OXFAM International just released a staggering report on inequality in the world. Here are the highlights.
• Almost half of the world’s wealth is now owned by just one percent of the population.
• The wealth of the one percent richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion. That’s 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the world’s population.
• The bottom half of the world’s population owns the same as the richest 85 people in the world.
• Seven out of ten people live in countries where economic inequality has increased in the last 30 years.
• The richest one percent increased their share of income in 24 out of 26 countries for which we have data between 1980 and 2012.
• In the US, the wealthiest one percent captured 95 percent of post-financial crisis growth since 2009, while the bottom 90 percent became poorer.
The world economy simply cannot be sustained with this level of inequality. Demand is not where it should be and this is exactly why. If this gap continues to widen, demand will fall and more people will have less money as smaller businesses collapse.
Check out this video clip below from "Morning Joe" which illustrates how this is no longer a left-right divide.
Joe sounds quite a bit like Ronald Reagan in that 1986 speech I cite often. Note that they discuss how it isn't simply one issue like the tax code or the minimum wage but many issues that have coalesced into a fundamental systemic failure.
Barack Obama came to Washington to change it and this could be just the issue to do it. My colleagues on the Right and in the Tea Party assure me that they loathe the political and aristocratic class and its rent seeking as much as I do. So, what are we going to do about it?
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Socialist Windmills
The other day in class we were talking about the chemical spill in West Virginia by Freedom Industries (ironic name, no?) and that discussion led into the topic of renewable energy. I mentioned the windmills we see when we drive down to Iowa to visit my in-laws. That was right around the time a student name Billy chimed in. A little background first...
Billy clearly has very conservative parents who feed him a lot of disinformation. When we do current events, he always makes some sort of anti-Obama comment followed by right wing blogsphere nonsense. The rest of the class usually rolls their eyes (even the Republicans) and, invariably, a debate ensues. Billy is a good kid, though, and is a ton of fun.
When the subject of wind power came up, he asked, "You mean those socialist windmills?"
"What makes you think they are socialist?" I wondered.
"Because Democrats support them so that means they are socialist."
After a brief explanation of the differences between the Democratic Party and socialism, as well as assurances from me that wind power in Iowa is privately owned, Billy seemed to understand the nuance.
I have to wonder how much longer we are going to have to clean out plaque from these poor people...
Billy clearly has very conservative parents who feed him a lot of disinformation. When we do current events, he always makes some sort of anti-Obama comment followed by right wing blogsphere nonsense. The rest of the class usually rolls their eyes (even the Republicans) and, invariably, a debate ensues. Billy is a good kid, though, and is a ton of fun.
When the subject of wind power came up, he asked, "You mean those socialist windmills?"
"What makes you think they are socialist?" I wondered.
"Because Democrats support them so that means they are socialist."
After a brief explanation of the differences between the Democratic Party and socialism, as well as assurances from me that wind power in Iowa is privately owned, Billy seemed to understand the nuance.
I have to wonder how much longer we are going to have to clean out plaque from these poor people...
Monday, January 20, 2014
Some Thoughts On Dr. King
The Friday before Dr. King's birthday, I always have students ask me what I think of Dr. King. As I invariably do, I ask them what they think. But this year, I had two freshmen pretty much pin me to the wall in the last five minutes of Civics class and tell me to (once and for all!) give my opinion. So, this is what I told them.
Like many figures in history, Dr, King is "heroified," to use a James Loewen term. To a certain extent, this transformation has done him a great disservice. My primary gripe is that he is consistently made out to be a more secular figure when it was Jesus Christ and His heart of peace and love that drove Dr. King to action. Certainly, he had a profound sense of civic duty for equal rights but we shouldn't mistake the origin of his passion. The other element of his personality I urged my two students to consider is that he was not a perfect man. I wrote about this two years ago and it is still very important to remember. He made mistakes just like anyone else. He had doubts just like anyone else. He had moments of weakness just like anyone else.
In the final analysis, however, our country today is something he would have broken down and cried over with tears of joy. I told the two young women in front of me, one black and one white and best friends since pre-school, that in so many ways his dream has been realized. We aren't perfect in terms of race or prejudice but we have come a very long way. My students generation...my children's generation...simply can't conceive of a time when people were treated differently because they were black. It's as foreign to them as a time when people didn't text or have a computer. They just don't grasp the concept and that means that a great stain has more or less been culturally eliminated. I then asked them what they think Dr. King would be doing today if he was around. They both said the same thing.
"Helping people who are sick and who are poor."
His dream continues to be fulfilled.
Like many figures in history, Dr, King is "heroified," to use a James Loewen term. To a certain extent, this transformation has done him a great disservice. My primary gripe is that he is consistently made out to be a more secular figure when it was Jesus Christ and His heart of peace and love that drove Dr. King to action. Certainly, he had a profound sense of civic duty for equal rights but we shouldn't mistake the origin of his passion. The other element of his personality I urged my two students to consider is that he was not a perfect man. I wrote about this two years ago and it is still very important to remember. He made mistakes just like anyone else. He had doubts just like anyone else. He had moments of weakness just like anyone else.
In the final analysis, however, our country today is something he would have broken down and cried over with tears of joy. I told the two young women in front of me, one black and one white and best friends since pre-school, that in so many ways his dream has been realized. We aren't perfect in terms of race or prejudice but we have come a very long way. My students generation...my children's generation...simply can't conceive of a time when people were treated differently because they were black. It's as foreign to them as a time when people didn't text or have a computer. They just don't grasp the concept and that means that a great stain has more or less been culturally eliminated. I then asked them what they think Dr. King would be doing today if he was around. They both said the same thing.
"Helping people who are sick and who are poor."
His dream continues to be fulfilled.
Sunday, January 19, 2014
Diamonds are Forever
Carl Sagan used to say that we are made of star-stuff. In his book The Cosmic Connection (1973) he wrote:
As every kid who read Superman comics knows, you can make diamonds by exerting great pressure and heat on carbon. Synthetic diamonds are now made by high-pressure high-temperature processes in labs: they're harder and more reliable than natural diamonds. You can also make diamonds with a process called chemical vapor deposition, which allows diamonds to be used in heat sinks and electronics.
Diamonds hold a special place in American culture. Diamonds are a girl's best friend. Diamonds are forever. Diamonds are the usually the centerpiece of an engagement ring, symbolizing eternal love. Diamonds are the gift for the sixtieth anniversary (down from the 75th), an occasion that is exceedingly rare. Diamond was long the hardest substance known, but has recently been displaced by wurtzite boron nitride and lonsdaleite.
Now you can have the carbon in the bodies of your loved ones turned into diamonds, so that they too can be forever. Companies in Switzerland and the United States offer services for turning cremated human ash into diamonds.
Depending on the size of the diamond, this can cost from $5,000 to $22,000. The diamonds are usually blue, because of the boron in the body. It takes about a pound of ash to create a diamond.
When we bury our dead or cast their ashes into the sea or a forest, their remains will ultimately return to the cycle of life. Their carbon will be be incorporated into the cells of bacteria and fungi, then plants, then animals and perhaps another person some day.
But if you turn your loved one's ashes into diamonds, their carbon will be locked up forever in a glittering gem, impervious to decay and corruption. Diamond sublimates at 6558ºF, which means diamonds may last until the sun bloats into a red giant in seven billion years, and may even survive that.
Is having your loved one turned into a diamond horribly creepy or hopelessly romantic? Is being a diamond immortality or an eternity of isolation?
Our Sun is a second- or third-generation star. All of the rocky and metallic material we stand on, the iron in our blood, the calcium in our teeth, the carbon in our genes were produced billions of years ago in the interior of a red giant star. We are made of star-stuff.We are recycled from material that was created when stars exploded billions of years ago. The carbon in our bodies has been recycled innumerable times, as it has gone from plants who drew it from the air, into herbivores who ate the plants, into predators who ate the herbivores, then exhaled by the predators, which was then inspired by other plants, which our ancestors ate, and we eat today.
As every kid who read Superman comics knows, you can make diamonds by exerting great pressure and heat on carbon. Synthetic diamonds are now made by high-pressure high-temperature processes in labs: they're harder and more reliable than natural diamonds. You can also make diamonds with a process called chemical vapor deposition, which allows diamonds to be used in heat sinks and electronics.
Diamonds hold a special place in American culture. Diamonds are a girl's best friend. Diamonds are forever. Diamonds are the usually the centerpiece of an engagement ring, symbolizing eternal love. Diamonds are the gift for the sixtieth anniversary (down from the 75th), an occasion that is exceedingly rare. Diamond was long the hardest substance known, but has recently been displaced by wurtzite boron nitride and lonsdaleite.
 |
| Diamonds made from the ashes of animals |
Depending on the size of the diamond, this can cost from $5,000 to $22,000. The diamonds are usually blue, because of the boron in the body. It takes about a pound of ash to create a diamond.
When we bury our dead or cast their ashes into the sea or a forest, their remains will ultimately return to the cycle of life. Their carbon will be be incorporated into the cells of bacteria and fungi, then plants, then animals and perhaps another person some day.
But if you turn your loved one's ashes into diamonds, their carbon will be locked up forever in a glittering gem, impervious to decay and corruption. Diamond sublimates at 6558ºF, which means diamonds may last until the sun bloats into a red giant in seven billion years, and may even survive that.
Is having your loved one turned into a diamond horribly creepy or hopelessly romantic? Is being a diamond immortality or an eternity of isolation?
Get In The Game
Michael Mann's recent piece in the Times is an excellent call to arms.
This is where scientists come in. In my view, it is no longer acceptable for scientists to remain on the sidelines. I should know. I had no choice but to enter the fray. I was hounded by elected officials, threatened with violence and more — after a single study I co-wrote a decade and a half ago found that the Northern Hemisphere’s average warmth had no precedent in at least the past 1,000 years. Our “hockey stick” graph became a vivid centerpiece of the climate wars, and to this day, it continues to win me the enmity of those who have conflated a problem of science and society with partisan politics.
The right wing blogsphere isn't scary at all. Threats of violence from men with titties don't mean anything. They are full of sound and fury and signify nothing. It's time for more scientists like Mann to recognize that and get into the game.
This is where scientists come in. In my view, it is no longer acceptable for scientists to remain on the sidelines. I should know. I had no choice but to enter the fray. I was hounded by elected officials, threatened with violence and more — after a single study I co-wrote a decade and a half ago found that the Northern Hemisphere’s average warmth had no precedent in at least the past 1,000 years. Our “hockey stick” graph became a vivid centerpiece of the climate wars, and to this day, it continues to win me the enmity of those who have conflated a problem of science and society with partisan politics.
The right wing blogsphere isn't scary at all. Threats of violence from men with titties don't mean anything. They are full of sound and fury and signify nothing. It's time for more scientists like Mann to recognize that and get into the game.
Saturday, January 18, 2014
Good Words
Now that a 4-year-old has shot and killed another 4-year-old in Detroit, we’re going to again talk about gun control, with predictably the same results. To me, two things are true: (1) Gun advocates who want no registration and management of gun ownership are in fact afraid of their government, and (2) we as a nation have a competency problem when it comes to managing gun ownership.
Every gun advocate argument I’ve heard that is against better management (not restriction) of gun ownership boils down to the individual or group being afraid any government control will lead to removal of their constitutional right. Until we solve that problem, gun control will only be a dream. Yet when a 4-year-old has access to a loaded rifle that is improperly stored or when a troubled high school student has access to military-grade weapons without military-grade training, oversight or certifications, we have proved ourselves unable to manage gun ownership. Identify the real problems, and perhaps we can together come up with real solutions. (Letter of the Day, Minneapolis Star Tribune)
Gun competency...indeed. Meanwhile, in responsible gun owner land..
Americans who accidentally shot themselves recently: A 31-year-old man, showing off his high-powered rifle to friends, shot off part of his face, Waterville, Maine (November). A 22-year-old woman, handing her brand-new assault rifle to her husband, shot herself (fatally) in the head, Federal Heights, Colo. (May). Two police chiefs shot themselves (Medina, Ohio, in April and Washington, N.H., in June). A 66-year-old firearms instructor, Winona, Minn., shot his finger while explaining to his wife that it was impossible to pull the trigger while the gun is holstered (April). Awkward Wounds: A Columbia, Mo., man shot in the "posterior" while removing his gun from his back pocket (May); a 23-year-old man, Charleston, W.Va., shot in the groin while holstering his weapon (August); a 43-year-old driver, Norfolk, Va., shot in the groin while waving his gun at bystanders who objected to his speeding (August). Waterville: [Morning Sentinel (Waterville), 11-8-2013] Federal: [KMGH-TV (Denver), 5-16-2013] Medina: [Medina Gazette, 4-18-2013] Washington: [WMUR-TV (Manchester), 6-3-2013] Winona: [Winona Daily News, 4-30-2013] Columbia: [KMIZ-TV (Columbia), 5-30-2013] Charleston: [Charleston Daily Mail, 8-28-2013] Norfolk: [WTKR-TV (Norfolk), 8-7-2013]
Every gun advocate argument I’ve heard that is against better management (not restriction) of gun ownership boils down to the individual or group being afraid any government control will lead to removal of their constitutional right. Until we solve that problem, gun control will only be a dream. Yet when a 4-year-old has access to a loaded rifle that is improperly stored or when a troubled high school student has access to military-grade weapons without military-grade training, oversight or certifications, we have proved ourselves unable to manage gun ownership. Identify the real problems, and perhaps we can together come up with real solutions. (Letter of the Day, Minneapolis Star Tribune)
Gun competency...indeed. Meanwhile, in responsible gun owner land..
Americans who accidentally shot themselves recently: A 31-year-old man, showing off his high-powered rifle to friends, shot off part of his face, Waterville, Maine (November). A 22-year-old woman, handing her brand-new assault rifle to her husband, shot herself (fatally) in the head, Federal Heights, Colo. (May). Two police chiefs shot themselves (Medina, Ohio, in April and Washington, N.H., in June). A 66-year-old firearms instructor, Winona, Minn., shot his finger while explaining to his wife that it was impossible to pull the trigger while the gun is holstered (April). Awkward Wounds: A Columbia, Mo., man shot in the "posterior" while removing his gun from his back pocket (May); a 23-year-old man, Charleston, W.Va., shot in the groin while holstering his weapon (August); a 43-year-old driver, Norfolk, Va., shot in the groin while waving his gun at bystanders who objected to his speeding (August). Waterville: [Morning Sentinel (Waterville), 11-8-2013] Federal: [KMGH-TV (Denver), 5-16-2013] Medina: [Medina Gazette, 4-18-2013] Washington: [WMUR-TV (Manchester), 6-3-2013] Winona: [Winona Daily News, 4-30-2013] Columbia: [KMIZ-TV (Columbia), 5-30-2013] Charleston: [Charleston Daily Mail, 8-28-2013] Norfolk: [WTKR-TV (Norfolk), 8-7-2013]
Friday, January 17, 2014
Retractions, Please
The United States Senate has released its report on the Attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. Here are some key takeaways.
The late Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador, has been partially implicated for the failure of adequate security at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The report notes that Mr. Stevens was aware of all of the intelligence reporting on Libya, including updates on the increased risks of anti-Western terrorist attacks that had prompted the C.I.A. to substantially upgrade the security at its own Benghazi facility in June 2012.
At times, Mr. Stevens requested additional security personnel from the State Department in Washington. But the inquiry also found that in June 2012, around the time the threats were mounting, Mr. Stevens recommended hiring and training local Libyan guards to form security teams in Tripoli and Benghazi. The plan showed a faith in local Libyan support that proved misplaced on the night of the attack.
During an Aug. 15, 2012, meeting on the deteriorating security around Benghazi that Mr. Stevens attended, a diplomat stationed there described the situation as “trending negatively,” according to a cable sent the next day and quoted in the report. A diplomatic security officer “expressed concerns with the ability to defend post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound.”
A C.I.A. officer at the meeting pointed out the location of approximately 10 Islamist militias and Al Qaeda training camps within Benghazi, according to the same cable. After reading the cable, Gen. Carter F. Ham, then the commander of the United States Africa Command, called Mr. Stevens to ask if the embassy in Tripoli needed additional military personnel, potentially for use in Benghazi, “but Stevens told Ham it did not,” the report said. A short time later, General Ham reiterated the offer at a meeting in Germany, and “Stevens again declined,” the report said. The same Aug. 16 cable had also promised that requests “for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs” for the Benghazi mission would be submitted through the Tripoli embassy, but “the committee has not seen any evidence that those requests were passed on by the embassy, including by the ambassador, to State Department headquarters before the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi.”
The Senate reports notes that the CIA bolstered its security at the annex, located near the diplomatic compound and actually paid attention to these reports. Stevens and the people at the State Department in DC did not. The person at the State Department specifically responsible for security at diplomatic compounds was Patrick F Kennedy. Kennedy held a similar job in 1998 when two American Embassies in East Africa were bombed. Clearly, Mr. Kennedy is not capable of doing his job and should never be allowed to be responsible in such a capacity again.
Nowhere in the report do we see secret plots or cover ups that we have been hearing squeak from inside the right wing bubble. No evidence that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama turned down additional security requests. This bloviation can be summed up quite simply as this. Sorry, folks, the president is better at foreign policy and international security than George W. Bush. Deal with it.
With this new information, I'm expecting some retractions from people who claim they can admit when they are wrong. Let's with Kevin Baker and his bullshit lying.
The late Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador, has been partially implicated for the failure of adequate security at the diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The report notes that Mr. Stevens was aware of all of the intelligence reporting on Libya, including updates on the increased risks of anti-Western terrorist attacks that had prompted the C.I.A. to substantially upgrade the security at its own Benghazi facility in June 2012.
At times, Mr. Stevens requested additional security personnel from the State Department in Washington. But the inquiry also found that in June 2012, around the time the threats were mounting, Mr. Stevens recommended hiring and training local Libyan guards to form security teams in Tripoli and Benghazi. The plan showed a faith in local Libyan support that proved misplaced on the night of the attack.
During an Aug. 15, 2012, meeting on the deteriorating security around Benghazi that Mr. Stevens attended, a diplomat stationed there described the situation as “trending negatively,” according to a cable sent the next day and quoted in the report. A diplomatic security officer “expressed concerns with the ability to defend post in the event of a coordinated attack due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound.”
A C.I.A. officer at the meeting pointed out the location of approximately 10 Islamist militias and Al Qaeda training camps within Benghazi, according to the same cable. After reading the cable, Gen. Carter F. Ham, then the commander of the United States Africa Command, called Mr. Stevens to ask if the embassy in Tripoli needed additional military personnel, potentially for use in Benghazi, “but Stevens told Ham it did not,” the report said. A short time later, General Ham reiterated the offer at a meeting in Germany, and “Stevens again declined,” the report said. The same Aug. 16 cable had also promised that requests “for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs” for the Benghazi mission would be submitted through the Tripoli embassy, but “the committee has not seen any evidence that those requests were passed on by the embassy, including by the ambassador, to State Department headquarters before the Sept. 11 attacks in Benghazi.”
The Senate reports notes that the CIA bolstered its security at the annex, located near the diplomatic compound and actually paid attention to these reports. Stevens and the people at the State Department in DC did not. The person at the State Department specifically responsible for security at diplomatic compounds was Patrick F Kennedy. Kennedy held a similar job in 1998 when two American Embassies in East Africa were bombed. Clearly, Mr. Kennedy is not capable of doing his job and should never be allowed to be responsible in such a capacity again.
Nowhere in the report do we see secret plots or cover ups that we have been hearing squeak from inside the right wing bubble. No evidence that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama turned down additional security requests. This bloviation can be summed up quite simply as this. Sorry, folks, the president is better at foreign policy and international security than George W. Bush. Deal with it.
With this new information, I'm expecting some retractions from people who claim they can admit when they are wrong. Let's with Kevin Baker and his bullshit lying.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
Paying Down Debt
Hey, look what super liberal California Governor Jerry Brown is doing.
Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday proposed a $106.8 billion general-fund budget that seeks to pay off a big chunk of the state's long-term debt while making modest investments in public schools, health care and the troubled bullet train. While the state's finances have improved significantly since the days of embarrassing, multibillion-dollar deficits, Brown said at a morning news conference that he believes the newfound fiscal stability could be short-lived and that restrained spending of scarce state resources is crucial.
What the-?!!?? A fiscally responsible liberal. you say? Where is Spock with a beard?:)
Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday proposed a $106.8 billion general-fund budget that seeks to pay off a big chunk of the state's long-term debt while making modest investments in public schools, health care and the troubled bullet train. While the state's finances have improved significantly since the days of embarrassing, multibillion-dollar deficits, Brown said at a morning news conference that he believes the newfound fiscal stability could be short-lived and that restrained spending of scarce state resources is crucial.
What the-?!!?? A fiscally responsible liberal. you say? Where is Spock with a beard?:)
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Even Weaker
Personally, I don't think the bridge scandal is that big of a deal in terms of Chris Christie's chances of being president in 2016. Is still think he'd make a great president. This isn't any different than things Democrats have done in the past so why is the left all bunged up about it? In fact, I would think the right would be more pissed off because Christie is acting like a Democrat in pulling this sort of shit. Besides, it's far less worse of a transgression than the sheer moonbattery we have seen these last few years from conservatives.
Yet, if Christie is toast, the GOP is really fucked. This recent piece in the Washington Post shows how there really isn't a good candidate out there that can win a national election. If 2012 was weak, 2016 is going to be downright awful without Christie. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal? I challenge Republicans to show me someone who can beat Hillary Clinton, let alone a Democrat at all.
Yet, if Christie is toast, the GOP is really fucked. This recent piece in the Washington Post shows how there really isn't a good candidate out there that can win a national election. If 2012 was weak, 2016 is going to be downright awful without Christie. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal? I challenge Republicans to show me someone who can beat Hillary Clinton, let alone a Democrat at all.
Tough One
The Supreme Court has a tough one in front of it with this case. Does free speech trump possible physical danger?
A couple of mornings a week, Eleanor McCullen stakes out a spot outside the Planned Parenthood clinic here and tries to persuade women on their way in to think twice before having an abortion. But she has to watch her step. If she crosses a painted yellow semicircle outside the clinic’s entrance, she commits a crime under a 2007 Massachusetts law. Early last Wednesday, bundled up against the 7-degree cold, Ms. McCullen said she found the line to be intimidating, frustrating and a violation of her First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday in her challenge to the law.
Yet...
The state’s attorney general, Martha Coakley, who is the lead defendant in the suit, said the 35-foot buffer zone created by the 2007 law was a necessary response to an ugly history of harassment and violence at abortion clinics in Massachusetts, including a shooting rampage at two facilities in 1994.
It's going to be interesting what SCOTUS has to say about this. My first reaction is what difference does a few feet make? Is there some sort of Pavlovian response to having a line drawn the prevents people from committing violence? Before reading their opinions, I say that Ms. McCullen's right to free speech is being violated. It's a public street. People can say whatever they want. If you are tough enough to go get an abortion, you can withstand an extra few seconds of conversation.
Or maybe you shouldn't have been a moron in the first place and used birth control more effectively.
A couple of mornings a week, Eleanor McCullen stakes out a spot outside the Planned Parenthood clinic here and tries to persuade women on their way in to think twice before having an abortion. But she has to watch her step. If she crosses a painted yellow semicircle outside the clinic’s entrance, she commits a crime under a 2007 Massachusetts law. Early last Wednesday, bundled up against the 7-degree cold, Ms. McCullen said she found the line to be intimidating, frustrating and a violation of her First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday in her challenge to the law.
Yet...
The state’s attorney general, Martha Coakley, who is the lead defendant in the suit, said the 35-foot buffer zone created by the 2007 law was a necessary response to an ugly history of harassment and violence at abortion clinics in Massachusetts, including a shooting rampage at two facilities in 1994.
It's going to be interesting what SCOTUS has to say about this. My first reaction is what difference does a few feet make? Is there some sort of Pavlovian response to having a line drawn the prevents people from committing violence? Before reading their opinions, I say that Ms. McCullen's right to free speech is being violated. It's a public street. People can say whatever they want. If you are tough enough to go get an abortion, you can withstand an extra few seconds of conversation.
Or maybe you shouldn't have been a moron in the first place and used birth control more effectively.
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
The First Casualty in Fox News' War on Texting
I don't watch Fox News, so I'm usually alerted to their craziness only when Jon Stewart calls attention to it. One of the more hilarious recent segments on The Daily Show was his sendup of Bill O'Reilly's tirade against marijuana and texting. (Lest you accuse me of some kind of liberal TV news bias, I also never watch the garbage on MSNBC, CNN, or the histrionic pap local TV sprays across the airwaves.)
In the Fox News segment, after O'Reilly claims that smoking weed is "literally Russian roulette," he notes that 75% of teenagers have cell phones and text (!). As if marijuana is the gateway drug to texting. O'Reilly then says that American kids should study harder and be more competitive, like the kids in the People's Republic of China (where kids text even more than they do in America).
Well, old white men have heard O'Reilly's call to action and fired the first shots in the battle for freedom from texting. An ex-cop in Florida shot and killed a man for texting during the previews at a movie theater. This appears to be the reason why we need to carry guns wherever we go: a good guy with a gun is needed to stop texting wherever it might break out.
The victim, Chad Oulson, 43, was texting his three-year-old daughter. His wife was also shot in the hand by the same bullet. That little girl sure is precocious, having her own cell phone and able to read at the tender age of three. Too bad her daddy was vile, low-down movie-preview texter, a dog too dirty to let live because he was filling that little girl's innocent mind with poisonous . . . texts.
The shooter, Curtis Reeves, 71, retired from Tampa Police Department 20 years ago. He was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. This is another in a long string of gun madness by crazy old coots, like the old man who shot a 13-year-old boy on the street in front of his mother, or the old man who abducted a boy and held him hostage at gun point in a bunker in Alabama.
The NRA likes to say that guns don't kill people, people kill people. But if Reeves hadn't had a gun in that theater he wouldn't be in jail, and Oulson's daughter would still have her father.
Guns are like a drug. They give men delusions of grandeur, strip them of their normal inhibitions and incite them to violence. Without guns, these old coots -- and probably the vast majority of people who kill with guns -- would never dare attack others with their fists. At best they'd simply be pulled off their victims. At worst they'd be beaten to a bloody pulp. But a gun in their hand gives them the power and the courage to kill on the slightest impulse.
So, I have to wonder. Did Curtis Reeves watch Bill O'Reilly's tirade against texting? Did Fox News incite this old coot to murder a man texting his little daughter?
Yes, I can hear the defense attorney addressing that typical Florida jury of little old white ladies, all Fox News viewers: "Bill O'Reilly told my client that texting was like marijuana, and when that man said he was texting his daughter my client knew he had to protect her from that monster at any cost!"
In the Fox News segment, after O'Reilly claims that smoking weed is "literally Russian roulette," he notes that 75% of teenagers have cell phones and text (!). As if marijuana is the gateway drug to texting. O'Reilly then says that American kids should study harder and be more competitive, like the kids in the People's Republic of China (where kids text even more than they do in America).
Well, old white men have heard O'Reilly's call to action and fired the first shots in the battle for freedom from texting. An ex-cop in Florida shot and killed a man for texting during the previews at a movie theater. This appears to be the reason why we need to carry guns wherever we go: a good guy with a gun is needed to stop texting wherever it might break out.
The victim, Chad Oulson, 43, was texting his three-year-old daughter. His wife was also shot in the hand by the same bullet. That little girl sure is precocious, having her own cell phone and able to read at the tender age of three. Too bad her daddy was vile, low-down movie-preview texter, a dog too dirty to let live because he was filling that little girl's innocent mind with poisonous . . . texts.
The shooter, Curtis Reeves, 71, retired from Tampa Police Department 20 years ago. He was arrested and charged with second-degree murder. This is another in a long string of gun madness by crazy old coots, like the old man who shot a 13-year-old boy on the street in front of his mother, or the old man who abducted a boy and held him hostage at gun point in a bunker in Alabama.
The NRA likes to say that guns don't kill people, people kill people. But if Reeves hadn't had a gun in that theater he wouldn't be in jail, and Oulson's daughter would still have her father.
Guns are like a drug. They give men delusions of grandeur, strip them of their normal inhibitions and incite them to violence. Without guns, these old coots -- and probably the vast majority of people who kill with guns -- would never dare attack others with their fists. At best they'd simply be pulled off their victims. At worst they'd be beaten to a bloody pulp. But a gun in their hand gives them the power and the courage to kill on the slightest impulse.
So, I have to wonder. Did Curtis Reeves watch Bill O'Reilly's tirade against texting? Did Fox News incite this old coot to murder a man texting his little daughter?
Yes, I can hear the defense attorney addressing that typical Florida jury of little old white ladies, all Fox News viewers: "Bill O'Reilly told my client that texting was like marijuana, and when that man said he was texting his daughter my client knew he had to protect her from that monster at any cost!"
Eight Inches
Remember a couple of weeks back when that ship carrying scientists and adventure tourists got stuck in the Antarctic and the 12 year olds laughed and pointed? Well, it turns out that there was no connection between that event and climate change.
The episode had little connection to climate change — shifting winds had caused loose pack ice to jam against the ship — and this was far from the first time that a ship had been trapped, even in the Antarctic summer. But sea ice cover in the Antarctic is changing, and scientists see the influence of climate change, although they say natural climate variability may be at work, too. “The truth is, we don’t fully understand what’s going on,” said Ted Maksym, a researcher at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Unlike the Arctic, where sharp declines in recent decades in the ice that floats on sea surfaces have been linked to warming, sea ice in the Antarctic has actually increased, scientists who study the region say. Averaged over the entire Antarctic coast, the increase is slight — about 1 percent a decade. At the same time, larger increases and decreases are being seen on certain parts of the continent.
In short, listen to science, not the right wing blogsphere.
This incident calls for a reminder of the Top Ten Right Wing Lies Regarding Climate Change with special attention to this one. Another great resource on all the lying is Skeptical Science. Here is their analysis of the Antarctic lie.
Meanwhile we have eight inches...
The episode had little connection to climate change — shifting winds had caused loose pack ice to jam against the ship — and this was far from the first time that a ship had been trapped, even in the Antarctic summer. But sea ice cover in the Antarctic is changing, and scientists see the influence of climate change, although they say natural climate variability may be at work, too. “The truth is, we don’t fully understand what’s going on,” said Ted Maksym, a researcher at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Unlike the Arctic, where sharp declines in recent decades in the ice that floats on sea surfaces have been linked to warming, sea ice in the Antarctic has actually increased, scientists who study the region say. Averaged over the entire Antarctic coast, the increase is slight — about 1 percent a decade. At the same time, larger increases and decreases are being seen on certain parts of the continent.
In short, listen to science, not the right wing blogsphere.
This incident calls for a reminder of the Top Ten Right Wing Lies Regarding Climate Change with special attention to this one. Another great resource on all the lying is Skeptical Science. Here is their analysis of the Antarctic lie.
Meanwhile we have eight inches...
A Responsible Gun Owner
Check out this story.
Three neighbors said a neighborhood meeting was held last Sunday so that Bauerle could talk about his fears about surveillance around his home, but they described his fears about the surveillance as “quirky” and “made you scratch your head.” Bauerle’s fears and suspicions about surveillance occur at a time when he has been on the air, criticizing the governor for sponsoring the new gun control laws in New York State and accusing Cuomo of seeking retribution.
At least he voluntarily submitted himself for a psych evaluation.
And people wonder why there is so much gun violence in this country...
Three neighbors said a neighborhood meeting was held last Sunday so that Bauerle could talk about his fears about surveillance around his home, but they described his fears about the surveillance as “quirky” and “made you scratch your head.” Bauerle’s fears and suspicions about surveillance occur at a time when he has been on the air, criticizing the governor for sponsoring the new gun control laws in New York State and accusing Cuomo of seeking retribution.
At least he voluntarily submitted himself for a psych evaluation.
And people wonder why there is so much gun violence in this country...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)