The Washington Post is still trying to contain the read-rage of its subscribers over George Will’s denial of global warming. The furor has centered on some arcane bits of data from 1978. The Post is hiding behind its claim that many fact-checkers misread the data summary. The question in the debate should not focus on whether George Will or the Washington Post misrepresented the facts, but on whether they are debating science with faith-disguised-as-science in a nay-sayers exercise in anti-intellectualism.
I am concerned about how science is discussed in the public arena when it intersects with politics, how it seems that the volatile emotions of the civic debate - since emotional appeals do change people's minds - have made it fine to color scientific debate in the same manner. I am thinking of global warming and of evolution, where the science may have question marks within it and could someday undergo a radical shift, but that shift would still include the facts as we know them today. Evolution is not going to be completely overthrown, nor is global warming. There is too much data.
People get confused because science does undergo enormous theoretical shifts when new information arrives. I can remember in my life being scoffed at by a geography teacher for my belief that surely Africa and South America must have broken off from each other. Once satellites went up and the movement of land masses was recorded, science tossed out the old model of geophysics and came up with plate tectonics.
This does not mean I can toss aside all science when it contradicts my beliefs. This instead shows the resilience and trustworthiness of science because of its fundamental divergence from belief systems like religion; science admits of disproof. Science actively looks for ways to disprove its most cherished theories. If fact contradicts theory, then theory falls, not fact. I could imagine a number of ways to test the theory of gravity, and if any of them worked, the relevant theories would have to change.
Pointing out flaws in current theories is a healthy way to challenge scientific orthodoxy. But when the challenge arises out of an opposing orthodoxy, then that opposition must submit to the same rigor. However, when one is a theory and the other is an a priori position simply denying the validity of the theory, the fundamental battle between science and faith falls right into our laps.
I ask George Will to conceive of any evidence that would disprove his belief that global warming is natural. If his viewpoint is not faith-based, then he must envision a way to surrender his theory. Then it can be tested. As it is, he is simply saying "That's not true" and we all know it is impossible to disprove a negative statement.
This kind of anti-science ignorance is not something the Post should be defending, even if presented by an eminent commentator. Fact-checking is not the same as intellectual honesty. Even if the facts supported his claims of flaws in the global warming arguments, what is the overarching viewpoint that is driving his belief that the scientists are wrong. Is it scientific, and thus does it contain arguments that he himself would accept as undoing his position? Or is it something he just "knows" and so remains impenetrable to evidence?
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Will and Faith in Global Warming Denial
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The O’Reilly Tool - How to write with no substance, just abuse
I was listening to O’Reilly spin about the Helen Thomas kerfuffle that resulted from his tasteless remarks. His rhetoric was a wonderful template for insult and propaganda. To prove there is no substance but just abuse, I took out the key words and made a kind of mad-libs game with it. I have supplied some suggestions for each category, but feel free to substitute your own mad-as-hell-libs to get a real feel for how simple and powerful the O’Reilly tool really is.
First read O'Reilly's original item, transcribed from his broadcast, with a few ellipses to make it mangeable.
Political correctness gone mad, that is the subject of this evenings talking points memo. Let me introduce you to the players. First we have the far-left Media Matters website which routinely assassinates the characters of conservatives and Republicans . These guttersnipes distort the public record hoping to harm people with whom they disagree. They never scrutinize liberals. Then we have a group called the WMC which was started by Jane Fonda and Gloria Steinham among others. ...
Last week I was a racist for supporting responsible immigration reform. This week I’m a sexist ageist for poking fun at Helen Thomas. ...And please remember this. Saturday Night Live can mock Sarah Palin all day long but I can’t mock Helen Thomas. The New York Times can brand people any vile name they want but I can’t make fun of an absurd question at a Presidential press conference? That’s some system isn’t it?
Now you try it.
(Hated ideology) gone mad, that is the subject of this evenings talking points memo. Let me introduce you to the players. First we have the (extreme position) (hated organization) website which routinely assassinates the characters of (people we like) and (more people we like). These (denigrating name) distort the public record hoping to harm people with whom they disagree. They NEVER scrutinize (people we despise). Then we have a group called (another hated org.) which (show connection to) (despised opposition leader) among others.
Last week I was a (insulting label) for supporting responsible (hot-button issue). This week I’m a (insulting label) for poking fun at (opposition leader). And please remember this. (Hated organization) can mock (people we like) all day long but I can’t mock (respected person). (Loudmouth opposition tool) can brand people any vile name they want but I can’t make fun of (liberal-leaning respectable person)? That’s some system isn’t it?
You can watch the video clip and follow along at the Women's Media Center website here.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Basketbal is Not Baseball: the government game has changed
The GOP “ideas” about the economy and the country have nothing to do with governing in a post 11/4 world. The country voted to change the game, and the Republican Congress keeps arguing that we must adhere to the rules of the old one. It’s as if Bush had a baseball team, and the people voted for Obama because he promised them basketball, and the GOP is still insisting that we enforce the infield fly rule.
Baseball is all about guys like Righty Rumsfeld, the slugger who swings for the fence and so what if he strikes out more than he connects. Or catcher Alberto “Swifty” Gonzales, who hunkers down behind home plate, changing his signals until the pitcher sees one he likes. All the players who we have gotten to know over the past eight excruciating losing seasons. No wonder people decided they prefer the quick and deft game of Obama, where teamwork, passing the ball and running over to the other guy’s court are all how you win. Oh, I could extend this metaphor, but you get the picture.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Fivethirtyeight's 435
Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight is working on a fabulous citizen resource that I think is going to take away a lot of the relative anonymity of congressional voting and drive a boom in blogosphere citizen-journalist awareness of Congress. He is working on a cartogram, a kind of map that shows every single congressional district so that voting records will be immediately available. Much more intuitive than listing votes, the map lets you go directly to a single congressperson, if you want to see how your representative stood on an issue, or to have a global sense of the voting around the country. His first iteration of the map along with an explanation of his process in designing it is here.
As you can see, the chart sort of represents a map of the US, distorted a bit by unequal population distribution, but still recognizable. The red and blue represent the Democratic and Republican districts. The balance and distribution of power is clearly visible for those who would philosophize on the state of the nation. I'm guessing that once the map is finalized, little rollover popups will tell the rest of the story. I can't wait.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Marriage: Saudi vs. Gay
Tradition-minded Americans would say this has nothing to do with them. They condemn the father, the judge, all of Saudi society, even as they apply the same mind-set in their own callous dealings with the less-powerful here. The Mormons, who would be better served accepting responsibility and cleaning up the mess of splinter sects of their own religion who practice variations on this kind of abuse, instead opt to pour money and energy fighting the gay marriage rights of people who do not belong to their church or any of its "kissin' cousins." And the traditional preachers, swelling with male pride in their struts and frets from the pulpits of America, raise their lusty voices in condemning gay marriage as dangerous to the children, even as they apply the tools of psychological foot-binding to the hearts of the girls who are told to submit to their fathers, husbands and male god. It is not the sanctity of marriage that is threatened by gay marriage, it is the divine right of men to be on top both in the world and with God. If men can marry men, then the ownership aspect of marriage is undermined. Most folks today would scoff at the idea of ownership of the woman by the man in marriage, yet they still think it’s beautiful for daddy to give his daughter away. No one gives away the groom; he stands on his own to feet ready to receive the hand of his bride from another man. Symbolic and potent, this pageant drama forms our minds and our relationships with its simple message and constant repetition. The image of a father “giving away,” say, a young black man to another man who happens to be white would induce a cringe because it unmasks the proprietorship implicit in the language and rituals of marriage. And if women can marry women, then suddenly there are women who neither belong to any man nor can they be shamed with the second class status of being unmarried. Male dominion would receive another blow, not in the courts of the law, but in the only other near-universal bastion of male supremacy: marriage. This is what makes gay marriage intolerable. In Saudi Arabia, a man can marry an 8-year-old girl, but can't have sex with another man on pain of death. This mindset is not just Saudi, or Muslim. It lies at the core of the fight against Prop 8 in California and the initiatives against gay marriage fueled by men who hate equality, who love power, and who deserve nothing but the contempt and resolve we apply to petty tyrants and selfish dictators.
The web is buzzing with the news that a Saudi judge has denied a divorce plea on behalf of an 8-year-old girl married without her knowledge to a 58-year-old man by her father in exchange for a $5000 dowry - apparently, he needed the cash. This is not merely a Saudi or Islamic crime against a girl-child’s right to liberty. Women in virtually all traditional societies are sold to men who pay “dowries” for their possession. How this is different from slavery has always been mysterious to me. Apparently, the “sanctity of marriage” making it not slavery is the fact that the woman cannot be resold to anyone else if she does not work out. This is no big problem for the man, as it is pretty safe to kill a wife in these countries.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Where's the Charity?
Palin kept saying the clothes bought for her would be donated to charity after the election. However, it now seems that some of those clothes have been 'lost.' 'Lost' as in once having found their way into the Governor's Mansion closet, they are now unable to remember how they got there or which way Neiman Marcus is from Alaska.
What I want to know is which charity will be receiving the clothes that were not lost. I'm betting the second-hand store in Wasilla, where the charity will sell the rags for a dollar a piece to the only woman in town who fits them.
From the upcoming Newsweek article:
Nicolle Wallace had told Palin to buy three suits for the convention and hire a stylist. But instead, the vice presidential nominee began buying for herself and her family--clothes and accessories from top stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. According to two knowledgeable sources, a vast majority of the clothes were bought by a wealthy donor, who was shocked when he got the bill. Palin also used low-level staffers to buy some of the clothes on their credit cards. The McCain campaign found out last week when the aides sought reimbursement. One aide estimated that she spent "tens of thousands" more than the reported $150,000, and that $20,000 to $40,000 went to buy clothes for her husband. Some articles of clothing have apparently been lost. An angry aide characterized the shopping spree as "Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast," and said the truth will eventually come out when the Republican Party audits its books.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Problem Voting? Call Here
Democrat or Republican, if you find yourself unable to vote or confused about something at your polling place, you can call these people. Election Protection is non-partisan and will help you deal with whatever comes your way so that everyone's vote can be counted.
866-OUR-VOTE
Hope and the Clock
The clock is running out on the "permanent Republican majority" so sweepingly orchestrated over the last generation. This grandiose plan resembles the rise of every tyranny in history, combining public rhetoric that idealizes tribalism with backroom powergrabs that care nothing for anyone outside the inner cadre of rich and powerful influence peddlers. Whoever wins the presidency on Tuesday, this assault on republican (as opposed to Republican) freedoms will receive a grievous injury. The impulse behind it will not die, any more than the age-old battle between good and evil can ever be decisively ended. But at least my generation will not be the one surrender to the ignorant, hate-filled clannish straightjacket that keeps the masses enslaved by their own passions to the very rich and powerful.
This is the hope triggered by the Obama campaign and his steady, unruffled calm has been no small element in this uprising. Whether Obama can become a great president or not is almost irrelevant. His power is that he brings home the message of community power rather than injured helplessness. Lobbyists do not own Washington any more, not when individual donations can topple both the Bush and Clinton money machines. More importantly, our few dollars, like drops of water, can swell to oceans of cash for candidates we feel speaks to and for us, not special interests.
This empowerment of voice - for the courts have ruled that money is a form of "speech" and so giving it is a right under the Constitution - this takes us out of the dependent child role in the political family and puts us all on a more nearly equal footing. Corporations and PACs can no longer make my few dollars insignificant by comparison. And so I have hope that I will be heard in the same way an adult with her own income is listened to over the demands of children who want things but do not contribute to the family income.
We are becoming 'adults' in a system that has infantilized us to make us regress in our thinking about public life so that we look to the wise big 'fathers' to do what's best for us. Fear and scapegoating work on children and dependents, whose emotions are more volatile and exploitable. Adults are less afraid than children, in part because they have more personal power. Autonomy gives weight and weight is a key in keeping one's equilibrium. The public has grown up enough to see during the S&L crisis that Oz, far from watching over us, the "man behind the curtain" of deregulation didn't know any more than the rest of us about the forces of capitalism.
As Election Day nears, I think about the month-long recount in Florida eight years ago and the what-to-me-was-obvious machinations of the Republican operation to deliver the election by hook or by crook to George W. Bush. That they succeeded was an almost mortal blow to my sense of security and trust in our system. Until that moment, I had believed that truth would out and that, in the end, cheaters would not prosper.
Now, as I watch the arc of this election season, a bit of that faith is being restored. Not that people are any better, but that reality, as they say, bites. And once bitten by Republican methods, twice shy.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Abraham Lincoln: The Illinois Socialist
All this talk about Obama being a socialist for wanting the wealthy to pay higher taxe rates than those in the middle ignores the realities of society. After all, it was Abraham Lincoln himself who introduced a tiered income tax to pay for the Civil War "... with taxable incomes up to $10,000 taxed at a 3 percent rate and higher incomes taxed at 5 percent." (From the US treasury website) Higher taxes for the wealthiest who have benefited the most from the system is not Socialist, or Marxist, or whatever name you want to apply - it is a traditional all-American value called fairness.
Why is it fair? Take a look at the opposite idea and see how it sits. Do you think it is fair for those who have benefited LEAST from the current system to pay the most in taxes? That's the system we have now. Time to stop asking the poorer to cover the costs of living in this country for the richest 5%.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Redistributing the Wealth
McCain and Palin crying foul on Obama wanting to redistribute the wealth. But since Reagan, this is just what their party has been doing.
From Daily Kos:
Between 1983 and 2004 the net worth dramatically shifted as follows:
The top 1% net worth went from $8,315,000 to $14,786,000 - a 77.8% change.
The next 4% net worth went from $1,375,000 to $2,645,000 - a 92.3% change.
The bottom 40% net worth went from $54,000 to $22,000 - a minus -58.7% change.From 1983 to 2004 the income change was nearly as drastic
The top 1% income went from $689,000 to $1,169,000 - a 67.6% change.
The next 4% income went from $180,000 to $258,000 - a 43.1% change.
The bottom 40% income went from $16,800 to $17,500 - only a 4.3% change.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Holy Rhetoric, Batman!
A great McCain/Obama debate parody written in a time warp 40 years ago for the old Batman TV series. Were television audiences smarter back then? Check it out and have a laugh before the main event tonight.
Watch it here.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
RedState Cofounder Doesn't Vote for McCain
HuffPo reports that RedState co-founder Joshua Trevino wrote in his blog that he filled in his CA absentee ballot intending to vote a straight Republican ticket but in the end he couldn't vote for McCain. He wrote in Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.
How about that for a kick in the teeth to McCain!
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Lying to Get Her Way
The legislative report that Palin abused her power in trying to get Trooper Wooten fired has some pretty damning conclusions about her character. Many of her claims described Wooten as dangerous, that he had threatened her and her family, and that she was afraid. The investigator, Branchflower, concludes:
I conclude that such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palin's real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family related reasons.More.
But don't take the committee's word that she lies. See her change her story on the issue of firing Monegan here.
How to Earn $480 Million
TPM has a great reader post on the math of the golden parachutes received by the CEOs after destroying the banking system. Puts their bonuses in perspective. Here.
Friday, October 10, 2008
The Verdict on Palin: "Abuse of Power" AND "Dereliction of Duties"
Today, in two separate arenas, Governor Sarah Palin has been rebuked for failures to carry out her duties as entrusted to her by the great state of Alaska.
ABUSE OF POWER
The bipartisan (mostly Republican) panel in the legislature investigating Troopergate released its findings. As reported here:
Sarah Palin unlawfully abused her power as governor by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, the chief investigator of an Alaska legislative panel concluded Friday.DERELICTION OF DUTIES
A judge has ordered both the State of Alaska to contact Yahoo, preserve any emails sent from her outside accounts and to attempt to resurrect those in deactivated accounts. As reported here:
Outsider reformer? If you consider the fox an outsider to poultry farming and elect her to reform business in the hen house, then sure, Palin is both an "outsider" and a "reformer." But why re-define two perfectly good words, when we already have terms for her kind of politician: "crook" and "bully.""We shouldn't be in a position where public records have been lost because the governor didn't do what every other state employee knows to do, which is to use an official, secure state e-mail account to conduct state business," (Judge) McLeod said after the 90-minute hearing.
"It's a dereliction of the governor and her duties," she said.
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Who Is Barak Obama?
The vicious innuendo that fills the new RNC ad as well as the McCain campaign ads and speeches needs to be met head on. I hope Obama develops an ad campaign with the same slogan, the same techniques, and answers the sleazy lies with the truth in clear images and words that rebuke the falsehoods and shame the ad makers.
Who is Barak Obama?
Voter Insecurity
The New York Times today reports on how states are illegally purging voters from their rolls. There are purging voters too close to the election day in violation of federal law. And they are using the Social Security database, a database that Social Security says is unreliable and should only be a last resort, as a first resort, which is in violation of their agreement for permission to use that database. But behind all that is the huge hand of human error. Conspiracy? We'll see how this plays out.
For example:
In the year ending Sept. 30, election officials in Nevada, for example, used the Social Security database more than 740,000 times to check voter files or registration applications and found more than 715,000 nonmatches, federal records show.Later in the same article:
Nevada officials said the large number of Social Security checks had resulted from county clerks entering Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers in the wrong fields before records were sent toNevada officials said the large number of Social Security checks had resulted from county clerks entering Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers in the wrong fields before records were sent to the state.What a surprise that there were over 95% nonmatches. They were looking for their driver's license numbers...
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Million-Dollar Web Design Company
Say you've got a million dollars to spend on a website. Your first thought is probably, do I really need to spend that much on a website. But, okay, you need to launch big and launch now. So who do you hire. You can have your pick of top firms. Would you choose a company that not only never ran a website before, but has as its website something that looks like the free template that comes with your domain name? Like this one below. Would you hire these people at even one-tenth of that, say $100,000?
These are the people McCain hired to do his website. Well, you say, Gramps is no wizard when it comes to the web. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on the minute you hear the names. Partner - campaign manager Rick Davis, the same Rick Davis who is a partner in the lobbying firm Davis Manafort, a firm that lobbies for the mortgage industry. The campaign has been saying that Davis hasn't worked for the firm for years, but it turns out his salary is paid to the lobbying firm! So Davis, and his lobbying partner Manafort start up a web design company and right out of the box they get a million dollar contract. What are the odds of that happening to you or me?
Cronyism is the heart and soul of lobbying, of influence peddling, of corruption in government and business. Welcome to McCain's world.
BTW, this is from US News and World Report in May, 2007.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Afraid to Hope, Yet Hoping
The Daily Kos has a set of graphics about the Presidential debates that brought home the results to me. The responses to the debate categories were broken down by Republican, Democrat, and Independent. In evaluating the candidates, you'd expect the partisan approvals by the party-affiliated responders. But the base hasn't decided a presidential election in years. The Independents must break your way if you want to win. And even with the Dems so far outpacing the Republicans in voter registration, the Independents will be decisive. What the graphics made clear to me, even though I have heard the info already many times, is how out-of-step the Republicans are with the direction of the country. It gives me hope I mostly dare not allow myself to contemplate.
See for yourself:
We the People at Palin's Hat Shop
The Washington Post has reported on yet another ethical lapse by Governor Palin. Apparently, state officials in Alaska are forbidden by law from taking sides on ballot initiatives. Palin bit her tongue about a conflict between mining and fishing industries, but put up partisan info on her government website. When the fisheries complained, she was ordered by the courts to remove the info. She did and then called a press conference, explained that she was "taking off her governor's hat" and told them that as a private citizen she was against the protections for fishing. The next day full page ads in the papers carried her picture announcing Governor Palin (not private citizen Palin) was against the initiative. It failed.
As former Governor Tony Knowles told the Post:
"She says, 'I'm going to take off my governor's hat,' but the only reason the press was there was that they were called to a press conference by the governor. Being governor is not a costume -- you either are the governor or not."In honor of Sarah Palin's discovery that laws only apply to those wearing the appropriate hat, I would like to celebrate the ways in which this discovery could make all our lives easier.
"I took off my teacher hat and cursed out a fifth-grader. And then I went back to being a caring instructor. But I'm only human and the kid was getting on my nerves."
"I took off my employee hat and took a nap. My boss started to yell at me, but I showed him that hat on the rack and he was suddenly embarrassed. You can't just scream at people unless you're their boss. He apologized and just to show no hard feelings, I put my hat right back on and got to work."
"I took off my law-abiding-citizen hat and robbed a bank. Just for a minute, and then I put that hat back on. Now my finances are peachy and I want all the laws enforced, as any law-abiding citizen would."
