Monday Open Thread
- In Iraq: 190,000 weapons missing. The Pentagon has lost track of some 30% of total weapons.
- Is Internet Addiction real? Heck, no: I can quit anytime I want!
- Three young people murdered execution-style in New Jersey; a fourth barely survived.
- Officials race to prevent potential health problems in the aftermath of floods in Southeast Asia.
Happy Monday, everyone!
Submitted by pico on Mon, 2007-08-06 05:56
Tags:
Comments :
Looking forward
to hearing about your adventures at Yearly Kos.
It is the economy, stupid.
I outed myself
in a diary on the people who do the evening rescue
. By "outed" I mean "physical appearance", not name. I do value my anonymity.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
cool
good to see ya finally. Somewhat similar to your SL appearance :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Heh, barely.
I tried, but I'm pretty inept with that system. I still haven't even downloaded it onto my computer, but I'll try sometime in the next week or two.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
No SL Swords Crossed tonight
I'm not scheduling a SL meeting tonight, so you have time to get your hardware in order.
We had a few new adds to the SL group, but the Dems are trying to use the Kos event as a way to get more folks to attend their meeting, which kinda conflicts with our time slot. So we'll meet for next week.
If anyone wants to drop in just to say hey, feel free, and I'll show you the hysterically funny photos I took of Prime last night. But I will be in and out all evening, I imagine.
You're a cutie, Pico. I was looking for you in the bloggers video feed, but wasnt sure you attended that one.
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran
I did miss that one.
Did you all manage to recruit any new SC people from SL?
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Four have joined the group so far (nt)
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran
nice work!
Are they coming to the site here, or still predominantly at SL?
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Just joined
I sent messages to all of them on Saturday, suggesting they check out the blog and to let them know we generally meet in SL on Mondays. I have not heard back from them. Hopefully they're lurking!
One of them is Justin, the SL Dem Party Chair, and I spoke to him briefly about it during one of the YearlyKos events. Our meeting (5 SLT) conflicts with the Dem meeting a bit (530 SLT), which is one reason I canceled tonight's meeting.
It's hard to know about groups in SL. The SC group is open enrollment, so anyone can join at any time. Some may join just because they like the name and concept, not because they really want to actively participate. So we'll see. But I was glad to see the new names there. Showing up en masse at events is paying off.
"Perplexity is the beginning of knowledge" -- Kahlil Gibran
I am out of town this week, BTW.
So don't have my SL setup either way. Just FYI.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I'm so embarrassed....
... I fell asleep on Purpleface last night in SL....
I'm a bad man.
;-)
“Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” --- Albert Einstein
Was she comfy? :) n/t
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
you know
if I met you without knowing much about you, I would never imagine you to be a russian speaker and almost professor dude... You look too all-american :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
While there, I got
"I thought you were older" and "I thought you were a woman." I'm really not sure about that second one!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
RE: I outed myself
Wow. While not perfect, my mental picture of you was actually pretty close. At least now I know who to look out for! :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Wild.....
That was completely not the mental picture I had. For some reason I always pictured you in glasses..... ;+).
It is the economy, stupid.
As it happens,
I did used to wear glasses.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Ah Ha!
You've got a nice build.
I would never would I have guessed in a million years that you are a truly shiny bright intellectual star, underneath that curved bill cap!
It is the economy, stupid.
Fred Hiatt has a good Op-Ed in today's
Washington Post titled
:"Warrantless Surrender-
Congress is stampeded into another compromise of Americans' rights." It's actually a very good piece, particularly in light of the fact that Fred previously spent his time saying how Democrats weren't following bush43 enough.
As usual, Glenn Greenwald has the best analysis out about the whole FISA mess we now have on our hands.
It's mighty fine reading. Take the time to read both.
I think
there is too much effort expended by the Left on something that doesn't affect the rights of law abiding Americans. Oooh, that Al Qaeda call was screened without a warrant... They are shredding the constitution!!! Ahhhh.
The left focuses too damn much on the rights of the terrorists and not enough on the threats we face.
[edit] I mean I have a hard time caring about a few guys stuck in Guantanamo when there is a war going on. Same with some people talking to people overseas being listened to by NSA. This is a huge difference - there is a war going on with people who want to destroy us and we have Americans whining about that kind of crap as if some rights are being violated? What a generation.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I think you don't know what your talking about.
I mean, sure, you have views.
But suggesting that this bill doesn't gut the constitution because you can still go home at night is somewhat insane.
here is a link
to your hero Glenn Greenwald pic
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/6/145528/6360#c20
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
That's a picture of Edwards and Hillary up on a stage.
Is that the picture you wanted to show?
I saw him speak at the panel
on blogs and the traditional media, which was an interesting case study in awkwardness. The panel tried to keep things on a mostly respectful level, but the editor from Time knew he was in hostile territory and sweated his way through it. Still, a lot of the discussion was interesting, and I'm glad I attended it. Greenwald isn't the most engaging public speaker, but he still runs laps around everyone else in terms of content.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Problem is...
...I wouldn't trust this current crowd of misfits to know what to do with actionable intelligence if it hit em in the face.
We keep doing things to alienate and weaken our potential allies, who could instead have been helping us to infiltrate al Qaeda and blow the organization wide open. By now, al Qaeda should have been isolated and heavily infected with the agents of the US and its allies. A competent administration should have had the al Qaeda problem well on its way to being licked and in the bag by now. 4 years it took us to beat the Germans and the Japanese; 6 years and we haven't even touched a couple of guys with AK47's in a cave.
I don't really care that much that these guys will be able to do more bulk communication analysis, but I don't think it makes me much safer either in the long run, because these guys are approaching the problem by trying to head off indivudual attacks, while not effectively addressing the source of the threat. Their vision for how to remake the middle east has utterly failed and backfired. I have no confidence in them.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
I'm curious to see
what will happen when we have a Democratic president with the legal ability to wiretap without anyone knowing who/what is being wiretapped. It's not that I doubt a lot of Republicans aren't serious about their belief in the program's necessity, but it may take a president they really hate for them to see the danger in this kind of system.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
hey all
I am back from vacation. Slightly busy catching up on all the work but I am around :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I'm back too
So where has everyone disappeared to?!
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I am still here.....
but I have been busy lately!
So here's a welcome back to both you and Ender.
I guess August is vacation month!
It is the economy, stupid.
thank you :)
I am still a bit busy but getting back into it. So I will be around.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I'm still here, El Guapo.*
I've been doing my best to keep things running smoothly. I'm usually busy during the day (attachment parenting
is very demanding, especially time-wise), but I try to stop in at night or in the early morning. Hopefully, when school starts up in a few weeks I'll have more time between classes to join the fun.
P.S. Welcome back.
*Three Amigos
quote.
I've been lurking a bit
and I certainly appreciate all that you've done to keep things going while some of us went on vacation. Ditto John for the copious output of posts.
How old is the baby now?
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Eliot Spitzer posted on dkos today
link
I'm a big fan of Spitzer's and particularly his efforts to clean up Wall Street, which I feel were pivotal in creating what I feel is a more transparent environment now than it used to be. I also like his image-- he's got a no-nonsense style and a clear and quick mind. He absolutely owned the NY governor debates that I saw, against an opponent who could also speak fairly well. I'd vote for him for President over any of the current candidates, from what I know of him.
He also scored 1590 on his SAT, according to his wikipedia entry. Not a surprise, the man is obviously brilliant. I'm all about electing our best & brightest. About time we start paying attention to talent, smarts, merit, and accomplishment when choosing candidates for higher office. Not that the others are dumb, but Spitzer stands out.
Ender, how do you feel about Spitzer? You get to see a lot more about him than I do out here in Ohio...
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
you know
I do not remember anything about Spitzer and have not heard anything about him since his election aside from a little snippet about his feud with Bruno where he was fueling a personal vendetta with government money and investigators.
He might be smart but he has not made a good impression on me from when he was campaigning...
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
How could you not know anything about Spitzer
and claim to live in New Jersey? Are you admitting that you don't actually reside in the northeast and instead have been sent by your overlords to wreck havoc on the blogworld?
Wikipedia the guy. He was a much better Federal Prosecutor than Gulianini ever was. I only hope he gets his sea legs pretty soon up in Albany.
If we were going to pick NY politicians for Presidential level, Bloomberg has them both beat.
I don't claim to live in New Jersey
I live in New York :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
And you STILL like Rudy?
Excuse me while I have a Blazing Saddles moment....you know the one where Slim Pickens says "I am mighty depressed" after seeing Clevon Little introduce himself as the new Sheriff of Rock Ridge.
I like Rudy a lot
as I was actually working (and living for some part) in NYC while he was mayor. He really transformed the city and I was very impressed. So why would I not like him if I actually saw him in action and appreciated it?
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
What do you think of Bloomberg?
The transition between the role...
...of an investagtor and an arguer to a role of an executive and a decision maker may be difficult. He may be keeping a low profile while learning and adjusting, or maybe news just isn't getting out, or maybe he's just not an effective executive and I'm overrating him. But let me just say that he did a helluva job as New York Attorney General, and maybe it's just the fact that I was so active in the stock market during that period of time that I have such a strong impression of him, and maybe people who weren't watching Bloomberg News and reading the WSJ and the stock message boards etc. during that time don't have a strong impression of what this guy is all about, but let me tell you that if & when this guy gets up a head of steam-- LOOK OUT! He's the real deal.
He took on some of the most powerful, entrenched, and corrupt institutions on Wall Street and won and made a big difference. Today, if some brokerage thinks about gaming an IPO by misleading the common investor while granting special favors to a select group, they're going to think twice, because they've gotten burned once. If some brokerage thinks they can game the system by publicly pumping up a stock with all kinds of praise while privately admitting that the stock is an overvalued POS, they're going to think twice, because Spizer burned em once. If priveleged investors try to game the system by engaging in corrupt trading practices which avoid losses that I as a common investor have to take, then they will think twice, becasue for once they got burned, and Eliot Spitzer is to thank for that. We've had a decent stock market the past several years in spite of a lot of uncertainty geopolitically and economically, and Eliot Spitzer can take a little bit of the credit for that, because he is in large part responsible for the fact that people have a little more confidence in the integrity of the market than they did 5 years ago.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Welcome back
Any fishing stories?
thanks man
Fishing stories? hehehe - just doing some work and chilling. It was in Orlando so it was pretty hot and not much fishing going on.
Great time overall. I am still not mentally back :) Save the jokes on that one! hehe
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
More news: bad judgment
with tragic consequences
. What a lousy way to die.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I'm really having trouble visualizing
how that happened. I mean, we hear about similar accidents while people are hunting, but this one just boggles my mind in terms of the visual arrangement.
(I'm not suggesting it wasn't exactly as described, but I can't make a mental picture of it)
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
A Quick 2-Part Poll - Part 1
"It is in the nature of birds to fly."
Please respond with your personal vote as to whether this is a true statement or not without thinking about it too much.
Part 2 will come up AFTER people have weighed in.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I will say "true"
[skymutt senses some sort of trap]
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
I'm not sure ...
how I feel about making your skymutt senses "tingle". :)
I assume skymutt sense work like "Spidy senses" in that respect, right?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
hehe
well, at least I tried to give it no thought in advance, in keeping with your instruction :-) I can't help it when the spidey sense kicks in...
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Many birds can
be objectively determined to be capable of flight =P
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
So does this mean you consider the
statement true or false? Come on. Just answer it please.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I dunno
If I were explaining to a young child what birds are I might say "birds fly," but if I were teaching a high school science class I'd probably try to avoid talking about "birds" in such general terms, given the wide variety of species.
Although perhaps this answers your question in the affirmative =)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
That's a great video. n/t
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
No,
I get to a "no" answer through a two-step process:
1. Many birds don't fly. The emu, the ostrich, the penguin, the kiwi... In fact, there are about forty different species
that don't fly at all.
2. I'd assume, then, that you mean specifically birds that do fly, in which case the question is tautological.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
You cheated.
And I'm not surprised, AND trying to pollute the whole poll to boot.
You, of course, have exposed where I was heading and I guess you just couldn't stand to let it play out without influencing the results ... realizing where it would end up.
So, there is no point to continuing.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I'm sorry!
It wasn't my intention. I always back up when I hear questions about "the nature of X to do Y", since it's one I've had to contest personally ("the nature of sex is to procreate"). When you posted your question, I immediately thought of emus and ostriches, so I looked up the wikipedia article to see how many flightless birds there were. I really wasn't intending to mess up your experiment!
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
It's OK.
As I said below I'll turn this around and see if we can find any statement like this that are bullet proof.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
because I take that kind
of a statement in a general way where exceptions are possible (like "it's in the nature of humans to procreate sexually") I'll say that it is "true".
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Well, I wouldn't object
to the statement as phrased; I certainly agree that most birds fly. I don't think it's technically precise but I understand opinion varies on that and I don't think any flightless birds reading this are going to be too offended ;-)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
So, pico ...
I didn't see, or get to see, you asking the question about Landsea. Is this going to be broadcast someplace or are you going to break down and let us all in on the secret response?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Heh, nothing secret about it.
It's just that his response went into a bit of depth about what had happened, and ultimately he feels Landsea should have stuck with it and battled it out instead of withdrawing. I'll keep checking the C-SPAN schedule to see when (if ever) it airs.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
OK, thanks. I would like to see it if it comes up.
Bottom line, though, do you feel like he believes Landsea is a AGW supporter or denier (both generally and specifically as part of his area of expertise)?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
As far as I can tell he is a supporter,
he just doesn't think its impact will have more than a negligible impact on hurricane strength.
I can't find a definitive and original "yes!" statement, but here's an unsourced quote in the Denver Post
("I am concerned about the trend in global warming. It is a problem."), and here's yet another short article 
in which he treats global warming as a given.
As for the panel: most of the author's discussion (it's before I asked my question, if you watch the whole session) dealt with the different methodologies that Landsea and others employ to reach their conclusions. He discussed that neither is a perfect model, and that even though there is significant overlap between the predictions, there are also divergences. Hurricane strength/frequency is one of them.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
looky there! a troll rating!
I think that's my third or 4th troll rate earned in life... this one is in regards to a poorly sourced smear on Sean Hannity
. I can't stand Hannity personally, but I can't stand the left adopting the tactics of the American Spectator even more. Innuendo is a poor subsitute for facts and evidence...
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
If you've only gotten 3-4 troll ratings ever ...
you definitely need to change the color of your bar. You're an embarrassment to the "colors", my lad. Pick something more your true style.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
I'm polite :-)
I'm not actually attempting to get troll rates, though I would say that I'm not particularly ashamed of any of the posts where I got the TRs. I've taken a lot more personal abuse than I've dished out, believe me.
Quit obsessing about kicking out the ol' RINO skymutt, and open up the big red tent!
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
:)
Well, I don't TRY to get troll rated. And in most cases I am not even being that pushy. But I have had accounts get banned within a couple of hours ... well OK ... on THOSE days I WAS being obnoxious.
OK, I guess you can be on our team for a while ... but you have to act like you really DESERVE that bar.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
yeah even a former
almost RINO like myself got a ton of troll rating over time. And I still do. :) It's not about politeness but more about standing up for the colors that don't run!
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
:) n/t
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
You guys spend more time on DKos than I do.
And I don't think anyone here is going to argue I'm more liberal than either of you.
The contrast is not true however. I spend almost no time at Townhall.com, Assrocket's blog, LGF, or even redstate now days.
Poll Part 2 -- sort of?
Well sense you people refuse to just answer simple questions and let things play out, there is no point in following up here.
This does raise the question of what a statement like "it is in the nature of x to do y" actually means. So, let's turn this about.
You guys give me your examples for x and y that you feel are good solid examples and let's [as in all of us] see if they have any holes.
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
it's in the nature
of mammals to breathe?
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Live ones or dead ones? :)
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
heh
it's in the nature of electrons to move :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
How do you know?
They could be sitting still until something comes along and pushes them like a photon, right? Who knows what they are doing when they are sitting nice stable at some particular energy level?
Also, according to what frame of reference? From the perspective of an observer sitting on the electron is the electron moving?
While we can take all comers such as electrons, to be fair to my position let's stick to biological entities. Can we actually make a statement such as "it is in the nature of biological entity x to do y?"
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
It is in the nature of libertarians to favor lower taxes
excuse me, make that "live libertarians"...
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
RE: It is in the nature of libertarians to favor lower taxes
That's not universally true. Even the libertarians would agree that there ARE SOME legitimate governmental functions and would therefore agree that there is a need for SOME taxation. Once we reach the point where taxes are set such that they only cover those legitimate governmental functions even the Libetarians wouldn't argue for lower taxes, right?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
Maybe
But until that acutally happens, that's just speculation on your part. Arguing for lower taxes could be so ingrained "in their nature" that they would continue to argue for lower taxes, even as taxation approached zero. At zero taxation, the libertarian might cease actively arguing for lower taxes, like a flighted bird landing on a wire is no longer flying; but their "nature" would still be to argue for lower taxes in any foreign or hypothetical situation where any taxation were present.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
RE: Maybe
This is clearly false. If tax revenues ever dropped to the point where government wasn't even meeting what they view as being the obligations of government (i.e. with respect to their legitmate role in the Libertarian's eyes) they would then be arguing in favor of raising taxes, not continuing to lower them. How else would they be funding the governmental obligations that they argue exist?
Republican Maverick at Large
-4:Strongly Disagree; 0:Meh; +4:Strongly Agree
You assume that libertarians are rational
Birds that are flightless sometimes uselessly flap their wings around, because it is their nature to fly. Such is the tax cutting reflex of Libertarians, I believe-- it would persist, even when not needed or productive.
skymutt: wise and powerful... enlightened...
Huge problem
that goes into the differences between rationalism
and empiricism 
in philosophy. Although I seem to be a rationalist (arguing from logic and reason), I consider myself more of an empiricist (though they are not mutually exclusive). The empiricist view is consistent with my comments overall.
Rationalists I think would subscribe more to forms and thus essences/natures. Empiricists (at least the few I read--Deleuze, Hume, etc.) don't. Even some of the more recent philosophies, such as existentialism
don't tend to subscribe to 'natures' as Sartre famously stated, "Existence precedes essence 
", meaning we define ourselves before any 'nature' can be attributed to people. These arguments have occurred since Plato (arguably more of a rationalist) and Aristotle (more of an empiricist). This debate is complex but the empiricists make more sense to me.
So, all in all, I would say I don't believe in 'natures', especially at the human level. Sorry if I pulled a pico and ruined anything you had planned.
If anyone (polemos) is out there that knows philosophy better than I do, feel free to expand on or correct my comments.
Ha! So, "pulled a pico"
is now synonymous with "ruined anything you had planned"?
Thanks, Specter. Thanks. :P
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce