) does get it.
Which is nice.
These are the sort of words we should be hearing right now:
When unemployment starts coming down, then pull you foot off the gas.
-Cheers
Which is nice.
These are the sort of words we should be hearing right now:
We’re never going to decrease the deficit until we create jobs, bring revenue into the Treasury, stimulate the economy so we have growth. We have to shed any weakness that anybody may have about not wanting to be confrontational on this subject for fear that we’d be labeled not sensitive to the deficit. … The American people have an anger about the growth of the deficit because they’re not getting anything for it. … So if somebody has the idea that the percentage of GDP of what or national debt is will go up a bit, but they will now — and their neighbors and their children — will have jobs, I think they could absorb that. … If we pull our punch, as they did in the mid-30’s, we shouldn’t be surprised if history repeats itself.
When unemployment starts coming down, then pull you foot off the gas.
-Cheers
Monday, November 23, 2009
It is hard to have a public debate....
...On issues when this is the sort of "informed" opposition you are interacting with.
The interviewer is far more reserved then I would have been. Know-Nothings proud as pie of their know-nothingness.....
Maybe it should give you pause if you can not articulate the policies of a preferred candidate. No it is not rocket science, but it is complex. You simply wanting a thing to be simple does not make it so.
-Cheers
The interviewer is far more reserved then I would have been. Know-Nothings proud as pie of their know-nothingness.....
Maybe it should give you pause if you can not articulate the policies of a preferred candidate. No it is not rocket science, but it is complex. You simply wanting a thing to be simple does not make it so.
-Cheers
Thursday, November 19, 2009
New Levels....
I know this will sound naive, but it just dawned on me, that in mass the base of the Republican party only believes in the Constitution and government when they are in charge. But more importantly, they firmly believe there political opponents are evil.
If you have a different opinion from them, you are a traitor, socialist, Hitler loving Marxist. This is arguably, the most depressing thought I have had in a while. There is a significant portion of the population, that believes, firmly and completely, that I am not a "true" American because I do not agree with them. They are completely and incorruptibly right and virtuous. While my views are not only wrong, but evil.
I was blissfully unaware of this. Now I know and now I shall act accordingly. If you want to believe "birther", "tenther", "young earth" crap, you have officially been given notice, that my assault on your fallacious beliefs will be directly proportional to the fervor with which you believe them.
So if someone is foolish enough to ask me why I think Sarah Palin is a horrible for this country. I will simply tell them that she is a buffoon. She has shown, not one ounce of deep knowledge on any subject and yet you celebrate her for that. She is a being of pure ambition and limited logic. So yeah, I think she and those who support her are incapable of being good stewards of my or my children's future.
I am completely okay with the notion of disagreeing with someone on issues. But they must at least have an opinion that they can clearly articulate. If they can not. If they just mouth and regurgitate sound bites, then I have no time for them.
What the world needs now is thinkers and innovators, not demagogues.
-Cheers.
-----Edit Jon Stewart beats me to the punch.
If you have a different opinion from them, you are a traitor, socialist, Hitler loving Marxist. This is arguably, the most depressing thought I have had in a while. There is a significant portion of the population, that believes, firmly and completely, that I am not a "true" American because I do not agree with them. They are completely and incorruptibly right and virtuous. While my views are not only wrong, but evil.
I was blissfully unaware of this. Now I know and now I shall act accordingly. If you want to believe "birther", "tenther", "young earth" crap, you have officially been given notice, that my assault on your fallacious beliefs will be directly proportional to the fervor with which you believe them.
So if someone is foolish enough to ask me why I think Sarah Palin is a horrible for this country. I will simply tell them that she is a buffoon. She has shown, not one ounce of deep knowledge on any subject and yet you celebrate her for that. She is a being of pure ambition and limited logic. So yeah, I think she and those who support her are incapable of being good stewards of my or my children's future.
I am completely okay with the notion of disagreeing with someone on issues. But they must at least have an opinion that they can clearly articulate. If they can not. If they just mouth and regurgitate sound bites, then I have no time for them.
What the world needs now is thinkers and innovators, not demagogues.
-Cheers.
-----Edit Jon Stewart beats me to the punch.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Lou Dobbs Extended Interview Pt. 1 | ||||
| ||||
Monday, November 16, 2009
Weekend Round-Up
Back to the grind. Good weekend, got to hang out with a nice group of people this weekend. Leigh was in town, though sadly with out her lovely husband Louis! Got to hang with my boys Mike and Tyler. Scuba was a fine host and hosted a fun party. The vets represented. Echo rocked on the beer pong table. DMB did me a solid and danced up a storm.
Went to a stellar event at Seven Saints. They hosted one of the owners of North Shore Distillery.
It was quite informative and we tried many interesting beverages. It may have spawned the creation of a new drink (thanks Julia for the input).
Now on to the other stuff.
Two articles this morning caught my eye.
Those who know me know how this sort of thing irks me. I definitely do not want someone who shows such a disdain for science to ever have their hands on any levers of power.
And another religiously-tinged article about PTSD and its treatment or lack thereof.
Now I can get my week started right! Nice and angry. :-)
-Cheers
Went to a stellar event at Seven Saints. They hosted one of the owners of North Shore Distillery.
It was quite informative and we tried many interesting beverages. It may have spawned the creation of a new drink (thanks Julia for the input).
Now on to the other stuff.
Two articles this morning caught my eye.
Those who know me know how this sort of thing irks me. I definitely do not want someone who shows such a disdain for science to ever have their hands on any levers of power.
And another religiously-tinged article about PTSD and its treatment or lack thereof.
Now I can get my week started right! Nice and angry. :-)
-Cheers
Friday, November 13, 2009
My new favorite site!
There are entertaining sites, and then there are entertaining sites.
This is a one man crusade (actually I think it is two dudes) to crush the duckface picture phenomena.
Don't know what a "duckface" is? Well...just take a look on over there and you will get the
information that you need.
Stop Making that duckface!
-Cheers
This is a one man crusade (actually I think it is two dudes) to crush the duckface picture phenomena.
Don't know what a "duckface" is? Well...just take a look on over there and you will get the
information that you need.
Stop Making that duckface!
-Cheers
Party like its 1937!
I hope that this is not something that the administration is planning.
White House Aims to Cut Deficit with TARP Cash
Literally it is the most stupid thing I have heard in some time. It is like people refuse to learn the lessons that history teaches us.
Reminder FDR listened to those who were clamoring for "deficit reduction" and that plunged the US back into depression.
I make this simple statement ignore the budget hawks for now. Do what we must to repair the economy and get job growth positive. I guarantee the public will not say a fucking word about the deficit if that happens.
-Cheers
White House Aims to Cut Deficit with TARP Cash
Literally it is the most stupid thing I have heard in some time. It is like people refuse to learn the lessons that history teaches us.
Reminder FDR listened to those who were clamoring for "deficit reduction" and that plunged the US back into depression.
I make this simple statement ignore the budget hawks for now. Do what we must to repair the economy and get job growth positive. I guarantee the public will not say a fucking word about the deficit if that happens.
-Cheers
Thursday, November 12, 2009
The two articles you should read
If Democrats/liberals/progressives read one article this year, it should be this one by Tim Ferholz at the American Prospect.
Basically Mr. Ferholz takes on Peter Bienart over the direction a "big tent" coalition should take. Mr. Bienart makes the case for smart centrists policies to prolong the large majority. I tend to agree with Mr. Ferholz when he says (emphasis added mine):
This is by definition what leadership means. Sometimes you will pay a price for your decisions. Even if they make for a better society in the long run, there are always consequences in the short. Accepting that, and being thoughtful yet bold are what those moments are made for.
And secondly, if you have not seen it. There is a snowball that survived a little longer in Hell today. Sean Hannity apologized to Jon Stewart last night about this piece that run on the Daily Show the other night. And here is a nice summation of what Stewart actually did by Will Bunch, and why it is so embarrassing for the mainstream media organizations.
One final article for the science oriented of you out there.
-Cheers
Basically Mr. Ferholz takes on Peter Bienart over the direction a "big tent" coalition should take. Mr. Bienart makes the case for smart centrists policies to prolong the large majority. I tend to agree with Mr. Ferholz when he says (emphasis added mine):
Believers in the Big Tent, like Peter and myself, have to be very careful about the compromises they make. If you lose track of what the point of politics is -- what you leave behind -- then you risk betraying the entire progressive agenda. If Peter thinks today's progressives should choose economic issues over other ones, he should make that case explicitly. But he shouldn't pretend that it's a normatively good choice. There's going to come a time when this Democratic majority has the chance to do something so big and important that it will destroy itself by alienating its conservative and moderate members. Maybe it will be gay marriage, maybe it will be the Freedom of Choice Act, who knows. I hope the leadership at the time has the principles and the guts to pass the law and blow up their majority. That's what it's there for, after all.
This is by definition what leadership means. Sometimes you will pay a price for your decisions. Even if they make for a better society in the long run, there are always consequences in the short. Accepting that, and being thoughtful yet bold are what those moments are made for.
And secondly, if you have not seen it. There is a snowball that survived a little longer in Hell today. Sean Hannity apologized to Jon Stewart last night about this piece that run on the Daily Show the other night. And here is a nice summation of what Stewart actually did by Will Bunch, and why it is so embarrassing for the mainstream media organizations.
One final article for the science oriented of you out there.
-Cheers
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Random Musings
So I have been going back and forth on a couple different ideas for posts recently. Not really making much headway on any of them at the moment. A lot of complaining with little to no solutions.
But for the sake of brevity these are some good articles on topics of the day:
I have said it many times before, but what I find most troubling about any public debate is that lack of any real discussion on the merits of the program or policy. It is always discussed under strictly ideological terms. The process is what matters. The question is always "What can pass?", and never "Is this any good?" or "Does this accomplish what we need it to.".
Compromise is always the order of the day. Bipartisan is the cry. Even though you are dealing with a minority party that has offered very little in the way of solutions, and has not given even one vote if those solutions are included. That is not compromise. That is capitulation.
Also moderation, centrism and bipartisanship have become fetishized. Even moderation, needs to be done in moderation. Sometimes there is no viable middle ground. If you build only half a bridge, all you have is a useless structure. It can not even perform the job it was ostensibly built for.
Sometimes you need bold and radical decisions and actions. But the other truth is you will never have unanimous support. Someone will always object to what you are doing. Whether there is merit or not to the criticism ( see death panels, and tea parties).
That is the world we live in now. If democrats in congress and Washington are wondering why they are seeing their support slip and the enthusiasm gap widen. They have only look at their own craven actions. From the President on down, they have yet to lead.
Now I am not expecting sweeping transformation to have happened over night. But accomplish something. The stimulus was too small. Why? Because a few centrist Senators, needed to exact their pound of flesh. So they could be seen as deficit conscious, and budget hawks. Where those cuts necessary? Did they make any sense at all? Who knows. Nobody asked, why these cuts needed to be made. And more importantly, nobody has gone back and asked them, "Since you requested to have those funds to help states meet budget shortfalls removed from the stimulus package x number of state employees have joined the ranks of the unemployed. Why again was it so necessary to cut that funding?
Basically failing to address the largest financial disaster since the Great Depression is better then possibly over compensating for it and saving a few more jobs of this countries citizens.
All I can say is I am glad that I do not live in Nebraska, Maine, or Arkansas. Ben Nelson (D-NE) in particular should be singled out for absolutely mind-numbing idiocy on these issues.
At some point someone needs to explain to me why "liberal" is such a bad thing. I mean other then the standard "I hate dirty fuckin' hippies", of course.
So much for brevity or coherence.....
-Cheers
But for the sake of brevity these are some good articles on topics of the day:
- The Cost of Doing Nothing (health care)
- Two great articles on how dysfunctional our bicameral system is today. Here and here.
- Every piece of news is always good news for conservatives/republicans.
- Excellent Quote from the CBO
- A good set of predictions about the next 4 years
I have said it many times before, but what I find most troubling about any public debate is that lack of any real discussion on the merits of the program or policy. It is always discussed under strictly ideological terms. The process is what matters. The question is always "What can pass?", and never "Is this any good?" or "Does this accomplish what we need it to.".
Compromise is always the order of the day. Bipartisan is the cry. Even though you are dealing with a minority party that has offered very little in the way of solutions, and has not given even one vote if those solutions are included. That is not compromise. That is capitulation.
Also moderation, centrism and bipartisanship have become fetishized. Even moderation, needs to be done in moderation. Sometimes there is no viable middle ground. If you build only half a bridge, all you have is a useless structure. It can not even perform the job it was ostensibly built for.
Sometimes you need bold and radical decisions and actions. But the other truth is you will never have unanimous support. Someone will always object to what you are doing. Whether there is merit or not to the criticism ( see death panels, and tea parties).
That is the world we live in now. If democrats in congress and Washington are wondering why they are seeing their support slip and the enthusiasm gap widen. They have only look at their own craven actions. From the President on down, they have yet to lead.
Now I am not expecting sweeping transformation to have happened over night. But accomplish something. The stimulus was too small. Why? Because a few centrist Senators, needed to exact their pound of flesh. So they could be seen as deficit conscious, and budget hawks. Where those cuts necessary? Did they make any sense at all? Who knows. Nobody asked, why these cuts needed to be made. And more importantly, nobody has gone back and asked them, "Since you requested to have those funds to help states meet budget shortfalls removed from the stimulus package x number of state employees have joined the ranks of the unemployed. Why again was it so necessary to cut that funding?
Basically failing to address the largest financial disaster since the Great Depression is better then possibly over compensating for it and saving a few more jobs of this countries citizens.
All I can say is I am glad that I do not live in Nebraska, Maine, or Arkansas. Ben Nelson (D-NE) in particular should be singled out for absolutely mind-numbing idiocy on these issues.
At some point someone needs to explain to me why "liberal" is such a bad thing. I mean other then the standard "I hate dirty fuckin' hippies", of course.
So much for brevity or coherence.....
-Cheers
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
One and done....
Got a couple of posts percolating in my brain, but I read the most interesting take down of new book "Superfreakonimics".
Now there are many facets to this argument. But I must say Elizabeth Kolbert has perhaps the best one. With this passage standing out:
-Cheers
Now there are many facets to this argument. But I must say Elizabeth Kolbert has perhaps the best one. With this passage standing out:
But what’s most troubling about “SuperFreakonomics” isn’t the authors’ many blunders; it’s the whole spirit of the enterprise. Though climate change is a grave problem, Levitt and Dubner treat it mainly as an opportunity to show how clever they are. Leaving aside the question of whether geoengineering, as it is known in scientific circles, is even possible—have you ever tried sending an eighteen-mile-long hose into the stratosphere?—their analysis is terrifyingly cavalier.There are some other well thought out and thorough take downs here, here and here.
-Cheers
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Weekend Round-Up
Pretty full weekend. So full in fact still recovering.
By and large it was pretty fun. I think there were some serious hangovers on Saturday, but it did provide me with the quote of the week: "You have to believe me. I am not wearing pants!".
I can both attest to the veracity to the preceding statement and the fact that the speaker did, indeed, lack pants.
Brian and Julia were wonderful hosts. Thanks to them for throwing a bang up party.
Movie night went well. A nice low key evening, the Zuppa Toscana turned out well. Possibly a bit too spicy for some, but I thought the heat complemented the creaminess of the stock. Ideally a wonderful hearty soup for a fall day. It was 70 degrees outside not quite what I had in mind.
Well I should be back to posting about health care and general politics tomorrow. Lots of developments over the weekend.
-Cheers
By and large it was pretty fun. I think there were some serious hangovers on Saturday, but it did provide me with the quote of the week: "You have to believe me. I am not wearing pants!".
I can both attest to the veracity to the preceding statement and the fact that the speaker did, indeed, lack pants.
Brian and Julia were wonderful hosts. Thanks to them for throwing a bang up party.
Movie night went well. A nice low key evening, the Zuppa Toscana turned out well. Possibly a bit too spicy for some, but I thought the heat complemented the creaminess of the stock. Ideally a wonderful hearty soup for a fall day. It was 70 degrees outside not quite what I had in mind.
Well I should be back to posting about health care and general politics tomorrow. Lots of developments over the weekend.
-Cheers
Friday, November 6, 2009
Yeah...I know about Rule # 2...
Or as I like to affectionately refer to it, the "Katy Rule" (from the infamous 'Roman's Rules').
Rule #2:
And lo it was said, "One should never begin a thought with the phrase, 'Where are my pants....'. Nothing good shall ever follow.".
However statistical analysis, the form of a Venn diagram, may be a dispositive to this time honored rule.
-Cheers
Rule #2:
And lo it was said, "One should never begin a thought with the phrase, 'Where are my pants....'. Nothing good shall ever follow.".
However statistical analysis, the form of a Venn diagram, may be a dispositive to this time honored rule.
-Cheers
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Meet the new boss...same as the old
So it is no secret that I have a thing about torture and its practice in these United States. To say that I pay attention to the cases involving alleged torture of detainees or laws with circumvent or abridge civil liberties would probably be an understatement.
That all being said I have to look on this development, brought to us by Glenn Greenwald, as an amazing disappointment.
To deny him that, is a denial of our most fundamental values. The very values that this country was found on. The very values that the current occupant of the White House campaigned on and was swept into office on.
I understand that governing is hard, and that the world is dangerous. But when you succumb to this sort of barbarism you are no better then terrorists you vilify.
It is not necessary to act in this way. Hell Canada gave a good example of how you actually handle this.
You want to change how we are perceived worldwide. Own up to what we did.
-Cheers
That all being said I have to look on this development, brought to us by Glenn Greenwald, as an amazing disappointment.
Yesterday, the Second Circuit -- by a vote of 7-4 -- agreed with the government and dismissed Arar's case in its entirety. It held that even if the government violated Arar's Constitutional rights as well as statutes banning participation in torture, he still has no right to sue for what was done to him. Why? Because "providing a damages remedy against senior officials who implement an extraordinary rendition policy would enmesh the courts ineluctably in an assessment of the validity of the rationale of that policy and its implementation in this particular case, matters that directly affect significant diplomatic and national security concerns" (p. 39). In other words, government officials are free to do anything they want in the national security context -- even violate the law and purposely cause someone to be tortured -- and courts should honor and defer to their actions by refusing to scrutinize them.We tortured an innocent man, and we will not even admit it. The president promised a better policy, where these sorts of things did not happen. But more importantly, he promised a country in which people were accountable for their actions. This was breaking the law. Those involved should face some punishment and the individual deserves some redress or at the very least the chance to confront his captures in court.
To deny him that, is a denial of our most fundamental values. The very values that this country was found on. The very values that the current occupant of the White House campaigned on and was swept into office on.
I understand that governing is hard, and that the world is dangerous. But when you succumb to this sort of barbarism you are no better then terrorists you vilify.
It is not necessary to act in this way. Hell Canada gave a good example of how you actually handle this.
In January, 2007, the Canadian Prime Minister publicly apologized to Arar for the role Canada played in these events, and the Canadian government paid him $9 million in compensation. That was preceded by a full investigation by Canadian authorities and the public disclosure of a detailed report which concluded"categorically that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offense or that his activities constituted a threat to the security of Canada."
You want to change how we are perceived worldwide. Own up to what we did.
-Cheers
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Compelling Posts....
Today I read two posts that I felt were pretty compelling and show the absolute dearth of substantive discussion going on today.
The first was posted by Marc Ambinder over at the Atlantic. With this extremely introspective line in the opening paragraph:
Next up we have Ezra Klein at the Washington Post, once again doing a yeoman's work on health care.
He puts the lack of real dialog on costs, in stark contrast with just a few graphs:
Again why do we let pundits dictate what the relevant parts of our debates should be?
-Cheers
The first was posted by Marc Ambinder over at the Atlantic. With this extremely introspective line in the opening paragraph:
Truth is that compared to the other economic problems we face, debt isn't much of a problem. But -- and this was the point I was trying to make -- it's become a problem because political elites have willed it to be a problem (and Americans seem to agree.)From there it just got more interesting. With commentary by real economists! Discussing real policy implications and prescriptions! Not overly obsessed with process.
Next up we have Ezra Klein at the Washington Post, once again doing a yeoman's work on health care.
He puts the lack of real dialog on costs, in stark contrast with just a few graphs:
Again why do we let pundits dictate what the relevant parts of our debates should be?
-Cheers
Monday, November 2, 2009
Franken Amendment redux
Evidently one of Senator David Vitter's (R-La) constituents, was not pleased about his vote on the Franken amendment. So she confronted him on the issue.
I happened to find his answers less then compelling.
Personally I feel every "no" vote on this amendment should be explained. I would like members who side with the views of corporations over the right of due process for constituents, to have to explain themselves.
-Cheers
I happened to find his answers less then compelling.
Personally I feel every "no" vote on this amendment should be explained. I would like members who side with the views of corporations over the right of due process for constituents, to have to explain themselves.
-Cheers
Word of the Day
Today's word is brought to us via an analysis of the differences in the democratic and republican caucuses. Why there seems to be more unity and uniformity in one caucus as opposed to the the other is of interest during these tumultuous debates over health care.
Variegated
And it is easier to build consensus around a “nothing” menu of 1 than it is for a more variegated menu of limitless options of “something.”
-Cheers
Variegated
–adjective
| 1. | varied in appearance or color; marked with patches or spots of different colors. |
| 2. | varied; diversified; diverse. |
And it is easier to build consensus around a “nothing” menu of 1 than it is for a more variegated menu of limitless options of “something.”
-Cheers
Friday, October 30, 2009
Movie Night....Son of Movie Night.
Okay had a confab with Lovetron and Tyler. They provided me with some solid suggestions as to types of movies.
(Also trying not to have another post derailed by my immense desire to cock punch Sen. Joe Lieberman.)
As of right now, I think I am leaning towards selecting from these movies:
But again any suggestions are welcome. I am thinking of maybe pulling it together on the 7th or the 14th.
-Cheers
(Also trying not to have another post derailed by my immense desire to cock punch Sen. Joe Lieberman.)
As of right now, I think I am leaning towards selecting from these movies:
- Tremors
- Slither
- 30 Days of Night
- Cloverfield
- Ghostbusters
- Dawn of the Dead
But again any suggestions are welcome. I am thinking of maybe pulling it together on the 7th or the 14th.
-Cheers
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Texts From Last Night.....
From an anonymous source.....
(815): When you are done being ravished come back to the bar.
-Cheers
(815): When you are done being ravished come back to the bar.
-Cheers
Thought of the Day.
Evidently Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), grew some stones and decided to go with a public option with an opt out clause. Jonathan Cohn does the heavy lifting on explaining this.
That is all fine and good. But what I am becoming increasingly concerned about is how caustic and perfunctory the dialog on health-care and policy is in this country.
Pundits and our representatives in Congress, do a horrible job of discussing actual policy. They are obsessed with process, to the occlusion of the actual merits of any policy.
Also bipartisanship has becoming fetishized.
What I mean by that is. You are dealing with a two party system in which, agree with them or not, one party is actually proposing solutions and the other is standing in the corner pouting and mumbling "No". You have a minority party that is more conservative and more of a regional party then it has been in almost two decades, yet pundits still compare it to more sane congresses of the past?
You literally have people running around saying that the majority is "too liberal". By definition, to have a large majority you have to dilute the ideological purity of your party. Speaker of the House Pelosi (D-CA) can not win in Terre Haute, Indiana. Nor could, Sen Inhofe win in New York state.
There are metrics for scoring programs. Methodologies for evaluating policy implications. Yet these thing are always secondary. Pundits, congressmen and spokespeople who have very little actual expertise in economics, science or what have you are always focused on more then actual experts.
Even experts I do not agree with are more useful then a congressmen/woman who is just spouting ideological nonsense.
-Cheers
That is all fine and good. But what I am becoming increasingly concerned about is how caustic and perfunctory the dialog on health-care and policy is in this country.
Pundits and our representatives in Congress, do a horrible job of discussing actual policy. They are obsessed with process, to the occlusion of the actual merits of any policy.
Also bipartisanship has becoming fetishized.
What I mean by that is. You are dealing with a two party system in which, agree with them or not, one party is actually proposing solutions and the other is standing in the corner pouting and mumbling "No". You have a minority party that is more conservative and more of a regional party then it has been in almost two decades, yet pundits still compare it to more sane congresses of the past?
You literally have people running around saying that the majority is "too liberal". By definition, to have a large majority you have to dilute the ideological purity of your party. Speaker of the House Pelosi (D-CA) can not win in Terre Haute, Indiana. Nor could, Sen Inhofe win in New York state.
There are metrics for scoring programs. Methodologies for evaluating policy implications. Yet these thing are always secondary. Pundits, congressmen and spokespeople who have very little actual expertise in economics, science or what have you are always focused on more then actual experts.
Even experts I do not agree with are more useful then a congressmen/woman who is just spouting ideological nonsense.
-Cheers
I Fear for Humanity.....
This literally is horrible. Soul crushingly, as a people we possibly have forfeited our rights to exist, sort of horrible.
How anyone with any sense of decency could sit by and watch this.
Truly disturbing.
-Cheers
How anyone with any sense of decency could sit by and watch this.
Truly disturbing.
-Cheers
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Damn Mike.....
For this....
I am totally in love with this woman. First I thought her eyes were creepy. Then they were interesting. Then oddly fascinating. Then absolutely mesmerizing!
-Cheers
I am totally in love with this woman. First I thought her eyes were creepy. Then they were interesting. Then oddly fascinating. Then absolutely mesmerizing!
-Cheers
Friday, October 23, 2009
Why Women Have Sex
Time has a nice interview with one the authors of the new book Why Women Have Sex. The team from Texas has authored a couple of books on social sexual habits. So I would mildly intrigued.
I figure I like women, and I like sex so why not give the interview a read. It was actually pretty interesting. I may have to pick up the book at some point. For purely academic reasons of course.
But I found this exchange interesting:
-Cheers
I figure I like women, and I like sex so why not give the interview a read. It was actually pretty interesting. I may have to pick up the book at some point. For purely academic reasons of course.
But I found this exchange interesting:
Any particularly surprising findings?Every time I read the passage I just envision a leggy supermodel type skulking around a jungle in a hunter's hat with a butterfly net, trying to "poach" mates.
I was surprised by the importance of revenge. A few had sex in order to give someone else a sexually transmitted disease. More commonly, women's revenge sex involved getting back at a cheating partner, or having sex with the partner of a friend who had poached her partner. Actually, the frequency of mate-poaching also surprised me — the frequency with which women try to lure men who are already "taken," either for a short-term sexual liaison or a longer-term relationship. Most women have experienced mate-poaching in one form or another, either as the mate poacher or as the victim.
-Cheers
Word of the Day
Today's word is brought to you Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post and the guys/gals over at Ballon Juice who have who for different reasons (Ms. Marcus' lack of perspective and BJ for pointing it out to me!) started me down a path of inchoate rage.
So two things first, when it was pointed out to her that there were acutal substantitive differences in what Fox news does and say, MSNBC, she pretty much dismisses. Though it goes right to her premise, she can not admit that it possibly undermines her argument.
Secondly the comparisons between Nixon and Obama are just silly. Pity upon thee with short memories. As Glenn Greenwald basically concludes that the Obama administrations response is sane, in regards to Fox News and no where near the sort of vindictive operation the Bush administration operated under against the media at large. Now when I see Obama using the FBI, IRS or the FCC to punish/spy on journalist/networks then you will have a comparison to make. Otherwise they are just exercising those same First Amendment Rights that supposedly
Fox is being denied.
Oh well, I guess my attempt to not get riled up failed. So here is your damn word.
Anodyne
Hopefully Vodkatastrophe will be an anodyne to the stupid news coverage!
-Cheers
So two things first, when it was pointed out to her that there were acutal substantitive differences in what Fox news does and say, MSNBC, she pretty much dismisses. Though it goes right to her premise, she can not admit that it possibly undermines her argument.
Secondly the comparisons between Nixon and Obama are just silly. Pity upon thee with short memories. As Glenn Greenwald basically concludes that the Obama administrations response is sane, in regards to Fox News and no where near the sort of vindictive operation the Bush administration operated under against the media at large. Now when I see Obama using the FBI, IRS or the FCC to punish/spy on journalist/networks then you will have a comparison to make. Otherwise they are just exercising those same First Amendment Rights that supposedly
Fox is being denied.
Oh well, I guess my attempt to not get riled up failed. So here is your damn word.
Anodyne
–noun
| 1. | a medicine that relieves or allays pain. |
| 2. | anything that relieves distress or pain: The music was an anodyne to his grief. |
–adjective
| 3. | relieving pain. |
| 4. | soothing to the mind or feelings. |
Hopefully Vodkatastrophe will be an anodyne to the stupid news coverage!
-Cheers
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Planning Stuff...
So in an attempt to blog about something else other then my supreme desire to scourge the world of those I feel are incompetent.
I will try to write a little bit about some little get-togethers I am gonna try to put on over the next few months.
First up, would be a new installment of the Saturday Afternoon Movie Night!
This time the theme will be horror movies (suggestions are welcome).
The list (which for the actual viewing will choose 3) I am working from currently includes:
So some of the current ideas kicking around in my head are:
Anyway any comments/suggestions are welcomed.
Also on a separate note, a blatant food related plug. If you get a moment you should check out my friend Carlin's blog.
She is a pretty spectacular baker and mighty nifty person to boot!
-Cheers
I will try to write a little bit about some little get-togethers I am gonna try to put on over the next few months.
First up, would be a new installment of the Saturday Afternoon Movie Night!
This time the theme will be horror movies (suggestions are welcome).
The list (which for the actual viewing will choose 3) I am working from currently includes:
- Drag me to Hell
- Dawn of the Dead
- 30 Days of Night
- Slither
- Tremors
So some of the current ideas kicking around in my head are:
Anyway any comments/suggestions are welcomed.
Also on a separate note, a blatant food related plug. If you get a moment you should check out my friend Carlin's blog.
She is a pretty spectacular baker and mighty nifty person to boot!
-Cheers
Douche-Bag of the Day
Whew...I do not know where to start. So many candidates for this honor this week!
There is Keith Bardwell, the Louisiana justice of the peace who refused to marry an interracial couple.
Sen. David Vitter (R-La), who has refused to comment on the topic.
Glenn Beck for being, well Glenn Beck.
Pat Buchanan for being.....Pat Buchanan.
But I think instead I will give it to the Insurance Industry as a whole. With stories like this. I wonder time and time again why we even allow them to exist and just points out why we desperately need reform.
Real classy guys.
-Cheers
There is Keith Bardwell, the Louisiana justice of the peace who refused to marry an interracial couple.
Sen. David Vitter (R-La), who has refused to comment on the topic.
Glenn Beck for being, well Glenn Beck.
Pat Buchanan for being.....Pat Buchanan.
But I think instead I will give it to the Insurance Industry as a whole. With stories like this. I wonder time and time again why we even allow them to exist and just points out why we desperately need reform.
Because survivors of rape and sexual assault really need more to worry about.Christina Turner feared that she might have been sexually assaulted after two men slipped her a knockout drug. She thought she was taking proper precautions when her doctor prescribed a month's worth of anti-AIDS medicine.
Only later did she learn that she had made herself all but uninsurable.
Turner had let the men buy her drinks at a bar in Fort Lauderdale. The next thing she knew, she said, she was lying on a roadside with cuts and bruises that indicated she had been raped. She never developed an HIV infection. But months later, when she lost her health insurance and sought new coverage, she ran into a problem.
Turner, 45, who used to be a health insurance underwriter herself, said the insurance companies examined her health records. Even after she explained the assault, the insurers would not sell her a policy because the HIV medication raised too many health questions. They told her they might reconsider in three or more years if she could prove that she was still AIDS-free.
Real classy guys.
-Cheers
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
So in love......
I think I may have found a new blog/site to while away my hours at.
The Atlantic: Food
I may have to make this soon:
-Cheers
The Atlantic: Food
I may have to make this soon:
-Cheers
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Throw-a-way bits
So still on my self-imposed health care hiatus I cam across a comment on social bias and how difficult it is to diagnose.
Basically it speaks to an issue I have tried futilely to write about.
Race and bias are just difficult subjects to broach. There are many reasons why that it is, which
could be debated. But that it is a difficult subject is not debatable.
Adam Serwer of the American Prospect wrote a piece on the Limbaugh-Rams story that had one passage that resonated with me:
Now I do tend to agree that conservatives are more prone to this sort of thinking then their progressive brethren, but it could be generalized to virtually any sort of intellectual coterie. Those who agree with you are somehow more virtuous then those who do not. But I digress. This is something that is become extremely virulent. People toss around racist, and Nazis like hand grenades.
What I mean with this whole post is this. I am not surprised when some says something racially insensitive. What I find shocking is the absolute inability to engage in any sort of self-examination. Someone else is always the "race-baiter". There is always a rationalization. Whether it is Rush's comments on Donovan McNabb, the commentary of two South Carolinian republican chairmen or well just about anything Pat Buchanan says.
There are not racists, they aren't biased! They are just telling it like it is.
No I think Mr. Serwer has the right of it.
-Cheer
Basically it speaks to an issue I have tried futilely to write about.
Race and bias are just difficult subjects to broach. There are many reasons why that it is, which
could be debated. But that it is a difficult subject is not debatable.
Adam Serwer of the American Prospect wrote a piece on the Limbaugh-Rams story that had one passage that resonated with me:
On the one hand, there's the general anxiety on the right that comes from the recognition that one can't actually treat black people this way and expect there not to be social consequences. On the other, there's actual bewilderment about the very concept of racism -- conservatives understand in the abstract that racism is bad, but they seem incapable of identifying actual racist behavior. Instead, because (a) racism is bad and (b) liberals are bad (c) racism is a quality possessed by liberals. By definition, conservatives cannot be racist, because they are good, unlike liberals, and therefore nothing Rush Limbaugh says is racist. Moreover, while liberals have sometimes intimated racial motivation for conservative criticism where there isn't any, conservatives have refused to recognize when attacks on the president become attacks on black people. Calling the president "an angry black guy" is one of those times.
This blanket refusal to evaluate their own behavior is what continues to make the GOP seem completely tone deaf when it comes to minorities -- the GOP can list as many black Republicans from the 1800s as they like, as long as they continue to adhere to the Bender Theory of Discrimination and refuse to acknowledge even flagrant racism within their ranks, and even imply that minorities are so stupid they're "fooled" into believing racism exists, they will remain a party minorities do not feel welcome in.
Now I do tend to agree that conservatives are more prone to this sort of thinking then their progressive brethren, but it could be generalized to virtually any sort of intellectual coterie. Those who agree with you are somehow more virtuous then those who do not. But I digress. This is something that is become extremely virulent. People toss around racist, and Nazis like hand grenades.
What I mean with this whole post is this. I am not surprised when some says something racially insensitive. What I find shocking is the absolute inability to engage in any sort of self-examination. Someone else is always the "race-baiter". There is always a rationalization. Whether it is Rush's comments on Donovan McNabb, the commentary of two South Carolinian republican chairmen or well just about anything Pat Buchanan says.
There are not racists, they aren't biased! They are just telling it like it is.
No I think Mr. Serwer has the right of it.
-Cheer
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Yeah...I agree with that.
Taking a break from blogging about health care this week. It seems to do nothing more then make me angry and ruin other peoples conversations with me. So today I figured John Stewart could do the heavy lifting for me.
-Cheers
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| CNN Leaves It There | ||||
| ||||
-Cheers
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Douche-Bag of the Week
Now today we have a group of award. It is rare that so many contribute to something so douchey.
Senator Al Franken (D-MN), had his first piece of legislation passed in the U.S Senate.
Sen. Franken was disgusted with this and made these points:
The final amendment passed 68-30. The Douche-Bags of the week are the 30 people who voted against. These people are actively trying to protect a company that not only tried to cover up the gang rape of one of its employees, but then threatened to fire that employee if they sought legal redress. So here you have the knuckle dragging republicans:
-Cheers
Senator Al Franken (D-MN), had his first piece of legislation passed in the U.S Senate.
On Tuesday night, the Minnesota Democrat got his first piece of legislation passed by the United States Senate via roll call vote. The amendment stopped federal funding for those defense contractors who used mandatory arbitration clauses to deny victims of assault the right to bring their case to court. It passed by a 68-30 margin with nine Republicans joining each voting Democrat.Now you may be asking yourself why this is even necessary. Well this involves the horrifying case of Jamie Lynn Jones. If you are not familiar with it here is the ABC story on Ms. Lynn's case.
So yeah the facts of this case, were a young lady was raped by her coworkers, her employers locked her in a shipping crate for 24 hours and forbade her from getting medical care.A Houston, Texas woman says she was gang-raped by Halliburton/KBR coworkers in Baghdad, and the company and the U.S. government are covering up the incident.
Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job.
"Don't plan on working back in Iraq. There won't be a position here, and there won't be a position in Houston," Jones says she was told.
In a lawsuit filed in federal court against Halliburton and its then-subsidiary KBR, Jones says she was held in the shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water by KBR, which posted armed security guards outside her door, who would not let her leave. Jones described the container as sparely furnished with a bed, table and lamp.
Sen. Franken was disgusted with this and made these points:
The story came to my attention of Jamie Leigh Jones who, when she was 19, went to Iraq to work for [defense contractor] KBR and she was put in the barracks with 400 men and was sexually harassed," Franken told the Huffington Post in a brief interview shortly after the vote. "She complained. But they didn't do anything about it. She was drugged and gang raped and they locked her up in a shipping container. She tried to sue KBR and they said you have a mandatory arbitration clause in your contract. She tried to fight back and said this is ridiculous. She took it to court and they have been fighting her for three years."So he wrote an amendment to address this. Personally trying to deny someone who was wronged, due process is just plain evil. And Haliburton is a pretty douchey organization, but this is more about those who are supposed to watch out for us and act as a buffer between business and the people."This bill would make it so that anybody in business with the Department of the Defense can't do this," he concluded emphatically. "They can't have mandatory arbitration on issues like assault and battery."
The final amendment passed 68-30. The Douche-Bags of the week are the 30 people who voted against. These people are actively trying to protect a company that not only tried to cover up the gang rape of one of its employees, but then threatened to fire that employee if they sought legal redress. So here you have the knuckle dragging republicans:
Alexander (R-TN)I will point out not a single woman member in the bunch.
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
-Cheers
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
A Fasion Move I Whole Heartedly Support!
I honestly hope Glamour sticks to this.
I could try to affect a righteous pose on how this is good because it shows women as they actually are! How it is less damaging to women's self-image, and may lead to less eating problems.
But well, that would be disingenuous on my part. Those are valid upsides. The truth is I just like girls with curves. Personally I have no use for girls that weigh less then my pumas! So there.
So down with Kate Moss and her ilk! Up with healthier looking girls with curves who I do not know your names yet!
Rock on wit yo' bad selfs!
-Cheers
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Health Care Debate...an Actual Debate!!
This morning on Morning Meeting with Dylan Ratigan, there was an interesting development. Mr. Ratigan hosted an actual debate on health care! Shocking I know. But it did happen.
The segment in quest was ostensibly to be a debate between Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and form New York Lt. Governor Betsy McCaughey (some how pronounced McCoy!). Now I am not going to present this as some sort of impartial and objective airing of differing points of view. I loathe Mrs. McCaughey. She has done more in the last 15 years to retard substantive health care reform then almost any other person.
Her track record on this issue is clear. If there is a democrat in the White House, she will be against virtually any health care reform they offer. The New Republic has a timely and long overdue piece attacking Mrs. McCaughey, especially since the very same publication was responsible for publishing her first misguided screed.
But I digress. In contrast to Mrs. McCaughey, Rep. Weiner has been vocal proponent of health care reform (a strong advocate of a single-payer system). So I am clearly on one side of this argument. But here is the segment on the Morning Meeting:
Obviously the host grew increasingly frustrated with Mrs. McCaughey's dissembling. Not only that, but I did very much enjoy the exchange over the "tort reform". While it is an issue which I talked about in much greater detail here, the statics just do not support the claim that it is the magic bullet that so many conservatives paint to be. I mean, viscerally it has the right feel to it. Lawyers are held in low regard by the general public, so it only stands to reason that they are somehow messing up health care too! The problem with that sort of rationalization, though cathartic, just is not an accurate assessment of what actually happens.
To add to that, when Mrs. McCaughey did finally answer Mr. Ratigan's question. Rep. Weiner took that opportunity to pounce. Pointing out accurately, that what she was suggestion was a removal of Medicare coverage for anyone currently 55 years old or younger. Not that I am opposed to some sort of age increase, in actuality I think the CBO's recommendation is a valid one. I just viscerally enjoy when a serial demagogue, gets out demagogued, or at the very least rhetorically treated the way they treat others.
As I stated earlier, it is just pleasant to see specious arguments challenged. Mr. Ratigan did an admirable job of trying to the keep the conversation tethered to the topic at hand. So it is worth a watch.
-Cheer
The segment in quest was ostensibly to be a debate between Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and form New York Lt. Governor Betsy McCaughey (some how pronounced McCoy!). Now I am not going to present this as some sort of impartial and objective airing of differing points of view. I loathe Mrs. McCaughey. She has done more in the last 15 years to retard substantive health care reform then almost any other person.
Her track record on this issue is clear. If there is a democrat in the White House, she will be against virtually any health care reform they offer. The New Republic has a timely and long overdue piece attacking Mrs. McCaughey, especially since the very same publication was responsible for publishing her first misguided screed.
But I digress. In contrast to Mrs. McCaughey, Rep. Weiner has been vocal proponent of health care reform (a strong advocate of a single-payer system). So I am clearly on one side of this argument. But here is the segment on the Morning Meeting:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Obviously the host grew increasingly frustrated with Mrs. McCaughey's dissembling. Not only that, but I did very much enjoy the exchange over the "tort reform". While it is an issue which I talked about in much greater detail here, the statics just do not support the claim that it is the magic bullet that so many conservatives paint to be. I mean, viscerally it has the right feel to it. Lawyers are held in low regard by the general public, so it only stands to reason that they are somehow messing up health care too! The problem with that sort of rationalization, though cathartic, just is not an accurate assessment of what actually happens.
To add to that, when Mrs. McCaughey did finally answer Mr. Ratigan's question. Rep. Weiner took that opportunity to pounce. Pointing out accurately, that what she was suggestion was a removal of Medicare coverage for anyone currently 55 years old or younger. Not that I am opposed to some sort of age increase, in actuality I think the CBO's recommendation is a valid one. I just viscerally enjoy when a serial demagogue, gets out demagogued, or at the very least rhetorically treated the way they treat others.
As I stated earlier, it is just pleasant to see specious arguments challenged. Mr. Ratigan did an admirable job of trying to the keep the conversation tethered to the topic at hand. So it is worth a watch.
-Cheer
Mental Health Break....
I will be back to posting about health care reform later today/week. But for today I had just had to post about this.
I present to you the "Craz-E" Burger.
A bacon cheeseburger, with a buttered Krispy Kreme bun. That's right a fraking buttered Krispy Kreme!!!!!
This ladies and gentlemen...is why we are fat. God. I feel my arteries clogging as I look at this thing.....
-Cheers
I present to you the "Craz-E" Burger.
A bacon cheeseburger, with a buttered Krispy Kreme bun. That's right a fraking buttered Krispy Kreme!!!!!
This ladies and gentlemen...is why we are fat. God. I feel my arteries clogging as I look at this thing.....
-Cheers
Monday, October 5, 2009
Moderation as a Religion...
The seeds of fetishized centrism are starting to show fruit. I have to echo Steve Benen and Atrios on this one.
That was such an awesome compromise.
-Cheers
The group, which didn't have any specific policy goals in mind and simply liked the idea of a small bill, specifically targeted $40 billion in proposed aid to states. Helping rescue states, Sen. Collins & Co. said, does not stimulate the economy, and as such doesn't belong in the legislation. Democratic leaders reluctantly went along -- they weren't given a choice since Republicans refused to give the bill an up-or-down vote -- and the $40 billion in state aid was eliminated.Whether the amount of money was necessary or not didn't even enter the equation. For centrists it is more about extracting their pound of flesh for moderation's sake, then about good policy.
In the past, government hiring had managed to somewhat offset losses in the private sector, but government jobs declined by 53,000, with the biggest number of cuts on the local and state levels. Even the Postal Service, which is included in the public-sector job statistics, dropped 5,300 jobs.
"The major surprise came from the public sector, where every level of government cut back," Naroff said. "The budget crises at the state and local levels have caused an awful lot of belt-tightening."
That was such an awesome compromise.
-Cheers
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Tell me again how great our health care system is....
No words just a graph. (Click on the pic to see a larger version)
-Cheers
-Cheers
Friday, October 2, 2009
Health care Debate....Part.....
Pretty much the deck is stacked against citizens getting a fair shake in the health care reform debate. Last night provided the perfect example of that, and earned (the often linked to here) Ezra Klein a place on my "blogs you should be reading" list.
His post on the 'The Status Quo Wins in Health-Care Reform' is a must read.
If you do not know much about Sen Wyden's Free Choice Amendment, it quite simply gave most of the insured populace a choice about insurance. It would give us the same sort of options members of congress and federal employees get with their coverage. Mainly it would give people the ability to chose coverage, portability of that coverage, and reasonable rates even if unemployed.
That was, what was defeated last night.
So yeah. I am a bit disappointed.
-Cheers
His post on the 'The Status Quo Wins in Health-Care Reform' is a must read.
If you do not know much about Sen Wyden's Free Choice Amendment, it quite simply gave most of the insured populace a choice about insurance. It would give us the same sort of options members of congress and federal employees get with their coverage. Mainly it would give people the ability to chose coverage, portability of that coverage, and reasonable rates even if unemployed.
That was, what was defeated last night.
So yeah. I am a bit disappointed.
-Cheers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)