Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
There's kind of a sliding scale here, fella
Sanford: I Shouldn't Resign Because "God Can Use Imperfect People To Perform His Will" TPMMuckraker
There's a range at work governor, and while it's certainly a nation or a states choice whether they accept your kind of imperfection, they don't have to tolerate things without limit. If they find your conduct objectionable enough, you're not making friends by invoking it as "imperfection" or by saying you're doing God's will, when you clearly and now openly have broken one of the commandments.
There's a range at work governor, and while it's certainly a nation or a states choice whether they accept your kind of imperfection, they don't have to tolerate things without limit. If they find your conduct objectionable enough, you're not making friends by invoking it as "imperfection" or by saying you're doing God's will, when you clearly and now openly have broken one of the commandments.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Stupid? Let me tell you what stupid is, mister.
The VO Stupid Facebook Meme Of The Day: "Stupid Facebook Meme Of The Day
A neat “progressive” meme is currently all the rage on Facebook. Stupid, but it sure sounds nice."
That's a Right Wing Blogger's take on things. But what's he calling stupid?
That's what he thinks is stupid.
I seem to remember this little thing in the Declaration of Independence about Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Not dying because you couldn't afford healthcare seems to cover two out of three just on flat practical terms, and if you understand just how constricting the economic consequences of serious illnesses are, you'd see it covered all three.
Oh, I know, I know. Maybe you'd have to comply with some regulations, deal with some red tape to get it. But are you any more free with the current system? Are you free to switch jobs if you've had a stroke, or a heart attack? Are your kids free to move from home, if your illness leaves you dependant on them for their livelihood?
If it weren't for Medicare, or social security, how many old folks would have to have moved in with their children, becoming a burden on them? Part of the point of these programs is to free the young and healthy to seek out lives of their own, rather than have to support their parents in their old age.
But that's just the economic argument, really. If I really wanted to be a bleeding heart about it, poverty shouldn't mean a death sentence for those with serious diseases. Come on, you Christians out there, this is a two-fer, heal the sick and help the poor! Or do you not fear the big fella saying "Go away, I know you not."?
As for people going broke because they're sick?
Look, part of the reason people go broke on this crap is because nobody can reasonably pay these bills themselves. The market is simply not shaped in a sane fashion for the person without health coverage. But worse, the folks who run the system look for every possible opportunity to dump people out of the very system that's supposed to keep them from having to pay all those costs out of pocket.
I support the Public Option, because I know from bitter personal experience just how screwed up this healthcare system is. I know people dead and maimed because of medical mistakes. Medical bills burden even those in my extended family with the highest incomes, the best coverage and the best doctors.
Folks, the stupidity is waiting on this. The stupidity is indulging the policies of those who had fifteen years to get this right, an opportunity they got for themselves throught he same kind of concerted effort they're giving now, but never did much good. The reason this meme is bouncing around the internet so fast is that my experience is not uncommon, and like me, those many people were folks who could have been satisfied, if the Republicans had created a workable alternative instead of just shooting down everybody else's suggestions.
I don't do Facebook, but if I did, I would agree. As it is, that paragraph is up there, and I invite anybody with an account to post that just like folks suggested. It'd be the smart message to spread.
Smarter than the Republican's message: Poverty should be a fatal disease, and the sick deserve to go broke. Their fault, really.
A neat “progressive” meme is currently all the rage on Facebook. Stupid, but it sure sounds nice."
That's a Right Wing Blogger's take on things. But what's he calling stupid?
No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should
go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status
for the rest of the day.
That's what he thinks is stupid.
I seem to remember this little thing in the Declaration of Independence about Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Not dying because you couldn't afford healthcare seems to cover two out of three just on flat practical terms, and if you understand just how constricting the economic consequences of serious illnesses are, you'd see it covered all three.
Oh, I know, I know. Maybe you'd have to comply with some regulations, deal with some red tape to get it. But are you any more free with the current system? Are you free to switch jobs if you've had a stroke, or a heart attack? Are your kids free to move from home, if your illness leaves you dependant on them for their livelihood?
If it weren't for Medicare, or social security, how many old folks would have to have moved in with their children, becoming a burden on them? Part of the point of these programs is to free the young and healthy to seek out lives of their own, rather than have to support their parents in their old age.
But that's just the economic argument, really. If I really wanted to be a bleeding heart about it, poverty shouldn't mean a death sentence for those with serious diseases. Come on, you Christians out there, this is a two-fer, heal the sick and help the poor! Or do you not fear the big fella saying "Go away, I know you not."?
As for people going broke because they're sick?
Look, part of the reason people go broke on this crap is because nobody can reasonably pay these bills themselves. The market is simply not shaped in a sane fashion for the person without health coverage. But worse, the folks who run the system look for every possible opportunity to dump people out of the very system that's supposed to keep them from having to pay all those costs out of pocket.
I support the Public Option, because I know from bitter personal experience just how screwed up this healthcare system is. I know people dead and maimed because of medical mistakes. Medical bills burden even those in my extended family with the highest incomes, the best coverage and the best doctors.
Folks, the stupidity is waiting on this. The stupidity is indulging the policies of those who had fifteen years to get this right, an opportunity they got for themselves throught he same kind of concerted effort they're giving now, but never did much good. The reason this meme is bouncing around the internet so fast is that my experience is not uncommon, and like me, those many people were folks who could have been satisfied, if the Republicans had created a workable alternative instead of just shooting down everybody else's suggestions.
I don't do Facebook, but if I did, I would agree. As it is, that paragraph is up there, and I invite anybody with an account to post that just like folks suggested. It'd be the smart message to spread.
Smarter than the Republican's message: Poverty should be a fatal disease, and the sick deserve to go broke. Their fault, really.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
Well, if you're sincerely sorry,it's accepted, but...
I'm not sure how well an apology fixes things like this.
If you are sincerely apologetic, break ties to this kind of racism. If you really were unaware of how offensive this was, when you first saw it, then you should consider what that says about who you're listening to, who you're hanging around with.
Folks on the right in general are not making good judgments as to who or what they're hanging around with. They're hanging around with Secessionists, people who support the violent overthrow of our elected government, racists, and others whose reputations are deservedly low. That has an effect on what a person judges to be appropriate.
This episode, one way or another, helps to highlight the extremity to which the right has drawn itself. It's time for the Republican to reconsider their associations, before their associations lead even more people to reconsider their support for them.
If you are sincerely apologetic, break ties to this kind of racism. If you really were unaware of how offensive this was, when you first saw it, then you should consider what that says about who you're listening to, who you're hanging around with.
Folks on the right in general are not making good judgments as to who or what they're hanging around with. They're hanging around with Secessionists, people who support the violent overthrow of our elected government, racists, and others whose reputations are deservedly low. That has an effect on what a person judges to be appropriate.
This episode, one way or another, helps to highlight the extremity to which the right has drawn itself. It's time for the Republican to reconsider their associations, before their associations lead even more people to reconsider their support for them.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
On Empathy
Short comment, pretty simple: As far as empathy goes in law, the Republicans state that empathy eviscerates impartiality.
Merriam Webster defines empathy so:
After all, with Brown vs. the Board of Education, the critical point is whether Separate is Equal. Some White guy who doesn't have to go to the back of the bus might see it that way, but another person may argue, indeed, that the very act of separating a person out based on appearance or racial ancestry constitutes unequal treatment. If you only consider an argument from one side, how can you call yourself impartial?
Merriam Webster defines empathy so:
If you think about it in those terms, then obviously, short of rendering yourself entirely ignorant of both cases being made and recusing yourself from any matter faintly related to your own experience, you can't be impartial unless you consider both sides of the story, both arguments, without bias. Considering the perspective of both sides is critical to quality judgments, especially when the law asks questions whose criteria involve fairness, equity, and equality.the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner
After all, with Brown vs. the Board of Education, the critical point is whether Separate is Equal. Some White guy who doesn't have to go to the back of the bus might see it that way, but another person may argue, indeed, that the very act of separating a person out based on appearance or racial ancestry constitutes unequal treatment. If you only consider an argument from one side, how can you call yourself impartial?
Thursday, May 21, 2009
No, no, it couldn't be.
Is That a Euphemism?
Among the names on the Stormy Daniels Exploratory Committee: Dick Johnson, Peter Rodman, Percy Hardwicke, and Long Min Hung. Apparently tabling measures is very popular, and everybody joins in on that intercourse.
What?
Among the names on the Stormy Daniels Exploratory Committee: Dick Johnson, Peter Rodman, Percy Hardwicke, and Long Min Hung. Apparently tabling measures is very popular, and everybody joins in on that intercourse.
What?
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Insert Headline Here
Insert Headline Here
I'm just going to leave the defaults up. That's what folks at the LA Times did.
The thing to keep in mind here is this: Once upon a time, you did your best to be productive and earn a profit by drumming up business well. Then came the age of the dominance of finance and speculation in the markets, and so it became more important to consistently make profits. But of course, you had to pay executives a lot for their executiveness. So guess what they cut? the jobs of people who just did things, who could fit in nice neat little slots and be taken out and replaced.
And so, business has become a game of how close to the edge you can run a business, before you run it into the ground. The problem with operating what's essentially a low flying business is that there's little room for correction. When the ground comes up to meet you, as it does in tough financial times, you really feel it.
There's something pathological about running a business this way, something strained.
I'm just going to leave the defaults up. That's what folks at the LA Times did.
The thing to keep in mind here is this: Once upon a time, you did your best to be productive and earn a profit by drumming up business well. Then came the age of the dominance of finance and speculation in the markets, and so it became more important to consistently make profits. But of course, you had to pay executives a lot for their executiveness. So guess what they cut? the jobs of people who just did things, who could fit in nice neat little slots and be taken out and replaced.
And so, business has become a game of how close to the edge you can run a business, before you run it into the ground. The problem with operating what's essentially a low flying business is that there's little room for correction. When the ground comes up to meet you, as it does in tough financial times, you really feel it.
There's something pathological about running a business this way, something strained.
Let's speak of broad overgeneralizations...
Oh Noes! The Left is organizing a large organization of people do do things! It must be the Hitler Youth! Or at least a Left Wing Slush Fund.
Okay, let me explain this in rather unconfused terms. The Hitler Youth was Adolf's personal youth fan club. It was created during the rise of the Nazi Party. It was paramilitary. Kids were actually trained to become Nazi soldiers.
As for calling it a slush fund, isn't it kind of early to allege corruption?
Of course, this is just me being literal about things, using words for what they mean rather than inventing paramilitary corrupt organizations out of thin air when faced by anything that resembles new deal type programs.
This is what comes of what we could call a vicious cycle of overheated rhetoric combining with the excessive credulity that many on the far right have of each others claims. Fictions far outrun realities when nobody's factchecking themselves.
Oh, and folks: it's voluntary.
Okay, let me explain this in rather unconfused terms. The Hitler Youth was Adolf's personal youth fan club. It was created during the rise of the Nazi Party. It was paramilitary. Kids were actually trained to become Nazi soldiers.
As for calling it a slush fund, isn't it kind of early to allege corruption?
Of course, this is just me being literal about things, using words for what they mean rather than inventing paramilitary corrupt organizations out of thin air when faced by anything that resembles new deal type programs.
This is what comes of what we could call a vicious cycle of overheated rhetoric combining with the excessive credulity that many on the far right have of each others claims. Fictions far outrun realities when nobody's factchecking themselves.
Oh, and folks: it's voluntary.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
An intriguing angle on Bernie Madoff's "Ponzi" scheme
This makes Madoff's case all the more intriguing, if right. The author makes the case that Madoff's fund wasn't a Ponzi scheme, but in fact a very complex, sophisticated money laundering operation.
The connection the author makes that grabs my attention is the one with the groups and individuals who own GM and Chrysler. Have to wonder what comes of this.
The connection the author makes that grabs my attention is the one with the groups and individuals who own GM and Chrysler. Have to wonder what comes of this.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Prince sends note to suicide couple's family - CNN.com
Prince sends note to suicide couple's family - CNN.com:
The insanity in one particular passage in this sad story speaks for itself:
Yes, if they could have killed themselves at home, they might still be alive today. Some people are actually arguing that killing yourself abroad is more dangerous than killing yourself at home. Me, I think both actions come with a strong chance of death. But that's just me, stuck in my old-fashioned ways.
The insanity in one particular passage in this sad story speaks for itself:
"Had they had the option of an assisted death in this country they may
still be alive, as their physical ability to travel would not have been a
factor," said Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying.
Yes, if they could have killed themselves at home, they might still be alive today. Some people are actually arguing that killing yourself abroad is more dangerous than killing yourself at home. Me, I think both actions come with a strong chance of death. But that's just me, stuck in my old-fashioned ways.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Let's define irony.
This is what Rush really thinks about what he does:
This is what happens when Republicans don't agree with this guy.
The conservative movement is tearing itself apart over a guy who intentionally provokes an atmosphere of hostility on his program in order to attract viewers. There's a certain poetic irony in this turn of events. The GOP benefited from similar tactics to that which Limbaugh describes in the video, tactics that made the Republicans the center of attention, the party of ideas it seemed.
Ideas? To be honest, they were little more than talking points designed to sell policies that were discredited by history, by clothing them in attractive language and framing. Where they about being serious conservatives? No. There really was no way for them to be that. They could trot out all their truisms, though, and make Democrats look bad or capitulate to certain policy by essentially wrapping everybody in a world where Republicans had the good ideas that work. The problem came when their ideas had to work, and yet didn't. Beating up the press didn't win Iraq for Bush. The rejection of federalism didn't help the Gulf Coast after Katrina. The destruction of accountability and responsibility in the regulatory regime didn't help business avoid a repeat of the events that sent us into a great Depression last time.
The Republicans were different, and for a while, people thought they might be different to a good effect. Unfortunately for Americans, we were just repeating the same mistakes we made before as a country.
Hat tip to JL Finch on the video
This is what happens when Republicans don't agree with this guy.
The conservative movement is tearing itself apart over a guy who intentionally provokes an atmosphere of hostility on his program in order to attract viewers. There's a certain poetic irony in this turn of events. The GOP benefited from similar tactics to that which Limbaugh describes in the video, tactics that made the Republicans the center of attention, the party of ideas it seemed.
Ideas? To be honest, they were little more than talking points designed to sell policies that were discredited by history, by clothing them in attractive language and framing. Where they about being serious conservatives? No. There really was no way for them to be that. They could trot out all their truisms, though, and make Democrats look bad or capitulate to certain policy by essentially wrapping everybody in a world where Republicans had the good ideas that work. The problem came when their ideas had to work, and yet didn't. Beating up the press didn't win Iraq for Bush. The rejection of federalism didn't help the Gulf Coast after Katrina. The destruction of accountability and responsibility in the regulatory regime didn't help business avoid a repeat of the events that sent us into a great Depression last time.
The Republicans were different, and for a while, people thought they might be different to a good effect. Unfortunately for Americans, we were just repeating the same mistakes we made before as a country.
Hat tip to JL Finch on the video
This is absolutely no cause for worry!
Former Republican Senator leading watchdog has taken a seat on the board of a subsidiary of Bank of New York Mellon. How can it be? The Republicans are fully able to sort out their conflicts of interests for the good of the country. Just look at Halliburton and Dick Cheney!
Seriously, though, when are the people in that party going to shock me by not shocking me with their behavior?
Seriously, though, when are the people in that party going to shock me by not shocking me with their behavior?
One Question: Are They Now French?
Blackwater Founder Prince Steps Down As Xe Chief
Ond I salute you, Monsieur Prince! Truly you are Xe King of Xe worldz marssehnarees! Xe Hiztory books will prais yor actsheenz!
Ond I salute you, Monsieur Prince! Truly you are Xe King of Xe worldz marssehnarees! Xe Hiztory books will prais yor actsheenz!
Sunday, March 1, 2009
It's not dead. It's Pining. Pining, for the FJORDS!
Oh, how horrible. Another excuse for these folks to say that they never had a truly conservative set of leaders.
I'm not going to count conservatism out just yet. But I can't say I look at the morale boost these folks are looking for as the most constructive element of a recovery. It was the inability to admit defeat, or at least the lack of success, that led Republicans to this point.
When are they going to reconsider things? When will they see that you can clothe old principles in new policies, and that a failure to do so will only guarantee further removes from public opinion.
Republicans must realize that the strength of their own beliefs is not enough. They must convince other people of what they believe, and the way they're going about things, they're confirming the worse views of their party.
But with their tactics, they're only reminding people what stubborn, uncompromising, obnoxious political figures they are. The Republicans need humble statesmen, need people that encourage the party as a whole to make peace with the rest of the country. The Republicans neither do themselves nor the country a favor by heightening the volume and the anger of their politics. They failed to maintain the trust of the American people, failed to create the conditions to justify their ideology with results.
I'm not going to count conservatism out just yet. But I can't say I look at the morale boost these folks are looking for as the most constructive element of a recovery. It was the inability to admit defeat, or at least the lack of success, that led Republicans to this point.
When are they going to reconsider things? When will they see that you can clothe old principles in new policies, and that a failure to do so will only guarantee further removes from public opinion.
Republicans must realize that the strength of their own beliefs is not enough. They must convince other people of what they believe, and the way they're going about things, they're confirming the worse views of their party.
But with their tactics, they're only reminding people what stubborn, uncompromising, obnoxious political figures they are. The Republicans need humble statesmen, need people that encourage the party as a whole to make peace with the rest of the country. The Republicans neither do themselves nor the country a favor by heightening the volume and the anger of their politics. They failed to maintain the trust of the American people, failed to create the conditions to justify their ideology with results.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
The Failure of the Market in Cute Cartoons!
A video that can help the layman figure out the way we got in our current economic mess.
The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.
The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Moron.
Video - CNBC.com: "Santelli's Chicago Tea Party"
Yes, yes, you people just did a bang-up job before the government came in and interfered. I hope the regulations give people like this rectal exams. Not that I'm a proponent of invasive government. I just would like to see America safe from the insane, unhinged Wall Street Free Market Freaks, who can't see past the end of their noses much less past their Trading Screens.
There's more to an economy than just letting shitheads like him play all day in the financial sandbox. These brats need to grow up.
Yes, yes, you people just did a bang-up job before the government came in and interfered. I hope the regulations give people like this rectal exams. Not that I'm a proponent of invasive government. I just would like to see America safe from the insane, unhinged Wall Street Free Market Freaks, who can't see past the end of their noses much less past their Trading Screens.
There's more to an economy than just letting shitheads like him play all day in the financial sandbox. These brats need to grow up.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Small World, isn't it?
Source: Kevin Drum's Blog at Mother Jones- Quote of the Day - 02.17.09
What we're seeing can be a very good function, so long as we keep the information good. By this kind of small world network (you know, six degrees of separation), we can see information pass out to the public very quickly. It makes it harder to keep secrets.
And easier to spread lies quickly. But then again, telecommunications already did that. The beauty of the Internet is that it allows the correction to flow back along the same lines with incredible speed.
But can their be something better?
Yes. Figure it this way: Individuals who are better than average researchers, have better than average memories, who are close to different subject, can pass along information that folks otherwise wouldn't get. In this way, the intellectual and situational advantages of a few in gathering information become the advantages of those who read them, and who subsequently provide links to the blog or pass on the original sources.
So, ask not what the interwebz can do for you, but what you can do for the interwebz!
What we're seeing can be a very good function, so long as we keep the information good. By this kind of small world network (you know, six degrees of separation), we can see information pass out to the public very quickly. It makes it harder to keep secrets.
And easier to spread lies quickly. But then again, telecommunications already did that. The beauty of the Internet is that it allows the correction to flow back along the same lines with incredible speed.
But can their be something better?
Yes. Figure it this way: Individuals who are better than average researchers, have better than average memories, who are close to different subject, can pass along information that folks otherwise wouldn't get. In this way, the intellectual and situational advantages of a few in gathering information become the advantages of those who read them, and who subsequently provide links to the blog or pass on the original sources.
So, ask not what the interwebz can do for you, but what you can do for the interwebz!
That's just Ridiculous
I was genuinely surprised to hear about this. I mean damn. If Hannity likes the Music, he ought to explain to his listeners what the lyrics actually mean.
First verse is about a rich guy sneering at an old lady for collecting welfare. "Just for fun, he says Get a Job!"
Just remember what the refrain says:
Interesting that even Hannity's song of choice argues against his beliefs.
First verse is about a rich guy sneering at an old lady for collecting welfare. "Just for fun, he says Get a Job!"
Just remember what the refrain says:
That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
That's just the way it is
But don't you believe them
Interesting that even Hannity's song of choice argues against his beliefs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)