Politics
grrlscientist | October 23, 2006When you see Bush's bone-headed responses to cutting-edge scientific research, especially global warming and embryonic stem cell reasearch, it's easy to think that he is the worst thing to happen to science in the history of this nation. But other 19th and 20th century presidents have ignored science to further their own political and religious agendas, so is Bush really the worst enemy of scientific research?
If you are the science advisor to the president, you would deny this allegation;
According to John Marburger, Bush's science advisor, allegations that Bush is harder on science than…
pharyngula | October 23, 2006Would you believe that Barack Obama is the anti-christ?
And here I just thought he was an over-hyped, ineffectual politician with a gift for speech-making. Maybe I should vote for him for President of the World after all.
pharyngula | October 23, 2006Atrios feels somewhat vindicated by Olbermann's success:
Of course, stupid people like me have long suggested that the way to counterprogram a right wing news network was not to put on slightly less right wing programming, and that a left-of-center block of programming on MSNBC in prime time would spike their ratings, but no one listens to stupid people like me.
There's a general lesson there. The way to oppose right-wing media dominance is not to set up a slightly less wingnutty version of the Fox News. The way to oppose a Republican takeover of congress, the executive branch, and the…
clock | October 21, 2006Am I going to link to everyhing Sara Robinson writes? I guess the answer is yes, as long as she keeps churning out posts like this one. It's short - read it twice:
The government cannot harass you or jail you for your associations, your political views, or your religious beliefs. (Or, at least, they couldn't, right up until last Monday.) It does NOT mean that the rest of us non-government types are required to hold our tongues and smile while people say things that are stupid, dangerous, or contrary to fact.
And it is interesting that Mr.WD wrote on the very same topic today:
Tolerance…
clock | October 21, 2006...does not automatically translate into Republican advantage:
Will the new GOP ad make you more or less likely to vote for Republicans?
Less likely67%
More likely33%
Total Votes: 82,879
grrlscientist | October 21, 2006A friend emailed this image, prompting me to ask; when will the pastor of this congregation be arrested and detained indefinitely as a terrorist?
A reader points out that this sign was created using an online church sign generator. Well, of course! That explains why the sign was not vandalized.
Create your own church sign and feel free to share it with my readers!
.
.
tags: Bush, politics, terrorism, freedom of speech
jlynch | October 21, 2006Keith says:
We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who may now, if he so decides, declare not merely any non-American citizens "Unlawful Enemy Combatants" and ship them somewhere -- anywhere -- but may now, if he so decides, declare you an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant" and ship you somewhere - anywhere.
And if you think this, hyperbole or hysteria... ask the newspaper editors when John Adams was President, or the pacifists when Woodrow Wilson was President, or the Japanese at Manzanar when Franklin Roosevelt was President.
And if you somehow think Habeas Corpus has not…
oracknows | October 21, 2006
Die-hard Tolkien fan that I am, I was struck at how breath-takingly stupid an analogy this was, even for Rick Santorum. For one thing, as Lance Manion points out, the forces of good didn't start the war. For another thing, Frodo in essence failed. He succumbed to the temptation of the One Ring at the last minute and claimed it for himself. Only the greedy intervention of Gollum, still lusting for the Ring, saved the day. (Of course, if Frodo hadn't shown mercy to Gollum earlier in the story, Gollum wouldn't have been alive to unwittingly save the day, but that's another matter.) The most…
grrlscientist | October 21, 2006A government led by pants-wearing individuals? Um, no.
Pantisocracy
n. government by all equally; anarchistic community. pantisocratic, a.
Usage: If this country was a pantisocracy, we would sell a lot of guns.
.
tags: word of the week, vocabulary, politics
drorzel | October 21, 2006It's not the sort of thing I usually follow, but Ethan Zuckerman is blogging about the talks at the Pop!Tech conference (Pop!Tech 2006 site). There's an impressive variety of topics, and Ethan gives good summaries of the talks (well, at least, the summaries themselves are pretty readable-- I can't speak for the accuracy, as I haven't seen the actual talks...).
Also, ScienceBlogs local favorite Richard Dawkins does a drive-by talk, so people here might be interested in that. (My personal opinion of Dawkins is closer to that in this David Weinberger post that Ethan cites.)
jlynch | October 20, 2006From Kevin Tillman, Army Ranger and brother of Pat:
Somehow we were sent to invade a nation because it was a direct threat to the American people, or to the world, or harbored terrorists, or was involved in the September 11 attacks, or received weapons-grade uranium from Niger, or had mobile weapons labs, or WMD, or had a need to be liberated, or we needed to establish a democracy, or stop an insurgency, or stop a civil war we created that can't be called a civil war even though it is. Something like that.
Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting…
clock | October 20, 2006An oldie (March 28, 2005) but goodie, bound to stir up the comment section (why do I post controversial stuff on Fridays when the traffic starts coming down?)
WHAT SHOULD WE CALL THEM?
First, who is "them"? Second, why should they be "called"? Third, who are "we"? Fourth, why "should" we call them anything? Finally, "what" is the appropriate name? These are all interconnected questions, dealing with the current US political environment, and the notion of "framing".
In his book Moral Politics (MP) and later, more explicitely, in "Don't Think Of An Elephant" (DTOAE), George Lakoff…
mixingmemory | October 19, 2006Since I posted on a really bad study that's outside of my area of expertise the other day, I thought I should make it up to you by posting on what I think is a good study by Gelman et al. that's also outside of my area of expertise today. Plus, with a title like "Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state: What's the matter with Connecticut?" (via the Columbia University stats blog, where Gelman is a contributor) it has to be blogged (the entire study can be read at that link). I mostly read it to learn about the methodology (interesting use of regression, if you're interested in that sort…
clock | October 19, 2006Only Diebold can save the Republicans from the voters' anger in November.
The apparent optimism of Republicans bordering on cockiness makes me nervous - either they are totally delusional, or they are just playing the optimism game, or they know something we don't.
grrlscientist | October 19, 2006Er, I was referring to the public opinion polls!
According to a recent MSN/Wall Street Journal public opinion poll, Rethuglicans have sunk so low that they can slide under the belly of a snake whilst wearing a tophat.
With congressional elections less than three weeks away, the Republican party's approval ratings are at an all-time low, with approval of the Republican-led Congress at its lowest point in 14 years, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday. [Cited story]
Another story analyzes the poll results and states the obvious; the Foley sex scandal and…
clock | October 19, 2006The Master explains just how deeply flawed the Santorum quip was:
But Aragorn didn't start the war!
Nothing in Middle-earth happens by accident
grrlscientist | October 18, 2006You won't believe this but Senator McCain says he thinks he will commit suicide if the Democrats win the Senate in this upcoming election.
McCain, on a visit to Iowa to campaign for Republican congressional candidates, was asked his reaction to a potential Democratic takeover of the Senate in the November 7 elections.
"I think I'd just commit suicide," McCain told reporters, to accompanying laughter from Republicans standing with him. "I don't want to face that eventuality because I don't think it's going to happen."
Promises, promises .. do you think McCain is serious? Regardless of…
jrosenhouse | October 18, 2006Check out this photograph. It's Bush meeting with a truly odious collection of sycophants and lickspittles: Sean Hannity, Michael Medved, Neal Boortz, Laura Ingraham, and Michael Gallagher. Gallagher is the only one of the bunch with whom I'm unfamiliar, but his inclusion in this photograph tells me everything I need to know about him. It's amazing who has the ear of the President these days.