Frontpage Feed
Community Feed
The Idea Market Feed
The 'Verse Feed
You are currently viewing the aggregator for the Distributed Republic reader blogs. You can surf to any author's blog by clicking on the link at the bottom of one of his/her posts. If you wish to participate, feel free to register (at the top of the right sidebar) and start blogging.
The main page of the blog can be found here.
Who's Committing the War Crimes?
Submitted by Brian Macker on Wed, 2008-07-16 06:29.Colombia had a recent triumph in freeing hostages from the leftist rebels FARC. If there is any doubt about the debased ideology of FARC the fact that it kept the hostages chained together at the neck continuously for years on end should make one pause for thought. Not CNN. No, they are already trying to interpret these events as a crime committed by the Colombian government.
CNN has just run an article trying to paint the Colombian government as "the bad guys" titled “Colombian military used Red Cross emblem in rescue”. By the third paragraph they are already making claims against Colombia.
“Such a use of the Red Cross emblem could constitute a "war crime" under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law and could endanger humanitarian workers in the future, according to international legal expert Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.”
Tough charges, lets see if they hold up. Will this endanger Red Cross aid workers in the future? How?
“It is clear that the conventions are very strict regarding use of the symbol because of what it represents: impartiality, neutrality. The fear is that any misuse of the symbol would weaken that neutrality and would weaken the [Red Cross],"
Yes, they are serious charges and that is a quite reasonable law, but the spirit of the law is that one not use the symbol to impersonate the Red Cross in doing humanitarian work. So the true question should be, “Was there an impersonation of the Red Cross here”.
If you look at the CNN article you will see that they have displayed the Red Cross in their article. No one would bother charging them with a “war crime” because they aren’t impersonating aid workers in doing so. There is no attempt to deception involved.
Well I shouldn’t say that. There is deception involved in their article, an attempt to deceive the public into believing that a “war crime” was committed by the Colombian government. What wasn’t attempted was to deceive any parties that CNN was the Red Cross. Nor was there any such attempt on the part of the Colombian government to do so as we will learn from information later in the article, despite CNNs attempts to magnify a different point of view.
It’s not until we get to the sixth paragraph that we learn.
"The unpublished video and photos of the mission, hailed internationally as a daring success, were shown to CNN by a military source looking to sell the material. CNN declined to buy the material at the price being asked; it was therefore unable to verify the authenticity of the images."
Why the rush to paint Colombia as war criminals if the photos are not know to be authentic?
Buried even deeper in the article.
“"After all these years of guerrilla war, we have become experts in identifying who is before us," she answered. "That's why I said it was very strange to me. I said, 'Well, what is this? A helicopter, a white helicopter. Red Cross? No. France? No.' There was no flag. There was nothing; there was no sign anywhere."
Here they have eye witness testimony from the event stating that there was no credible impersonation of the Red Cross. Was the Colombian government trying to impersonate the Red Cross here or were they trying to do something quite different?
“One of the members, dressed in a dark red T-shirt or polo shirt, khaki cargo pants and a black-and-white Arab-style scarf, also wears a bib of the type worn by Red Cross workers.”
An Arab-style scarf. Well that doesn’t sound like someone trying to impersonate the Red Cross. The Red Cross is not a Muslim organization.
At the beginning of the article we learned.
“The military source said the three photos were taken moments before the mission took off to persuade the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia rebels to release the hostages to a supposed international aid group for transport to another rebel area.”
Were they trying to imitate international aid workers? Do international aid groups transport prisoners for terrorist organizations? I don’t think so. We do know that it’s a common practice for terrorists to pretend they are running ambulances. The Al-Dura affair was an event at which such mock use of ambulances took place. Something we know with no thanks to CNN. In this case the Colombian forces are obviously pretending to be FARC sympathetic operatives pretending to be aid workers in order to transport prisoners.
“Both of Colombia's two main guerrilla armies, the FARC and the smaller National Liberation Army, have been known to misuse the Red Cross symbol, sometimes transporting fighters in ambulances.”
Well, then it’s obvious that there was no impersonation of the Red Cross. From prior reports we know the FARC rebels had been told that this was a prisoner transport operation ordered by FARC leadership. Since it is common practice for FARC to impersonate the Red Cross for transport then what better way to impersonate other terrorists than to use the same tactic. Therefore no “war crime”.
Have no doubt, there was no attempt here to trick anyone into believing the Colombian military personal were actual aid workers doing humanitarian work. The Colombian government was on a true humanitarian mission but that is the exact opposite of what FARC was lead to believe. FARC members were under the mistaken belief that this was just another prisoner transport operation by other members of FARC. There was no attempt to deceive anyone into believing that this was the Red Cross, the Colombian Military certainly wasn’t trying to deceive itself, so there was no violation of the spirit of the law even if a Red Cross symbol happened to be worn.
Now had the Colombian government convinced FARC they were the Red Cross and were planning on actually helping these people with treatment, or by releasing them then certainly there would have been a “war crime” in the sense perhaps that was not intended. That’s a problem with the letter of the law not the spirit. In fact, if anyone, even a bunch of doctors, impersonated the Red Cross to deliver medical attention they would be violating the letter of this law. That’s not the spirit however. The spirit is that the symbol of the Red Cross not be used for military operations like transporting prisoners. The true “war criminals” here are members of FARC.
This CNN story was written with a certain bias, a certain interpretation of events, and I don’t think it was unintentional. The article could have been headlined “Colombian Military Uses FARC’s Abuse of Humanitarian Aid Symbols to Rescue Hostages”, and it could have stressed the important point that no FARC member ever truly believed this was a humanitarian mission. Instead they painted this as war crimes being committed by a US ally. This is far from objective journalism.
How can CNN wonder why they are considered by some of being anti-American, and pro-Terrorist? People are rescued from being chained together at the neck day and night for years and CNN finds a way to paint their rescuers as demons, shame on you CNN. Shame, shame.
Student Who Took Condom Getting Death Threats
Submitted by Brian Macker on Fri, 2008-07-11 09:03.I'm linking to this story too trigger a discussion of contracts. Well, maybe not, I just find it ridiculous. I've changed the nouns to protect the innocent.
"A UCF student claims he’s getting death threats for messing with something sacred.
Webster Cook says he smuggled a condom, a small rubber ballon that to planned parenthood members is symbolic of responsible behavior after a volunteer hands it out, he didn’t use it as he was supposed to do, but instead walked with it."
Ok so he took something that he was given freely and left with it disobeying some rule about immediate usage. In this case the condom was suppose to be used in an act of oral sodomy. A kind of symbolic cannibalism.
"Planned Parenthood members worldwide became furious."
Not only were they furious but they wanted it back.
Why? They gave it to him for free and if he used it the way they wanted it would've been ruined by the act. In fact the volunteer had directly put the condom on Webster Cook. Who else would want to use it after that?
The quality of the condoms handed out do not even rise to the level of what is sold in stores. This is a five cent condom not a fifty cent one.
Surely not something to become outraged over even had Cook signed a contract stating that he would use the condom in a sex act. Suppose he had gotten home and thrown the condom away instead of using it in a sex act, thus violating the contract. Surely Planned Parenthood could be indemnified by this wastage of their condom by paying five cents or better yet buying a high quality condom on Amazon or at the supermarket and returning that instead.
"Webster’s friend, who didn’t want to show his face, said he took the Eucharist, to show him what it meant to Catholics."
He wanted to show his friend the condom and perhaps discuss safe sex practices. You'd think planned parenthood would be good with that.
Another article at WorldDaily.com gave even more details on his motivations.
The student senator, Webster Cook, originally claimed he merely wanted to show the condom to a friend who had questions about Planned Parenthood before using the condom for a oral sex act.
So apparently he was planning to use the condom all along, just from home.
"Webster gave the wafer back, but the Condom League, a national watchdog organization for Condom rights claims that is not enough.
“We don’t know 100% what Mr. Cooks motivation was,” said Susan Fellatio a spokesperson with the local Planned Parenthood. “However, if anything were to qualify as a hate crime, to us this seems like this might be it.”"
Wait a second. He gave the same condom back and they are still not satisfied? I find this puzzling to say the least. Not using a freely distributed five cent condom that you can buy online is a hate crime?
Get real.
If you want to control how your condoms are used then you are going to have to restrict your distribution to members only, put signs up, have them sign a contract first, and supervise the process more diligently. You can even make the pay for the condoms up front if you want.
Once you put the condom on a person though I don't see how you can force them to perform a sex act if they decide not to at the last minute. So even if Cook was a member and all these procedures were followed the most they can do is revoke his membership.
What is especially disturbing is that throughout the middle ages Planned Parenthood used the false accusation of "Stealing the Condom" and "Condom Desecration" to persecute Jews.
"Accusations of condom desecration leveled against Jews were a common pretext for massacres and expulsions throughout the Middle Ages in Europe.[1] At the time, the concept of Jewish condomcide — that the Jewish people were responsible for poking holes in condoms — was a generally accepted Condomist belief."
This seems to be a common practice of non-profits. They set up some taboo that no rational person would give a second thought about and use that to demonize, persecute and lynch anyone who disagrees with their dogma. What better excuse for killing someone and stealing their property than accusing them of stealing a five cent condom or mishandling a book that is full of lies. Hell they'll beat you to death even if they own the book or were the ones that originally handed you the condom.
Hell, in the middle ages they were forcing the Jews to put on the condoms in cannibalistic ceremonies, and at the same time accusing them of smuggling them out for illicit purposes. If you remember your history on the incondomquisition then you will recall that many Jews were forced to become Condomists by the Spanish.
Great white teeth
Submitted by Constant on Thu, 2008-07-10 23:25.
Spotted at the Boston Herald.
A dialog
Submitted by Constant on Tue, 2008-07-08 02:58.A: The struggle for freedom is the struggle against aggression.
B: The struggle for freedom is the struggle to maximize our possibilities.
A: I'm all for maximizing possibilities, but just because you like two things (freedom and maximizing possibilities) doesn't mean that they're the same thing.
B: So what makes your characterization any better?
A: It fits the examples.
B: What examples do you have in mind?
A: A slave wants to be free.
B: A slave wants to increase his possibilities.
A: But he can increase his possibilities in other ways. He can ask his owner for more possibilities.
B: But he can increase his possibilities even more if he's free.
A: Not necessarily. A free man may struggle more than a slave.
B: If a certain slave truly enjoys more possibilities than a certain free man, then the free man will envy the slave.
A: How so? What if the free man values his freedom more than his possibilities?
B: But how are we to weigh different possibilities except by how they are valued? If a certain free man envies a certain slave, then however happy he may appear from the outside, by his own lights the possibilities he enjoys as a free man are outweighed the possibilities enjoyed by the slave. But if he does not envy the slave, then however miserable he may appear from the outside, by his own lights the possibilities that he enjoys as a free man outweigh the possibilities enjoyed by the pampered slave.
A: Okay, then I will grant that a free man may, in theory, envy a slave. What do you want to conclude from this?
B: If he envies the slave, then he considers the slave more free. I defined the struggle for freedom as the struggle to maximize our possibilities. If the free man thinks that a slave enjoys more possibilities than he does as a free man, then he considers the slave to be freer.
A: This is only if we adopt your notion of freedom as the struggle to maximize our possibilities.
B: Why not? If the free man envies the slave, then the free man prefers the life of the slave to his own life. Why not say that he considers the slave to be freer? Surely the man's preference trumps every other consideration, at least from his own perspective.
A: Slavery is freedom?
B: A particular slave might be freer than a particular free man.
A: But the distinction between a slave and a free man just is that the latter is free and the former is not. That's just what slavery means.
B: Well, then we might need to reexamine the concept of slavery, but if the free man envies the slave, isn't that more important than quibbles about concepts?
A: But we already have terminology for that. We have the word "preference." Why draft the word "freedom" to serve as a synonym for "preference"? It was already doing important work.
B: What can be more important than preference itself?
A: And therefore it's okay to draft the word? By that logic, every word in the language should be drafted to be a synonym for "preference". No more language.
B: You still haven't explained the important work being done by the word "freedom."
A: You agree that there is such a thing as aggression, correct?
B: I'll agree to that.
A: Then there's such a thing as freedom from aggression.
B: And this is what you mean by "freedom?"
A: Pretty much. "Freedom" is short for "freedom from aggression."
B: Aren't you drafting the word "freedom" to do special work for you?
A: I think all I've done is analyzed the received idea of freedom. I think if we look at examples of freedom, they all concern freedom from various acts of aggression.
B: But I've also analyzed the received idea of freedom. Maybe a different received idea.
A: I see you're not going to change your mind. Can we at least recognize that there are two concepts? Must we try to wipe each other's concept out?
B: Agreed. Freedom from aggression and freedom to act.
A: But these can come in conflict.
B: You are referring to the free man who envies the slave?
A: No, I mean that, in order to increase Paul's freedom to act, it is a common practice to aggress against Peter - to rob him and transfer the money to Paul.
B: But by the same token, freedom from aggression can come into conflict with itself.
A: That sounds like a contradiction.
B: Just replace money transfer with police protection. Here, I'll spell it out: in order to increase Paul's freedom from aggression, it is a common practice to aggress against Peter - to rob him and transfer the money to a police department which protects Paul's freedom.
A: I disagree with a tax-funded police force. Do you disagree with tax-funded welfare?
B: Maybe.
A: But on what basis? You advocate freedom to act, not freedom from aggression.
B: Robbing Peter to pay Paul reduces Peter's freedom to act.
A: But it increases Paul's freedom to act. On what basis do you make a choice? If you consistently make the same choice as I do, siding with the potential victim of aggression, then aren't you in fact an advocate of freedom from aggression?
B: Maybe I have a dilemma, maybe I have to choose between Peter and Paul. Are you saying you don't have a similar dilemma?
A: Well, in this case the principle of freedom from aggression dictates that I side with Peter. The principle of the maximization of possibilities does not decide between Peter and Paul.
B: How about this. What if Peter is so rich he can hardly feel the aggression but Paul's life is transformed by the transfer? Peter's possibilities are reduced less than Paul's are increased. In fact, in this case, don't you agree? Isn't the benefit worth the cost?
A: It's still aggression. You've reduced Peter's freedom from aggression in order to increase Paul's freedom to act.
B: But the world is on the whole better.
A: Debatable. What's not debatable is that it's still aggression.
B: Well - so what? So you get to label it 'aggression'. What is so important about that?
A: It's important to Peter.
B: The transfer is important to Paul.
A: You don't feel any guilt? You don't feel the robbery is wrong?
B: The total sum of human happiness goes up.
A: And that defines right and wrong for you?
B: What else defines right and wrong?
A: Apparently you are not a receptive audience. I will address myself to Peter.
Peter: Oh, hi. What's on your mind?
A: You are being robbed. Join me in the fight against the welfare state.
Peter: Yes, you are right, I am being robbed. But what can be done about it? It is more worthwhile for me to lobby the government to rob Paul and to transfer a bit of his wealth to me.
A: Madness.
Peter: No, rationality. I don't want to reshape the world. All I want to do is get along as well as I can. What I'm doing now is the best thing for my own future.
(Nothing really new here. Just an exercise, or a bit of fun for me, or something. And while I leave A defeated and frustrated, I am in fact A.)
Speaking of Tomatoes
Submitted by Brian Macker on Mon, 2008-07-07 16:08.Here I am in my natural habitat. I'm around 6'1" so you can see the tomatos are already up around 5 foot. Those poles are twelve feet long each. I may have to add a third rung near the top if they go past the 6 foot mark. I've gotten two ripe tomatos so far.
No it's not just tomato's either. Half that garden is other things. I keep four foot wide beds with paths that run east to west. The shorter stuff grows at the front of the beds and the tomatos shade the footpaths. It's 32x32 and I have another at 12x40.

Watermelon, zucchini, gourds, turks turbins, cucumbers, radishes, carrots, turnip greens, green beans, soy beans, peas, bitter melon, leaf lettuce, winter lettuce, miners lettuce, turnip greens, onions, strawberry spinach, strawberries, long island cheese pumpkins, giant pumpkins, pie pumpkins, american giant sunflowers, potatoes, eggplant, hot peppers, sweet peppers, verdolaga, and italian wall lizards.
There's around 14 kinds of tomatos, 3 hot peppers, etc. I grow many types of flowers too. Here's mullen banana custard next to my pool.
I'm growing the hottest pepper in the world this year, the bhut jolokia, which is three times hotter than the second hottest the habanero. It rates a around one million scoville units. The pepper spray they use in riot control is 2 to 5 million scoville units, while tabasco is a mild 2,500 units.
Here's a video of some kid eating a habanero. Notice the flames coming out his ears and the uncontrollable knitting of his eyebrows in anguish. He emits a pained squeal before going for the water. You need to watch this first to be impressed by the others.
Here's different guy but instead eating a bhut jolokia. Remember the individual peppers are between half and one fifth pepper spray by volume. I'm quite impressed but I think he was born with defective pain sensors so it's not quite fair. At least he was smart enough not to eat then entire thing like the other guy.
A couple of these Mexican's are obviously racist against East Indians as they don't seem to be enjoying this traditional Indian food. The one on the right not only handles the hot but she is hot. Perfect if you're planning a riot.
I thought I wasn't going to be able to find any videos of normal people eating the bhut jolokia. Seem's like everybodies doing it but they are all super human. This guy eats a whole one, you can sense he wants to cry when he talks, but then he gulps down another. Apparently it hurts on the way out too.
Yes, someone did "plant" italian wall lizards in my garden to keep the bugs in check. Besides they're cute. I think that same someone is responsible for putting them in my old garden back in New Hyde Park. They have been in the news recently as they are rapidly evolving new body parts.
I believe with the new habitat containing bhut jolokia this is the first step in evolving true fire breathing dragons.
The Course of Human Events
Submitted by Mark on Sun, 2008-07-06 09:13.Ad appearing in NY Times 4 July.
H/T Daily Paul
Forget Diversity; Pass the Wine and Spaghetti Please
Submitted by Dave on Sat, 2008-06-28 16:43.Socioeconomic Inequalities vs. Health in 22 European Countries
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine points out that there are health outcome disparities in European countries too. I thought it would generate a lot of newspaper articles and public discussion but there has been silence as far as I can tell. Inequity in health outcome among groups of various socioeconomic status (as measured by education, occupation, and income) constitutes part of the debate about American health care.
It is unknown to what extent such inequalities are modifiable or exactly how they arise. This does not keep persons with strong political agendas from using these disparities to demand specific changes.
For example this list from the Commonwealth Fund gives a rundown of things that need to be done in order to ameliorate health care disparities in the United States.
- Effective evaluation of disparities-reduction programs.
- Minimum standards for culturally and linguistically competent health services.
- Greater minority representation within the health care workforce.
- Establishment or enhancement of government offices of minority health.
- Expanded access to services for all ethnic and racial groups.
- Involvement of all health system representatives in minority health improvement efforts.
But how much benefit should we expect if we do make these changes? Perhaps it would be appropriate to look at conditions in other parts of the world.
Data on mortality according to education level and occupational class in this study came from census-based mortality studies. Deaths were classified according to cause, including common causes, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, smoking, alcohol use and causes amenable to medical intervention, such as tuberculosis and hypertension. Data were also obtained from health or multipurpose surveys given to 350,000 persons asking them about their general health. For each country, the association between socioeconomic status and health outcomes was measured with the use of regression-based inequality indexes.
Europe offered an excellent opportunities for this type of research because of the intercountry variety of political, cultural, economic, and epidemiologic histories and because good data on inequalities in health are often available.
In almost all countries, the rates of death and poorer self-assessments of health were substantially higher in groups of lower socioeconomic status, but the magnitude of the inequalities between groups of higher and lower socioeconomic status was much larger in some countries than in others.
Findings of interest included the following:
- Inequalities in mortality between socioeconomic groups and genders were small in some Southern European countries and very large in most countries in the Eastern European and Baltic regions.
- Though higher education was associated with lower mortality in all countries the ratio differed markedly between countries. In England, Wales, and Sweden lower education was associated with less than twice the mortality rate of the more educated persons. In Eastern Europe there was a four fold increase in mortality among the least educated. In the Basque country of Spain the disparities were less pronounced than anywhere else. Southern Europe seemed to be the healthiest area over all.
- Among men and women, smaller inequalities in the rate of death from any cause in the Southern European regions are due mainly to smaller inequalities in the rate of death from cardiovascular disease. For example, among men in the Basque country, where the education-related inequality in the rate of death from any cause is below the European average, decreased death from cardiovascular disease accounts for 45% of this difference. Larger inequalities in the rate of death from cardiovascular disease make an important contribution to larger inequalities in the rate of death from any cause in the eastern and Baltic regions as well; however, important contributions are also made by cancer in the eastern region and injuries in the Baltic region.
- I wonder about the effect of the Mediterranean diet on this reduction in cardiovascular mortality in men. The custom of eating a high fiber diet rich in monounsaturated fat and low in saturated fat, washed down with a little wine seems a more pleasant alternative to the Commonwealth Fund plan described above. Smaller scale studies really do show unexplained disparities in the way people are treated according to race and gender. But the reasons for this are not clear( See Below)
- Smoking and Drinking in Europe as whole, inequalities in mortality from smoking-related conditions, account for 21% of the inequalities in the rate of death from any cause among men and 6% of those among women. In Europe as a whole, inequalities in alcohol-related mortality account for 11% of inequalities in the rate of death from any cause among men and 6% of those among women.
- Deaths from conditions amenable to immediate to medical intervention account for 5% of inequalities in the rate of death from any cause when measured among social groups.
Discussion: The authors state that Smoking, obesity, excessive alcohol consumption, and deficiencies in health care represent only some of the determinants of inequalities in health. Yes, Social inequality is important. Yet within Western Europe, there is little evidence that among-country inequalities in health are related to variations in government support for health care. For example, Italy and Spain have welfare policies that are less generous and less universal than those of Northern Europe but they appear to have substantially smaller inequalities in mortality. Do overriding cultural factors, such as the Mediterranean diet and the reluctance of women to take up smoking outweighing government health care activities? Evidently they do. Cultural factors seem to have prevented differences in access to material wealth and other usual health related resources in these populations from translating into inequalities in lifestyle-related risk factors for mortality.
The study also found no evidence for a leveling of health inequalities among classes in countries in Northern Europe. This was surprising, because these countries have long histories of egalitarian policies, reflected in, among other things, welfare policies. These policies provide a high level of social-security protection to all residents of the country, resulting in smaller income inequalities and lower poverty rates. The studies results suggest that although a reasonable level of social security and public services may be a necessary to prevent inequalities in health, it is not sufficient. Lifestyle-related risk factors have an important role in premature death in high-income countries and also appear to contribute to the persistence of inequalities in mortality in Northern Europe.
New York Times Story June 5,2008
This kind of news report is typical of media hype but is this where the real problem is?
“Race and place of residence can have a staggering impact on the course and quality of the medical treatment a patient receives, according to new research showing that blacks with diabetes or vascular disease are nearly five times more likely than whites to have a leg amputated and that women in Mississippi are far less likely to have mammograms than those in Maine.
The study, by researchers at Dartmouth, examined Medicare claims for evidence of racial and geographic disparities and found that on a variety of quality indices, blacks typically were less likely to receive recommended care than whites within a given region. But the most striking disparities were found from place to place.
For instance, the widest racial gaps in mammogram rates within a state were in California and Illinois, with a difference of 12 percentage points between the white rate and the black rate. But the country’s lowest rate for blacks — 48 percent in California — was 24 percentage points below the highest rate — 72 percent in Massachusetts. The statistics were for women ages 65 to 69 who received screening in 2004 or 2005.
In all but two states, black diabetics were less likely than whites to receive annual glycolated hemoglobin testing.( a test that monitors long term diabetic control) But blacks in Colorado (66 percent) were far less likely to be screened than those in Massachusetts (88 percent).
The study was commissioned by the nation’s largest health-related philanthropy, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which on Thursday planned to announce a three-year, $300 million initiative intended to narrow health care disparities across lines of race and geography.
Such variations may be partly explained by regional differences in education and poverty levels, but researchers increasingly believe that variations in medical practice and spending also are factors.
“In U.S. health care, it’s not only who you are that matters; it’s also where you live,” wrote the study’s authors, led by Dr. Elliott S. Fisher.”
The fact that there are marked state to state variations seems to argue against racism as the cause of these disparities unless Colorado is more racist than Massachusetts. If the European study sited in the first part of the post holds true in the United States, changes in welfare and medical care should be expected to have only marginal effects on mortality as compared to life style and cultural changes. Perhaps the Johnson Foundation would get more bang for the buck by distributing cases of olive oil and wine to the disadvantaged.
Why Are High Housing Prices Good?
Submitted by Dave on Thu, 2008-06-26 17:02.Have you ever read a news story like this?
“In other reports, sales gasoline rose in May, although prices continued to drop, according to the Petroleum Institute Sales rose 2 percent to a pace of 499 million gallons. The median sales price per gallon, however, fell to $3.75, down 6.3 percent from a year ago. That was the fifth biggest year-over-year price decline in records that go back to 1999. Many analysts think gasoline prices need to stop falling or start rising for the ailing petroleum market to get back its health.”
This is a slightly doctored version of the story below.
The Associated Press:
“In other reports, sales of previously owned homes nudged up in May, although prices continued to drop, the National Association of Realtors said. Sales rose 2 percent to a pace of 4.99 million units. The median sales price, however, fell to $208,600, down 6.3 percent from a year ago. That was the fifth biggest year-over-year price decline in records that go back to 1999. Many analysts think housing prices need to stop falling or start rising for the ailing housing market to get back its health.”
I hope prices of houses go up enough so I can afford to buy one.
One Upping
Submitted by Kyle Eliason on Tue, 2008-06-24 00:27.I'll try to top David Masten's post. The Senate majority leader in my home state of Minnesota, Larry Pogemiller (DFL), recently had this to say:
I think it is simplistic and naive to say that people can spend their money better than government... The notion that everybody can individually spend their money better than government, I just think is trite wrong-headed and anti-democratic.
Video here.
Time for Show Trials
Submitted by Curunir on Mon, 2008-06-23 18:34.I wish I could come up with something insightful to say about this, but I'm drawing a blank. I had thought the issue of show trials for heresy had been settled, but once again I've been proven wrong. From the Guardian, here are the latest ramblings from Chief Defender of the Faith James Hansen:
James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech (pdf) to the US Congress - in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming - to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the "perfect storm" of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.
Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.
In an interview with the Guardian he said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."
Did Anyone Else Catch This?
Submitted by Kyle Eliason on Wed, 2008-06-18 07:06.I was watching one of the CSPAN channels last week when a member of the ACLU said, straight faced (and there were no chuckles from the audience nor did he crack a smile or give much of a pause), that more rich white people should be falsely indicted (a la the Duke case) to help expose prosecutorial misconduct. I was pretty stunned, but everyone on stage with the guy didn't seem phased at all.
Getting crapped on by the government sucks for all involved. If prosecutorial misconduct is given greater scruitiny as a result of the Duke case, I'm very glad such a silver lining exists, but yikes, man. I don't even wish that kind of stuff on Scott Scheule.
I tried googling to find out the name of the ACLU employee, but there is so much with Duke case and ALCU I didn't get far.
You say yes, I say no
Submitted by Mark on Wed, 2008-06-11 13:53.Looks like Amit and his near miss in yesterday's primary election is the subject of some more cosmo-/paleo- libertarian bickering. The cosmos seem to take the higher ground this time; I get the feeling that Lew just had to vent his disappointment without thinking too carefully about which "side" Amit was supposed to be on.
There must be a numerical term that measures how large a social group gets before it splits into warring factions. I would have thought that with all the discussion of polycentric market solutions that libertarianism would have a much larger number. Guess not.
What Can be Done About the Knife Culture?
Submitted by Dave on Tue, 2008-06-10 02:27.A phenomenon first reported in the British Isles is now gaining in strength in Japan. What can the government do? The Brits have launched a massive education program and started sentencing people caught carrying knives over 3 in. in length to up to four years in prison after having 16 knife deaths.
Google Link
In Japan a 25 year old anime watching, Internet using mad man killed seven with a large sports knife. One legislator called for banning sports knives with long blades. These weapons which might be labeled assault knives include knives with blades over five inches in length.
A quick check of the kitchen shows ten knives that would be affected by the ban, some with blades up to 10 inches in length. Some of them were owned by my dear mother. Oh well ,I guess we are already all felons anyway.
Yes,The links work,now get ready to rummble!
Dept. of Jokes I Wish I'd Thought Of
Submitted by Matt McIntosh on Sun, 2008-06-08 14:38.Because I can't not pass on a joke that combines neurology, politics, and bad taste all in one shot:
Did you hear about Senator Kennedy's left-parietal glioma? Apparently it was giving him such a bad case of hemineglect that he couldn't perceive the right side of the political spectrum.
Definition of Sabotage
Submitted by Kyle Eliason on Tue, 2008-05-13 04:15.The Cato blog linked here and the following caught my eye:
The Cato Institute will present this student, Yon Goicoechea, with the "2008 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty" at a dinner costing $500 per person.
The student movement against the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela has been receiving money from different agencies of the United States, such as the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, and other U.S. and international agencies.Yon Goicoechea has made it clear that the $500,000 from the Cato Institute will be used for further attempts to sabotage the Bolivarian Revolution.
Emphasis mine. My guess (and it is just a guess, I know nothing about Goicoechea)is that sabotage in this context means to hold a contrary opinion and speak out on it.
Note to the New York City Independent Media Center: The Venezuelan government's price controls will take care of the sabotage of the Bolivarian Revolution. If that is the goal of Goicoechea and Cato, either would be better off keeping the cash.