« March 2008 | Main | May 2008 »
Hillary's Interview With the Indianapolis Star - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
Hillary's Interview With the Indianapolis Star Bump and Update: From Hillary's interview with the Indianapolis Star today (video below):' Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said today that it would be “the height of political foolishness” for Democrats to back a Republican, or not vote at all, if they’re disappointed by the outcome of the long-running nomination battle between her and Barack Obama. “Anyone, anyone, who voted for either of us should be absolutely committed to voting for the other” in the general election, Clinton said during an hourlong meeting with The Indianapolis Star Editorial Board. “I’m going to shout that from the mountaintops and the valleys and everywhere I can, no matter what the outcome of the nominating process is.” ...“no matter what the differences are between Senator Obama and myself, they pale in comparison to the differences we have with Senator McCain and the Republicans.”
Hillary, policy wonk.

I think I missed last week and so this week I'll give away two books,The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America by Louis Menand and In The Wake: A Novel by Per Petterson
The winners are: Age of Deception for The Metaphysical Club and Sean for In the Wake. Please contact me by email with your mailing addresses.
I'll take all requests for the books left in the comments during the next 24 hours and then use a random number generator to determine the winners. You can enter for one book or the other but not both, so please specify the book you want. I'll then ship the book at my expense to the winners. The offer is limited to residents of the U.S. and Canada. My apologies to my good friends in other countries but the cost of shipments to other destinations is simply too high.
Note:The offer is open only to registered comments others will be ignored. Please make it clear if you want to be considered for the book or are just commenting, and don't forget to specify the book you want.Reflections: Letting Go: Smoking and non-smoking by David Sedaris
When I was in fourth grade, my class took a field trip to the American Tobacco plant in nearby Durham, North Carolina. There we witnessed the making of cigarettes and were given free packs to take home to our parents. I tell people this and they ask me how old I am, thinking, I guess, that I went to the world’s first elementary school, one where we wrote on cave walls and hunted our lunch with clubs. Then I mention the smoking lounge at my high school. It was outdoors, but, still, you’d never find anything like that now, not even if the school was in a prison.moreI recall seeing ashtrays in movie theatres and grocery stores, but they didn’t make me want to smoke. In fact, it was just the opposite. Once, I drove an embroidery needle into my mother’s carton of Winstons, over and over, as if it were a voodoo doll. She then beat me for twenty seconds, at which point she ran out of breath and stood there panting, “That’s . . . not . . . funny.”
Carter defends his meeting with Hamas.

Disclaimer: I do not necessarily agree with the point of view expressed in the links I post. I do find them interesting for a variety of reasons, and in general worthy of discussion.
Apart from the fact that it doesn't have the benefits claimed by supporters it sends the wrong message about energy consumption.
But what if Obama has peaked too early, and Hillary has reason to hang around now on the one issue he claims as his own: electability?Hillary Rodham Clinton now leads John McCain by 9 points in a head-to-head presidential matchup, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll that bolsters her argument that she is more electable than Democratic rival Barack Obama.
A seven-month study of weather forecasting at Kansas City television stations was conducted over 220 days ... One [station manager] said, "There's not an evaluation of accuracy in hiring meteorologists. Presentation takes precedence over accuracy." And when discussing accuracy (or the lack thereof) of a seven-day forecast, another station manager stated, "All viewers care about is the next day. Accuracy is not a big deal to viewers." ...
As the media coverage of the Democratic presidential race continues to focus on lapel pins and pastors, America is ailing. As I travel around the country, I find people are angry and motivated. Like Dr. Rocky White, a physician from a conservative, evangelical background who practices in rural Alamosa, Colo. A tall, gray-haired Westerner in black jeans, a crisp white shirt and a bolo tie, Dr. White is a leading advocate for single-payer health care. He wasn't always.
Humans alone practice religion because they're the only creatures to have evolved imagination.That's the argument of anthropologist Maurice Bloch of the London School of Economics. Bloch challenges the popular notion that religion evolved and spread because it promoted social bonding, as has been argued by some anthropologists.
Instead, he argues that first, we had to evolve the necessary brain architecture to imagine things and beings that don't physically exist, and the possibility that people somehow live on after they've died.
Once we'd done that, we had access to a form of social interaction unavailable to any other creatures on the planet. Uniquely, humans could use what Bloch calls the "transcendental social" to unify with groups, such as nations and clans, or even with imaginary groups such as the dead. The transcendental social also allows humans to follow the idealised codes of conduct associated with religion.
"What the transcendental social requires is the ability to live very largely in the imagination," Bloch writes.

Disclaimer: I do not necessarily agree with the point of view expressed in the links I post. I do find them interesting for a variety of reasons, and in general worthy of discussion.
He did a good job with the interview but if one his goals was to call them to task it didn't happen. How do the Obama supporters here feel about his failure to confront Fox about their coverage of him?
The Fox News Sunday interview is over. And Obama didn't take on Fox at all in any meaningful sense.On Friday, a senior Obama adviser responded to criticism of his decision to go on Fox with a bunch of tough talk, saying that Obama knew full well that Fox has been at the forefront of spreading "the most specious of rumors" (i.e., lies) about Obama and vowing that he would "take Fox on."
Well, it didn't happen.
If the Pope came to Britain, would he get the same rapturous reception he is getting in the States? And should he?That's the question I'm being asked, and my answers are "I hope not" and "No".
Given the chance to do it over, would Franzen have wanted The Corrections to be part of Oprah's book club?
IT’S a nightmare. It’s the Bataan Death March. It’s mutually assured Armageddon. “Both of them are already losing the general to John McCain,” declared a Newsweek columnist last month, predicting that the election “may already be over” by the time the Democrats anoint a nominee.Not so fast. If we’ve learned any new rule in the 2008 campaign, it’s this: Once our news culture sets a story in stone, chances are it will crumble. But first it must be recycled louder and louder 24/7, as if sheer repetition will transmute conventional wisdom into reality.
“A few days after the raid the sirens screamed again. The listless and heartsick survivors were showered this time with leaflets. I lost my copy of the epic,” writes Kurt Vonnegut, “but remember that it ran something like this: ‘To the people of Dresden: We were forced to bomb your city because of the heavy military traffic your railroad facilities have been carrying. We realize that we haven’t always hit our objectives. Destruction of anything other than military objectives was unintentional, unavoidable fortunes of war.’”“The leaflet should have said, ‘We have hit every blessed church, hospital, school, museum, theater, your university, the zoo, and every apartment building in town, but we honestly weren’t trying hard to do it. C’est la guerre. So sorry.’”
Totally obliterate them. “That’s a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that,” says presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Candidate Obama assures us that he “will take no options off the table,” while candidate McCain sings, “Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb, Iran.” C’est la guerre. So sorry.
FOR the last month, news media attention was focused on Pennsylvania and its Democratic primary. Given the gargantuan effort, what did we learn?Well, the rancor of the campaign was covered. The amount of money spent was covered. But in Pennsylvania, as in the rest of the country this political season, the information about the candidates’ priorities, policies and principles — information that voters will need to choose the next president — too often did not make the cut.
And this week's winner is?

Disclaimer: I do not necessarily agree with the point of view expressed in the links I post. I do find them interesting for a variety of reasons, and in general worthy of discussion.
The problem that Obama has had with expanding his base in every primary since Wisconsin (Feb. 19) may boil down to the simple equation that either you get it (the young, the affluent and African-Americans) or you are tone-deaf (older voters, blue-collar Democrats, middle-class women and Hispanics). Trapped by the true-believer enthusiasm that the fledging Illinois senator arouses, the Obama campaign has become something of a Cool Kids Club. Either you are a full-fledged member (with the secret handshake and the decoder ring) or else you find yourself voting for a well-known, albeit flawed, alternative called Hillary Clinton.Obama is the first insurgent candidate in memory who has not come up with a new issue to challenge the establishment favorite. (Clinton's 2002 vote to permit the Iraq war was part of the background of the campaign before Obama decided to run.) By predicating almost his entire campaign on inspiration and process (he can reform the broken system in Washington and Clinton cannot), Obama has deliberately forsaken bread-and-butter issues as a means of persuasion. Maybe a federal bowling-ball subsidy plan might have been derided as economic pandering, but it would have at least given Obama something new to talk about in the run-up to the Pennsylvania primary.
IN 1860, while studying primroses in the garden of Down House, his home in Kent, England, Charles Darwin noticed something odd about their blooms.While all the flowers had both male and female parts — anthers and pistils — in some the anthers were prominent and in others the pistils were longer. So he experimented in his home laboratory and greenhouses, cross-pollinating some plants with their anatomical opposites. The results were striking.
“He determined that if they cross-pollinate, they produce more seed and more vigorous seedlings,” said Margaret Falk, a horticulturalist and associate vice president at the New York Botanical Garden. The variation is evolution’s way of increasing cross-pollination, she said.
A Turkish citizen born and raised in Germany, Murat Kurnaz was only 19 when he was arrested without explanation in Pakistan in October 2001. Handed over to the US, he spent the next 1,600 days enduring the brutal life of a prisoner at Guantanamo and various forms of torture, before being released without explanation or apology in August 2006.
Pisces: You will be busy exchanging ions across your gill membranes today — watch out for predators, and trust your lateral line organs.
Clinton challenges Obama to Lincoln-Douglas style debate -
MARION, Ind. - Democratic rivals Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton turned up the rhetoric Saturday in their increasingly heated primary battle as she issued a new debate challenge and he complained of a race that's largely been reduced to trivia while working families feel economic pain.Clinton took the debate dispute to a new level, challenging Obama to face off with her in a debate without a moderator, Lincoln-Douglas style.
"Just the two of us, going for 90 minutes, asking and answering questions, we'll set whatever rules seem fair," Clinton said while campaigning in South Bend.
Her campaign made the offer formal with a letter to the Obama campaign. Obama aides said they were studying the letter.

Another of those intruiging little coincidences; the other night I read this anecdote about Sarte's excitement on hearing about how you could apply phenomenology even to things like apricot cocktails.
"The president hasn't been on the case for a while"—Jeffrey Sachs. Jeffrey is the author of Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet

It does make an interesting point. Although Obama's case for being the nominee is much stronger at this point than Clinton's, if he placed party ahead of self he could drop out.
contributed by Charles Lemos
The above video from my favourite British sit-com, The Vicar of Dibley, provides a moment of levity as well as affords me a perfect introduction to analyze bread and butter issues quite literally. Alice (played by Emma Chambers) in her wonderful round-about manner comes to the conclusion that she believes that "in fact there is a lot more butter around than we all thought there was." She is not wrong, the butter supply is stable but the price of butter has soared some 30%. What is driving the price of butter is that the price of its input, namely grain and feed, are rising.
The bread market is different however. It too is affected by the rise of its inputs but the bread market unlike butter is not global, it is quite local. I can go into my local supermarket and buy butter from California, Oregon, Vermont, Wisconsin, Denmark, Ireland, France, Spain, Bulgaria, India and New Zealand. My bread comes from Oakland and not much farther. Thus the price of bread has risen faster in part because its market is not a global one. The reasons for that are:
It's not durable--even if you could keep the loaves from being crushed, it goes stale too quickly.
It is not compact--a container full of bread isn't worth enough to make it profitable to ship. It certainly isn't worth enough to pay for the sort of fast shipping that would get it to market while it was still fresh.
It is not uniform--ask someone what bread is and you'll get a different answer from someone in the United States than you would in France, and a very different answer from someone in India. Even within the US there are regional differences for example here in San Francisco we have a passion for sourdough dating back to the Gold Rush era.
The result of that is that there hasn't been much in the way of cheap imports to hold down the price of bread. To that is added a general increase in the price of the inputs to bread, especially the price of wheat, but more fundamentally, the price of energy. And in more ways than one. An increase in the price of oil makes everything cost more. Everything takes energy to make, and everything takes energy to ship to your local store. Beyond that, there are second-order effects--the strong price of ethanol made corn so profitable that huge amounts of land that might have grown other crops have been used for corn. Back in late February I wrote an article for One Good Move entitled Let Them Eat Ethanol which covers the surge in wheat prices globally and in the United States. Briefly prices have been driven by rising world consumption for grains, reduced harvests due to drought in Australia and Argentina, increased cost of oil-based fertizilers and pesticides, and conversion of acreage from durum wheat to corn production.
So what has the impact been of all those factors, well here is a review of the impact of rising bread prices is having around the world. The articles date back to late Summer 2007 through the present:
AfghanistanBut there is even more going beneath the surface. For example, India, the second biggest consumer of wheat, waded into the global market to try to buy more grain than suppliers were offering. In 2006, India swung dramatically from exporting surplus wheat to importing it.
Elsewhere, Russia is considering curbs on exports to keep a lid on prices at home. Australia, the third-biggest exporter of wheat, warned that its output this year might be less than its previous estimate. This causes disruptions in the spot market. Bread is often subsidized in many countries and global wheat prices rise, countries are not selling excess supply in the global markets for fear that when they need to replenish their stocks prices will only be higher. In effect, they are hoarding. These supply problems thus cause the global markets to tighten and thus global reports indicate that the price of wheat has more than tripled during the past 10 months and doubling since September 2007.
The soaring price of wheat is not an isolated phenomenon. All around the agricultural markets prices are rising. Corn doubled last year, while the price of soybeans is also much higher than it was 12 months ago. In a time-lagged rerun of the explosive growth in the price of energy and metals earlier in this decade, crops are fuelling a surge in food prices that's picked up the ugly, but inevitable, tag "agflation". With food prices really on the move up again, history suggests we should be worried. Prices have tended to move in long cycles driven by extended periods of mismatched supply and demand. And the tendency is not for them to come down.
Maybe I'm just buying into the pundit's hype, but I agree with them. The Reverend Wright is saying that Barack agrees with him, but that politicians don't say what they really believe. I think Barack has to make a total break from this nut. Perhaps a speech where he once again makes the case that this is not politics as usual. The problem is that there are so many of his statements that are clearly political, views he's tweaked to be more electable, that he'll have trouble selling it. I don't think he believes what his reverend believes, but I'm not sure he can convince the average voter. If he doesn't do a good job of addressing issues like this one, he'll lose. Step up Barack or you really will be unelectable.
It was a tough night for Barack Obama. His staff was worried this morning when he failed to make a scheduled campaign appearance. The very junior Senator is fine; he was found hiding under Hillary's umbrella of deterrence.Was it the very in front of junior you didn't like, or that you simply weren't amused. Okay then, how about this, funny or not?
Hillary got a big boost out of Pennsylvania but the experts say it's not enough. Hillary will need a miracle to pull it out, they say. Rumor has it the campaign is counting on the rapture, Barack is transported to heaven and Hillary is 'left behind' to beat John McCain.Let's see if this polling software works?
Grandpa says:
Did ya ever see one of these. It's called a dictionary, and you don't even have to be hooked up to the internets to use it.
The first time a Bush Administration official dared the Iraqi insurgency to attack Americans, they did, with devastating consequences that reverberate to this day. In a show of sound judgment, they went and did it again (h/t Newshoggers):Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mocked anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as a coward on Sunday, hours after the radical leader threatened to declare war unless U.S. and Iraqi forces end a military crackdown on his followers.
One of my duties involves teaching nurse practitioner students. Nursing is quite different from medicine, and many of the linguistic markers of nursing differ significantly from medicine. As more physicians' assistants and nurse practitioners enter the primary care world there will be a bit of a culture clash. For instance, my NP students often refer to a physical exam as an "assessment", a misnomer which I do not allow them to use with me. Assessments come after you have spoken to and examined a patient. Another difference is in the common use of "client" in referring to patients. This debate seems to have originated in the late 80s or early 90s, and perhaps in psychiatry, but it spread rapidly. Its growth also coincided with the growth of HMOs and other managed care. Language means something beyond the words themselves, and what we call the people we care for matters.
How do you think Obama will answer an ad like this? Should he ignore it? If you are his campaign adviser what advice will you give him?

on MSNBC last night Elizabeth Edwards is likely to show up at a Clinton rally or two, but can she convince the ex-candidate to come over? It's a tough decision for John Edwards since Obama is such a heavy favorite in his home state.
If religion isn't the greatest threat to rationality and scientific progress, what is? Perhaps alcohol, or television, or addictive video games. But although each of these scourges - mixed blessings, in fact - has the power to overwhelm our best judgment and cloud our critical faculties, religion has a feature of that none of them can boast: it doesn't just disable, it honours the disability. People are revered for their capacity to live in a dream world, to shield their minds from factual knowledge and make the major decisions of their lives by consulting voices in their heads that they call forth by rituals designed to intoxicate them.It used to be the case that we tended to excuse drunk drivers when they crashed because they weren't entirely in control of their faculties at the time, but now we have wisely inverted that judgment, holding drunk drivers doubly culpable for putting themselves in that irresponsible position in the first place. It is high time we inverted the public attitude about religion as well, finding all socially destructive acts of religious passion shameful, not honourable, and holding those who abet them - the preachers and other apologists for religious zeal - as culpable as the bartenders and negligent hosts who usher dangerous drivers on to the highways. Our motto should be: Friends don't let friends steer their lives by religion.
But the candidate who rocketed to stardom as the embodiment of a new kind of politics -- hopeful, positive and inspiring -- saw his image tarnished in the bruising fight for Pennsylvania. Provoked by Clinton's repeated references to his remarks about the state's voters and her charges that he is an "elitist," Obama struck back in the closing days of the campaign."It's a real danger for Obama, and if you look at these recent ads, the messages they're delivering in all these conference calls, it's a far cry from last fall," when the theme of hope emerged amid calls for a more negative tone, said Democratic consultant Steve Elmendorf, a Clinton supporter.
Republican strategist John Feehery put it less charitably: "That's the danger of running as holier-than-thou. You have a lot farther to fall."
Hillary Won
Barack Lost
Dr. Obama and Dr. McCain - Fact Checker (Dr. Obama indeed, anti-science indeed,(still an open question I'll wait to see how he responds to the criticism his remarks provoke) I'm sticking with shame on him, and shame on Hillary for her pandering. )
"We've seen just a skyrocketing autism rate. Some people are suspicious that it's connected to the vaccines. This person included. The science right now is inconclusive, but we have to research it." --Barack Obama, Pennsylvania Rally, April 21, 2008.
update: More here
Do you believe there is an autism epidemic in the United States?Wrong! Senator Obama Just Plain WrongAutism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) is the fastest growing developmental disorder in the United Sates and, perhaps the world.. One in 150 children is diagnosed with ASD. These numbers can not be explained solely by increased awareness or changes to the diagnostic criteria. It is a health crisis and I will act accordingly. There are many Americans with special needs. They will have a partner in the federal government under my administration.
I know what apologists for Clinton and Obama will say there: What's wrong with calling for more research? Of course, "calling for more research" is the cop-out that all politicians use whenever there's an issue that is contentious, but that's not why the Democratic candidates are in for a dose of Orac's loving attention. Rather it is because in answering these questions the way they did, they both fell for the very frame (I hate that word these days, but it's the correct one here) that antivaccinationists wanted them to fall for with respect to vaccines and autism. In essence, both candidates accepted some of the major pillars of the mercury militia's fantasies as being true.
It is unfortunate that both candidates have failed to accept an invitiation to debate.
Ok, so I'm going out on a limb here. I am a Hillary Clinton supporter, but as I've stated in the past, not by much. I support Clinton because I belong to that little-known political party: Realisticrats. Realisticrats never fall in love with a candidate. We fall in love with winning. We start at the end--the actual election--and work our backwards from there in choosing the candidate who has the best chance at victory. I don't rally around anyone unless they look, smell and act like a winner. I belong to no "team." A reporter once jabbed basketball legend Michael Jordon about his his ego and style of play with "Hey Michael, there's no "I" in team"....His Airness responded with the brilliant, "that's right, but there is in 'win'." It's all about winning. And while I actually prefer to see Sen. Barack Obama become our 44th president, and think he would be much better for the country at this critical military, economic and social crossroads, I firmly believe Clinton is the more electable candidate against the GOP's presumptive nominee Sen. John McCain and the Ruthless Republican Attack Machine (RRAM).Obama, in order to achieve the historic presidential greatness that might one day be his destiny, needs to first get past the supreme ugliness that he faces with the RRAM. And I am as confident as a caterpillar at a toe-countin' contest that McCain & Company will eat him alive in the general election. He has unfortunately armed the RRAM with way too much ammunition involving his Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, William Ayers, flag pin, BitterGate and Michelle's "pride" controversies. Throw in the inescapable fact that he's a 46-year-young black man with a Muslim name, a drug past and just three years experience in the Senate and the picture deeply worsens. Now before I continue, don't shoot the messenger. I personally don't care about any of this nonsense, but you can bet your ass the RRAM is salivating as we speak. If you believe otherwise, you are beyond naive. I've taken a lot of heat over the past several months over this position. But I am not in the politically-correct business. Remember, I'm a Realisticrat. My only goal is to win.
In stark form, the debate was: Does language shape what we perceive, a position associated with the late Benjamin Lee Whorf, or are our perceptions pure sensory impressions, immune to the arbitrary ways that language carves up the world?The latest research changes the framework, perhaps the language of the debate, suggesting that language clearly affects some thinking as a special device added to an ancient mental skill set. Just as adding features to a cellphone or camera can backfire, language is not always helpful. For the most part, it enhances thinking. But it can trip us up, too.
Bobby Fischer was a genius, a recluse and a political outcast. Our correspondent examines the controversial life and legacy of one of the world’s greatest chess players, whose last move has sparked a vicious wrangle over his fortune
Hillary visited the lions den, but the mangy Keith failed to draw any blood. Perhaps it was lack of time, it wasn't for a lack of trying.
Which one will be the next PRESIDENT?
I THINK THIS IS THE BEST POLITICAL POSTER SO FAR THIS YEAR. NOT BIASED, THE TRUTH. WE HAVE TO PICK ONE OF THE 3 STOOGES.
tip and captions courtesy of pedantsareus

One may make a distinction between two types of novel: the self-enclosed and the open. The distinction is not absolute. Such things never are. Genre fiction may merge with what is called the literary novel, for instance. Still the categories I have in mind are useful, or at least interesting. By the self-enclosed novel, I mean one which makes no reference — or almost no reference — to anything beyond itself. It belongs to its age of course, but it does not appear to be set in time. Time naturally passes, as it must in a narrative, but there is no suggestion that events in the world of fact beyond the novel might impinge on its characters, influence their behaviour, or affect the course of their lives. The doors of the novel are closed against the winds of the world.
I don't normally blog on religion, but there has been an jump in foolish writing coming from the wacky end of the religious spectrum. On the top of the list are folks like Vox Day and Geisler and Turek (I Don't Have Enough FAITH to Be an ATHEIST). For some Christians, faith isn't enough, apparently---they want logic and science to be on their side. Apologists perform some crazy cognitive acrobatics to try to prove that their beliefs have some objective reality.
Chris Hedges has a new book out, a really terrible book on the putative 'new' atheists. It's so stupid it's unreadable. This is a little surprising, since he was a foreign correspondent for the NY Times for several years, and even though the Times is not nearly as clever as it thinks it is, I would expect it to be above the kind of counter-factual drivel Hedges perpetrates in I Don't Believe in Atheists. Or would I. No on second thought maybe I wouldn't. Anyway the book is the kind of stupid that makes your jaw drop as you read.
So there you go Israel, tear down those walls. It will make it easier to leave the territory you've been illegally occupying for years.
Carter: Hamas is willing to accept Israel as its neighbor - Yahoo! News
JERUSALEM - Former President Carter said Monday that Hamas — the Islamic militant group that has called for the destruction of Israel — is prepared to accept the right of the Jewish state to "live as a neighbor next door in peace." But Carter warned that there would not be peace if Israel and the U.S. continue to shut out Hamas and its main backer, Syria. The Democratic former president relayed the message in a speech in Jerusalem after meeting last week with top Hamas leaders in Syria. It capped a nine-day visit to the Mideast aimed at breaking the deadlock between Israel and Hamas militants who rule the Gaza Strip. "They (Hamas) said that they would accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, if approved by Palestinians and that they would accept the right of Israel to live as a neighbor next door in peace," Carter said.
I know you've missed him, so it's my pleasure to annouce that Charles is back. He has spent the last several weeks 'walking the walk.' On his recent trip to Africa he visited Ethiopia, Chad (the border with Darfur), Uganda and finally Zimbabwe to assist the Zimbabwe Election Support Network in monitoring the recent elections in Zimbabwe. As you know if you've read his bio, he runs a a non-profit called The Living Arts Project that raises awareness and funds for other non-profits and assist them in their brand development and marketing. His main focus is rural development projects primarily building schools, libraries and community centers as well as sustainable development projects and micro-finance.
Charles seems to raise the hackles on the faint of heart here and so has decided to start his own blog. He will continue to offer the ocassional post on economics and history here but will save his most pointed offerings for his site. So, if you're inclined you can visit him at By The Fault his tagline says it all "seismic politics, earth-shattering economics and volcanic commentary". I suggested he use "slip sliding away" for a tagline, he's not asking for advice, but how many prefer my suggestion? It will be interesting to see how many of you just can't resist and sign up to comment there. His style isn't for the faint of heart, but love him or hate him, you can't accuse him of not having a clear point of view, and a passionate way of expressing it.
Ian McEwan is one of may favorite authors and an atheist. You may have watched the segment on him in the [Root of All Evil](http://richarddawkins.net/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=6). I recently finished reading [Enduring Love](http://amazon.com/dp/0385494149/?tag=onegoodmove-20) a novel he wrote ten years ago, and one of his best. The protaganist, Joe Rose, is one I like a lot, a science writer,and a rationalist. He is a character who has much in common with the author. It's not suprising, but interesting, how McEwan draws on his personal experiences and imbues this character with his own feelings and beliefs in this story.
realted: [I think I'm right, therefore I am](http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/generalfiction/0,6121,98968,00.html)
I said,"there is nothing we can do but wait," and gestured in the direction of the road, one field away.
Parry took a couple of steps closer and looked down at Logan then back to me. The gray-blue eyes gleamed. He was excited, but no one could ever have guessed to what extent. "Actually, I think there is something we can do."
I looked at my watch. It was fifteen minutes since I had phoned the emergency services. "You go ahead," I said. "Do what you like."
"It's something we can do together?" he said as he looked about for a suitable place on the ground. The wild though came to me that he was proposing some form of gross indecency with a corpse. He was lowering himself and with a look was inviting me to join him. Then I got it. He was on his knees.
"What we could do," he said with s a seriousness that warned against mockery, "is to pray together?" Before I could object, which for the moment was impossible because I was speechless, Parry added, "I know it's difficult. But you'll find it helps. At times like this, you know, it really does help."
I took a step away from both Logan and Parry. I was embarrassed, and my first thought was not to offend a true believer. But I got a grip on myself. He wasn't concerned about offending me.
"I'm sorry," I said pleasantly. "It's not my thing at all."
Parry tried to speak reasonably from his diminished height. "Look, we don't know each other and there's no reason why you should trust me. Except that God has brought us together in this tragedy and we have to, you know, make whatever sense of it we an?" Then, seeing me make no move, he added, "I think you have a special need for prayer?"
I shrugged and said, "Sorry. But you go right on ahead." I Americanized my tone to suggest a lightheartedness I did not feel.
Parry wasn't giving up. He was still on his knees. "I don't thin you understand. You shouldn't you know, think of this as some kind of duty. It's like, your needs are being answered? It's go nothing to do with me, really, I'm just the messenger. It's a gift."
As he pressed harder, so the last traces of my embarrassment disappeared. "Thanks, but no."
Parry closed his eyes and breathed in deeply, not praying so much as gathering his strength. I decided to walk back up the hill. When he heard me moving away, he got to his fee and came over. He really didn't want to let me go. He was desperate to persuade me, but he was not going to drop the patient, understanding manner. So he seemed to smile through a barrier of pain as he aid, "Please don't dismiss this. I know it's not something you'd normally do. I mean, you don't have to believe in anything at all, just let yourself do it and I promise you, I promise—"
As he tripped over the terms of his promise, I interrupted him and stepped back. I suspected that at any moment he would be reaching out to touch me. "Look, I'm sorry. I'm going back to see my friend." I couldn't bring myself to share Clarissa's name with him.
He must have know his only chance of keeping me now was a radical change of tone. I was already several steps away when he called sharply, "Okay, fine. Please just have the courtesy to tell me this."
It was irresistible. I stopped and turned.
"What is it exactly, that stands in your way? I mean, are you able to tell me, do you actually know yourself what it is?"
For a moment I thought I wouldn't answer him—I wanted him to know that his faith laid no obligations on me. But then I changed my mind and said, "Nothing. Nothing's standing in my way."
He was coming toward me again, with his arms hanging loose at his side and with the palms turned up and the fingers spread in a little melodrama of the reasonable man perplexed. "Then why don't you take a chance on it?" he said through a worldly laugh. "You might see the point of it, the strength it can give you. Please, why don't you?"
Again, I hesitated and almost said nothing. But I decided he ought to know the truth. "Because, my friend, no one's listening. There's no one up there."
Parry's head was cocked, and the most joyous of smiles was spreading slowly across his face. I wondered if he had heard me right, because he looked as though I had just told him I was John the Baptist. It was then that I noticed over his shoulder two policeman climbing over a five-barred gate. As they ran across the field toward us, one of them used a hand to keep his hat in place, Keystone Kops style. They were coming to set in motion the official processing of John Logan's fate and, as I saw it, to deliver me from the radiating power of Jed Parry's love and pity.
And this week's winner is?

A poll by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation uncovered a widespread belief that faith - not just in its extreme form - was intolerant, irrational and used to justify persecution.Pollsters asked 3,500 people what they considered to be the worst blights on modern society, updating a list drawn up by Rowntree, a Quaker, 104 years ago.
The responses may well have dismayed him. The researchers found that the “dominant opinion” was that religion was a “social evil”.
Many participants said religion divided society, fuelled intolerance and spawned “irrational” educational and other policies.
He may be a self-confessed neurotic, but his genius at turning small personal tragedies into the stuff of humour have made him one of Britain's best-loved comic writers. Here, he talks to Rachel Cooke about his depression and deafness - the subject of his new novel - and about his faith in the healing powers of a loving marriage.
A little about the Alien and Sedition Acts where John Adams comes off sounding a lot like today's republicans. The clip is from the sixth episode of the HBO series on John Adams based on the book by David McCullough.

Electability is an issue, and one that both Senators Obama and Clinton are likely to use to woo the superdelegates. But our polling suggests that neither candidate has a demonstrable advantage to tout.
Salman Rushdie tells Matthew d’Ancona that the idea at the heart of his new novel set in 16th-century Florence and India is that universal values exist and require robust champions
Clinton and Obama both strained the facts at times during their debate in Philadelphia.Clinton said "people died" in 1970s bombings by a radical group of which an Obama acquaintance was a member. In fact, the deaths were of three members of the Weather Underground itself, who died when their own bombs accidentally exploded.
Obama said, "I have never said that I don't wear flag pins or refuse to wear flag pins." Actually, he did. He said last year, "I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest" because it had become "a substitute for ... true patriotism" during the run-up to the Iraq war.
Does the truth become less true because some idiot used it to justify something awful?Science isn't morality. Science describes what is. Morality defines our understanding of right and wrong. Science doesn't tell us what's morally right and wrong. It tells us what is. It can allows us to reason from what we know, to determine the effect of an action, which can allow us to decide whether that action is morally right or wrong. But the science doesn't tell us what's moral.
If you think the Democrats are going to take away your Bible you're an idiot, if you think they're going to take away your gun you're an armed idiot, and if you think they're going to take away your gun and give it to a mexican to kill your God you're Bill O'Reilly.
A bit of comedy from Hardball featuring the Colbert trio of Hillary, Barack, and John Edwards plus a couple of 'old' jokes at the expense of John McCain.
And Barack
Richard and Josh put together a great parody of Ben Stein's Expelled. reposted from Richard Dawkins dot Net Sexpelled: No Intercourse Allowed.
related links:
Expelled Exposed
The Paranoid Style in American Science (tip to Peter)
Imagine Ben Stein's Ethics
Framing Science
I must say the Republicans have pretty good talent writing their jokes for them. That is expect for George, he doesn't need help, he writes his own. Here they are the three stooges: Mitt, Dick, and George.

Halfway through the 2005 baseball season, John Olerud was having a great year with the Boston Red Sox. His batting average was .405, far better than that of most players. If someone had offered to wager with you on what his batting average would be for the rest of the season, what would you have bet?
How Paul McCartney was inspired to write the song 42 years ago
It sounds like a nightmarish event, and I'm glad they survived. I wish a few more people hadn't died horrible, painful deaths in such a catastrophe, but this was a family of despicable missionaries, so you know what's coming next.
Solar power, the holy grail of renewable energy, has always faced the problem of how to store the energy captured from the sun’s rays so that demand for electricity can be met at night or whenever the sun is not shining.
ABC's journalists were out for a gotcha moment and so asked stupid questions about pastor Wright, Bosnia, bitterness, blah blah blah. The most interesting part for me came with the discussion of foreign policy They both provided reasonable answers, but I thought Hillary did a better job. Barack seemed annoyed at having to rehash all the old stuff on the non-issues and didn't seem to regain his game on the more substantive issues. He allowed himself to be trapped on the tax issue, for instance. The hosts got a commitment from both candidates that they wouldn't raise taxes on those with incomes of less than $250,000 a proposition they both agreed on, and then Obama's position on Social Security bit him in the ass. If you're going to raise the cap on the payroll tax you are raising takes for those under $250,000 there is no getting around it. I thought it a shame since I favor his position on this issue over Hillary's. I think the cap should be raised. He danced around it a bit but not convincingly. Will it make a difference in the results in Pennsylvania? If anything I think it helps Hillary.
A final note to those who don't believe Hillary will support Barack if he wins the nomination. She answered quite emphatically: Yes, Yes, Yes!
You can use this as an open thread to discuss the debate or the campaign in general.
Oh my, Orrin writes a song for McCain. It's supposed to appeal to the youth. Since I'm no longer young enough to qualify I'll leave it to you to tell me if you find it appealing.

His mess of white hair rising with the wind, Nobel laureate Harold Kroto delivered what has become his standard speech on evolution:Humans and fruit flies share the same genes.
"You may not like that but it's not my fault," Kroto, 68, said in front of the state Capitol on Monday.
"It's the way it actually is."
In his latest round of ad feminam slurs, Senator Barack Obama has denigrated Senator Hillary Clinton and her position on gun regulation by likening her to Annie Oakley. But once again, Obama has shot himself in the foot.Annie Oakley was one of the first great female superstars in American history. Born in poverty in western Ohio, she began hunting when she was nine years old, and sold hunting game to locals in order to support her siblings and widowed mother. Her sharpshooting abilities eventually led her to become the star act in Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show.
Reporting on John McCain’s proposal for a “gas-tax” holiday this summer as a way to boost the struggling economy, laid out in a speech this morning, Michael Cooper of The New York Times notes that “some environmentalists said that the change might encourage more people to use their cars, while Mr. McCain has made combating global warming central to his campaign.”
I have taken issue before (here and here) with the writings of Stanley Fish in the New York Times, and I’m about to do it again. Fish is a professor of law at Florida State University, and often writes reasonably on a variety of topics in the NYT, but there is a streak of deconstruction running through some of his columns, that brings him to espouse pretty questionable positions when it comes to science, religion or philosophy.
Reading an enlightening new biography by Peter Ackroyd, Christopher Hitchens learns that Newton probably didn’t get bonked on the head by an apple—but he did have some pretty funny ideas about sex, gold, and religion.
This week's book is Monkeyluv by Robert M. Sapolsky
And the winner is k, the final entry. Congratulations to the winner and thanks to all who participated.
I'll take all requests for the book left in the comments during the next 24 hours and then use a random number generator to determine a winner. I'll then ship the book at my expense to the lucky person. The offer is limited to residents of the U.S. and Canada. My apologies to my good friends in other countries but the cost of shipments to other destinations is simply too high.
Note:The offer is open only to registered comments others will be ignored. Please make it clear if you want to be considered for the book or are just commenting.Cindy McCain is a plagiarist, making her the worst person in the world. There is more on the story here Oh and here's a scoop from Don Davis a new Cindy McCain recipe.I think she stole this one from current president. The only change in the recipe was the longer cooking time.
Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss sat down for a public discussion at Stanford University on Sunday, March 9th 2008. The focus was on Science education, but the discussion also covered religion, physics, evolution and more. This video will be released on DVD soon at RichardDawkins.net , along with other new unmoderated discussions with Richard Dawkins.reposted from: Richard Dawkins.net You will also find the Q&A that followed at Richard's site.

A fossil animal locked in Lebanese limestone has been shown to be an extremely precious discovery - a snake with two legs.Scientists have only a handful of specimens that illustrate the evolutionary narrative that goes from ancient lizard to limbless modern serpent.
So journalists and reporters who can manage to get off their knees might want to ask the pope if he is conducting his own foreign policy and, if so, in consultation with whom? Then there is another question, which also raises a matter of diplomatic propriety: Why is the Vatican continuing to shelter Cardinal Bernard Law?
Larry King's guest Stephen Colbert with what could well be a 30 second Obama ad. Hell, he almost had me convinced to vote for him.
Geoff Garin, a new member of the Clinton campaign asked for my help, and for my money.
I want to know what you think -- about the state of the race, our campaign strategy, or your ideas for doing things differently. You've made an investment in this campaign, and I want your input as we plan the days, weeks, and months to come.Okay it was a form letter and I suspect he was more interested in the money than the advice. I didn't send him any money, but I did send him advice. Would anyone like to take a shot at what my advice to him would be? What advice would you give Mr. Garin if you were inclined to help?

. . . far from trying to throw the proverbial kitchen sink at Barack Obama, Hillary has been exercising great restraint.
Our ability to use words is a critical part of our species' mastery of language. In practice, that mastery comes down to saying what we mean without having to think too much about it. When we have something to say, we first retrieve the correct words from memory, then execute the steps for producing the word. When these cognitive processes don't mesh smoothly, conversation stops.
Jimmy Carter explains his reasons for meeting with Hamas, and they are good reasons in my opinion. It's too bad Hillary and Barack are so afraid of the Israel Lobby that they refuse to take a chance for peace. What is it exactly we lose by talking. The Democrats are Tweedledum and Tweedledee on this issue.

And this week's winner is?

If proof is needed that it's easier to talk the talk than walk the walk, look no further than our federal government's support for U.S. competitiveness in the global economy.In his State of the Union address two years ago, President Bush announced the American Competitiveness Initiative "to encourage innovation throughout our economy, and to give our nation's children a firm grounding in math and science."
Upon passage last year of landmark legislation authorizing increased funding for math and science education and scientific research, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said the bill would "launch new, thriving industries that will produce millions of good jobs here at home and a better future for the next generation." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) noted that other countries "see by investing in science and technology and in the education of their citizens, they can attract jobs and create wealth. We must make the same investment in our future."
However, when political push came to budgetary shove, all these words of support turned out to be hollow. The $555 billion government spending bill signed into law by the president in December left science out in the cold.
DEMOCRAT grandees Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are being lined-up to deliver the coup de grâce to Hillary Clinton and end her campaign to become president.
Falling poll numbers and a string of high-profile blunders have convinced party elders that she must now bow out of the primary race.Former president Carter and former vice-president Gore have already held high-level discussions about delivering the message that she must stand down for the good of the Democrats.
"They're in discussions," a source close to Carter told Scotland on Sunday. "Carter has been talking to Gore. They will act, possibly together, or in sequence."
Two children in the space of five years—is it because you can’t find the time to write that you had to resort to the short stories instead of another novel?I don’t think of short stories as a secondary option, ever. I happened to have some ideas for stories, that I had on the backburner when I was working on The Namesake and it was all very natural to return to those ideas when I finished that novel. In a sense, when life is very overwhelming, working on stories can be slightly more manageable because they are single pieces you can wrap your head around a little more effectively. But having said that, I felt I wrote these stories over a period of many years. It was not that I wrote one, and went on to write a collection.
A reason to get one of these bumper stickers for your car.
Email me with your address and I'll send you one. I have five or six available, or order one from Common Dreams the picture is the link
.Like many of you I'm enjoying the HBO series on John Adams. My first in depth introduction to John and Abigail Adams came some forty odd years ago from Irving Stone's Those Who Love a book that does an wonderful job of capturing the very special relationship John and Abigail shared. More recently I read Founding Brothers by Joseph Ellis, a book Charles recommends, a recommendation with which I heartily concur. Here is a bit of video from a recent episode.
The conversation between John and his friend and confidant Dr. Benjamin Rush was a stark reminder of the divisiveness born of party politics and of its early genesis. And now a bit of John Adams history contributed by Charles Lemos
On HBO, the John Adams series is in full swing. Based on the book by David McCullough, which is well-written and reads like a novel, the series is receiving praise. I would also recommend any book by Joseph Ellis, especially one called Founding Brothers that has a great chapter on Adams and his relationship with Abigail. Abigail and John had quite the torrid love affair (their letters form a large part of the scholarship for the McCullough book) and theirs was also a political partnership in an age where that was still far from the norm.
Before you all get carried away with John Adams' wonder, might I remind you that his Administration passed the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 a series of four acts aimed at internal critics of the Administration. Think of them as a Patriot Act for their times. While Jefferson would repeal three of the Acts, one remains still on the books, the Alien Enemies Act (allows for detention or deportation of foreign nationals in times of war). Jefferson thought the Acts unconstitutional because they violated the Tenth Amendment (the states are effectively sovereign).
The greatness of John Adams was not so much his Presidency, which was bitter and difficult, two characteristics of John himself, but rather his role as the main and early advocate for independence and in his diplomatic journeys on behalf of the Continental Congress to France and Holland. He was instrumental in securing French entry into the Revolutionary War and Dutch loans. Both would be critical to the survival of the American cause.
In France, Adams’ role was overshadowed by the popularity of Benjamin Franklin as well as the enmity displayed by the French Foreign Minister, the Comtes de Vergennes, towards Adams. Still it was Adams who most adroitly argued for French naval forces to blockade and trap the British army (as would come to pass at Yorktown) while Franklin seemed more pressed with impressing the French ladies.
In Holland, Adams would embark on his own mission that would secure first loans and later Dutch recognition of the nascent American republic. Protestant and tolerant Holland proved a rejuvenating experience for Adams. In Leyden, he was moved to tears when he visited the Church and homes of his Puritan ancestors who first found refugee there before their embarkation to Massachusetts. The Dutch Republic had 200 years of political experimentation for Adams to study and its politics would influence Adams’ own political concepts from then on. Still it would his ability to persuade the bankers of Amsterdam to provide critical loans that permitted the young Republic to survive.
On the home front, Abigail and John were a team in securing needed supplies and coordinating the homesteads with the war front. Adams also led the diplomatic team (or so he thought, Franklin thought otherwise) that negotiated the Peace of Paris that secured American independence and thereafter served as the first Ambassador to the Court of St James.
The rift between Adams and Jefferson is well known and lasted for well over a decade. The death of Jefferson's daughter prompted a letter of sympathy from Abigail and that led to a peace, an amazing correspondence and their ever-lasting friendship. Adams died on July 4th 1826 during his son's Presidency aged 90. It is said that his last words were "But Jefferson survives." Actually Jefferson had died earlier that same day in Virginia. The delicious ironies of history.
They were very different men. Adams was nothing but prudent though argumentative, religious, and frugal. He left a large estate. Jefferson was more daring and more conciliatory, an atheist (though many today think him a Deist his contemporaries did not), and anything but frugal. He died in debt.
It should also be noted that alone among the major Founding Fathers, John Adams never owned any slaves. While he was often critical of both slavery and the slavery trade, the need to placate the South often made him couch his words. Still he would write in a tract entitled “The Selling of Joseph”:
“All men, as they are sons of Adam . . . have equal right unto liberty.”
Abigail had no such restriction and her letters are full of her strong dislike for the inhumanity of slavery. She employed freed Negroes on her farm and in her home, treating them as part of her extended family.
In time, many of the Founding Fathers would come to see slavery as John and Abigail did as “foul contagion in the human character” and as “an evil of colossal magnitude,” but in the 1770s few saw slavery as such. Franklin who by 1774 opposed slavery had in his younger days owned two slaves but even after setting them free, Franklin continued to trade in slaves from his Philadelphia shop until at least 1760. Washington was one of the largest landowners in Virginia and thus one of its largest slaveholders. Jefferson owned about 200 slaves employing them on his various plantations. On the occasion of his daughter’s wedding, he provided them a gift of 24 slaves. The other strong opponent of slavery among the Founding Fathers was Dr. Benjamin Rush of Pennsylvania. Rush, however, had once owned a slave but by 1773 he was, apart from Quaker and Congregationalist preachers, the fiercest opponent of slavery.
From of John Adams’ life, there is little doubt that it is the relationship with his wife Abigail that mattered most and provided the anchor in all the tumult of life in the late 18th century.
He was nine years older than Abigail Smith. He came from a reputable family; she came from Puritan and English royalty, the Quincys of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Of their courtship, not much is known. John failed to pen in his dairy a word the year of their courtship. Of their marriage, their letters tell a romance any human being would be lucky to share. It is hard to imagine one without the other. Abigail soothed the tempestuous temperament of John and in she he found solace. They had a love that held no bounds, an understanding of the plight of the other and their own collective duty and individual responsibility. She was simply his "Miss Adorable" and he her "My Dearest Friend." This is from a letter from Abigail to John dated October 16th 1774:
I dare not express to you at 300 hundred miles distance how ardently I long for your return. I have some very miserly Wishes; and cannot consent to your spending one hour in Town till at least I have had you 12.
One wonders why she would want her husband a full half-day before allowing him out of the house. The romps they must have had. The banter back and forth. So much for the theory of Puritans being uptight. John is 40 at this point and Abigail 31 and they had been married 11 years. Their letters are simply electric. Bombastic John is but a kitten in the hands of Abigail. I have been known to cry reading them and steal from them liberally. Beyond the romance, there is hard politics, the harsh realities of war and human life in the late 18th century. There is advice and encouragement flowing both ways and an equality in a partnership. Abigail's feminist qualities shone brightest in her famous "remember the ladies" letter dated March 31st, 1776:
I long to hear that you have declared an independency -- and by the way in the new Code of Laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make. I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favourable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If perticuliar care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebelion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation.
That your Sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute, but such of you as wish to be happy willingly give up the harsh title of Master for the more tender and endearing one of Friend. Why then, not put it out of the power of the vicious and the Lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity with impunity. Men of Sense in all Ages abhor those customs which treat us only as the vassals of your Sex. Regard us then as Beings placed by providence under your protection and in immitation of the Supreme Being make use of that power only for our happiness.
He was more prolific than she (he wrote more letters but hers were generally longer often taking a week or more to write) but he was often lonely and bored in Philadelphia and more so later when abroad while she raised children, ran the farm and made the business decisions during his long absences. She was no less eloquent. And as First Lady, she set the model for an activist role in politics earning her the title of "Mrs. President."
While theirs was wedded bliss, theirs was not an easy life. They knew the sorrow of losing a child in infancy and another stillborn. Between 1774 when John left New England for the first time to go to the Continental Congress in the "country" of Pennsylvania and 1785, they rarely saw each other hence the frequency and length of their letters. They are available online: hyperlink . Their separation is our joy.

Now I'm all for playing rough. Politics is a dirty business. But these attacks are outrageously irresponsible, reprehensible and offensive. Both Clinton and the McCainiacs know exactly what Obama was referring to when saying the nation's poor and middle classes were bitter. And why shouldn't they be? Starting with Ronald Reagan in the 80's, their values were co-opted and their loyalties misused and abused, and they were routinely directed towards hot-button issues like abortion, gay marriage and gun control. These Reagan Democrats, by the time George Bush and Karl Rove got through with them, felt duped, dirty and betrayed. And now they're still without proper health care, jobs, quality education for their kids, and are mired in a housing crisis. You're damned right they're bitter, and they ought to be. They were mercilessly used and abused. And that's what Obama was talking about..An elitist? Out of touch? Give me a break. Obama and his wife have not been in the Washington power seat for the past 16 years like the Clintons. Nor have they made $109 million since 2000. And for Pete's sake, who is more elitist, more out of touch, than the crusty old Republican relic McCain? Shame on these two combatants for stooping to the lowest common denominator in attacking a rival
The Daily Show on the story of Fox News and George Bush.
Bill's guest Richard Dawkins author of The God Delusion
The Center for Inquiry has released a report strongly criticizing a widely used civics textbook, American Government: Institutions and Policies, written by James Q. Wilson and John DiIulio. Wilson, a Republican, and DiIulio, a Democrat, are certainly eminent scholars. That only makes one wonder how in the world the errors documented in this report made their way into the book, especially into the 10th edition.
ABC News reports that the senior most advisors of President Bush, led by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice, met in the White House repeatedly to discuss and approve specific torture tactics, including waterboarding and physical assault, as applied to particular prisoners.
The story told of a journalist who asked if the senator’s skin cancer might make him sympathetic to the idea of requiring that insurance companies offer policies to those with such conditions. McCain responded: “That would be mandating what the free enterprise system does.” Indeed the free enterprise system does allow insurance companies to choose the healthiest people and refuse coverage to those who are sick. But how does that help people get care for conditions they already have? That’s what the public wants to know
I teach a seminar called "Secrecy: Forbidden Knowledge." I recently asked my class of 16 freshmen and sophomores, many of whom had graduated in the top 10 percent of their high-school classes and had dazzling SAT scores, how many had heard the word "rendition." Not one hand went up. This is after four years of the word appearing on the front pages of the nation's newspapers, on network and cable news, and online. This is after years of highly publicized lawsuits, Congressional inquiries, and international controversy and condemnation. This is after the release of a Hollywood film of that title, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Meryl Streep, and Reese Witherspoon.
Mr. I'll meet with anyone apparently has his limits, and yes I know Hillary has a similar position, but then she isn't the one making the claim to meet with anyone is she?.
"I said early in this campaign I would meet not just with our friends, but with our enemies. Not just with those we like, but those that we don't...Senator Clinton said, 'oh no, that'd be naive, that'd be irresponsible.' I said, 'remember what John F. Kennedy said, he said 'you should never negotiate out of fear, but you should never fear to negotiate.'" --Barack Obama, Florence, SC, Jan. 25, 2008.
Obama Triangulates and Won't Go Where Other Great Americans Will on Hamas - The Washington Note
Ben Smith of Politico points out that Barack Obama has "drawn a line" regarding which of the world's problematic bad guys should be met by Presidents like himself -- and Jimmy Carter. He thinks Carter should not meet any Hamas leaders. I guess isolation works for some and not others -- but ah, just when does one know in Obama's play book? Apparently, he's OK meeting Israeli leaders because they disavow terrorism -- but still they protect and establish illegal settlements and have installed more roadblocks and inhibitions to Palestinian mobility than was the case since the November 2007 Annapolis Summit. And while knocking Carter's efforts, Obama fails to articulate how any negotiation that does not include in some way a wrestling match and attempt at a negotiation with Hamas will be stable enough to believe in. A leading Knesset Member in Israel who strongly favors Senator Obama if he had the chance to vote in the U.S. elections told me recently that his one fear about Obama is that in his quest for the White House, he will ultimately have to shed his pragmatic approach to problem solving and demonstrate to critics "that he will be more Israeli than the Israelis." To establish a context, look at this roster of great Americans -- all national foreign policy leaders, military leaders, former government officials, and public intellectuals -- who have been able to go where Barack Obama seems unable.

You wouldn't expect Scientific American to take a particularly positive view of a movie that espouses intelligent design over evolutionary biology. Then again, you wouldn’t expect the producers of said film—in this case, Ben Stein’s Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed—to offer the editors of said magazine a private screening.
In Al Gore's brand-new slideshow (premiering exclusively on TED.com), he presents evidence that the pace of climate change may be even worse than scientists were recently predicting, and challenges us to act with a sense of "generational mission" -- the kind of feeling that brought forth the civil rights movement -- to set it right. Gore's stirring presentation is followed by a brief Q&A in which he is asked for his verdict on the current political candidates' climate policies and on what role he himself might play in future.
(tip to Thadeusphoenix)
While Mr. Obama’s positive personal image plays an important role in his high favorable ratings, the polling found that his ratings are more influenced by how he makes voters feel than by specific characteristics they attributed to him. In particular, views that Mr. Obama inspires hope and pride are the strongest determinants of a person’s opinion of him. In other words, he is a charismatic candidate who has made large numbers of Democratic voters feel good, and this is even more important to them than specific perceptions of him.In contrast, Mrs. Clinton’s image is more driven by opinions about her own qualities, rather than the emotions she engenders in others. Although, making voters feel hopeful does register as a significant factor for her, especially among women, it is much less important than for Mr. Obama. . .
If The Enchantress of Florence doesn’t win this year’s Man Booker I’ll curry my proof copy and eat it.
Obama's healthcare plan is not a universal healthcare plan. It lacks mandates. Elizabeth Edwards favors Clinton's plan because it is universal and Barack's plan is not.
I'm convinced a healthcare policy without the mandates is only half a policy.—Elizabeth Edwards
The Left Coaster has a post on the Hillary hate so prevelant on some so called progressive blogs. I think regardless of whether you are a Clinton or Obama supporter it is worth a read. He ends the post with this video.

What would you do if your partner got rubbed out by a cold-blooded killer? A good cop who sat beside you in the squad car for 15 years? A guy who was only two days away from retirement? He had a wife and two kids. Granted, his wife isn't as young and beautiful as the women I get, but I'm the star and he's just part of the supporting cast. If you want a supermodel costar you should at least try to make it out of the first paragraph.
I love short stories, and so when I learned that Tobias Wolff had some new stories, and had released them in a collection with a selection of his earlier stories I didn't order it from Amazon. I didn't take advantage of my Amazon Prime account and its two-day delivery. No, I stopped by my local bookstore on the way home from work and purchased Our Story Begins: New And Selected Stories by Tobias Wolff. It includes one of my all time favorite short stories, "Bullet in the Brain," and you're in luck the New Yorker has a podcast of T. Coraghessan Boyle reading the story. Give it a listen, even if you're familar with the story Boyle's reading is excellent, and the discussion of the story is also interesting.
Well said Mr. Olbermann
related: Rep. Monique Davis to atheist Rob Sherman: `It’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists!' (tip to Jason)
By popular request this week's book is The Yiddish Policeman's Union
by Michael Chabon
I'll take the first ten requests for the book left in the comments and then use a random number generator to determine a winner. I'll then ship the book at my expense to the lucky person. The offer is limited to residents of the U.S. and Canada. My apologies to my good friends in other countries but the cost of shipments to other destinations is simply too high.
Note: Please make it clear if you want to be considered for the book or are just commenting.
Onegoodmove reader Oz finds the anti-war movement alive and well near his home in Richmond, VA. He tells me the improvements to the billboard have been in place for a week now.

Russell T Davies: Return of the (tea) Time LordThe man who reinvented 'Doctor Who' for a new generation hints at a real surprise to come in the new series, as the man in the Tardis goes into 'dadshock'.
By Cole MoretonHe is the creator of galaxies, saviour of Saturday night telly and the most influential gay man in Britain, but Russell T Davies can still shriek like a starstruck fanboy. "Richard Dawkins!"
The evolutionary biologist and best-selling author of The God Delusion will appear as a guest star in the new series of Doctor Who, which began last night. "People were falling at his feet," says Davies, creator of the BBC's flagship show. "We've had Kylie Minogue on that set, but it was Dawkins people were worshipping."
As writer and executive producer of Doctor Who, Davies often plays with religious imagery (from a cross-shaped space station to robot angels with halos), but he's a fervent believer in Dawkins. "He has brought atheism proudly out of the closet!"
I mentioned that believers can resort to a quick and easy way with difficult questions that secular thinkers and atheists can't, and that this lack is perhaps one reason students are always moral relativists. We can offer reasons for thinking X is better than Y, or for thinking Z is entirely unacceptable in any moral universe we can think of (executing gays for being gay, genocide, murdering women for talking to an unrelated man), but we can't hand out anything as brisk and simple and conversation-stopping as 'God said so.' Believers* have a short cut which unbelievers don't have. Believers have an answer that is both quick and easy, while unbelievers have to spend time and effort if they want to explain to skeptics why executing gays for being gay is unacceptable.
Mediums are fighting new EU rules designed to protect the public from dodgy traders, fearing that honest spiritualists could be targeted
The governor of Illinois has been playing some games with state money, shuffling a million dollars to benefit a Baptist church, and an atheist dared to testify to the legislature against this. The response from one legislator was unsurprising: she shrieked at the atheist to get out.”
I loved the, I-nailed-it, smile on the third try.

In the last two weeks Senator Obama has been sounding rather hawkish. Perhaps he believes he has the Democratic nomination wrapped up and now can start running to the center-right. The peace movement needs to let him know his positions are not acceptable.
Politically, I'm a leftie. That should be no surprise to anyone who knows me. But when it comes to science and medicine, my politics are irrelevant. Given that John McCain has already made some questionable public statements regarding vaccines and autism, this seems like a good time to see what the democrats are saying.
Hundreds of years ago in Japan, people offered thanks to the gods by sacrificing a horse or a pig. Horses and pigs, however, were valuable and expensive, so poor folks had a hard time expressing their gratitude. So they came up with a solution: Rather than sacrificing a horse, they would simply draw a painting of a horse on a wooden tablet and hang it in the temple.
“We met with the Israelis, and they said that Gaza is a hostile entity,” said al-Khozendar. He said that his organisation told Israeli officials that their fuel embargo policy is a violation of the Geneva Convention (in which Article 4 guarantees the rights of a people living under occupation). He said he was reminded that they are better off than are Iraqis under U.S. occupation.
Barack Obama is ahead of Hillary Clinton in the (regular) delegate count, and it looks almost certain that he will remain so when all of the primaries and caucuses are completed. Still, the gap is not large, and it is possible that Clinton will end up with the most popular votes. Rightly or wrongly, it appears that some — perhaps many — of the as-yet-uncommitted Democratic superdelegates intend to take electability into account in deciding which candidate to support (see here, here, and here).
What information should they consider in making a decision?
And this week's winner is?

I’ve been through exactly one DUI checkpoint in my life, and the last time I was even stopped by the fuzz was 10 years ago. twice in the past month. I don’t drink anyway, but to me it seems like a difficult thing to get nailed for DUI, unless:
You knew that about Hillary but Obama, the darling of 'hope' generation. Say it isn't so.
Another fine illustration of this principle comes from Google. Most people think Google's success is due to their brilliant algorithms, especially PageRank. In reality, the two big innovations that Larry and Sergey introduced, that really took search to the next level in 1998, were:
- The recognition that hyperlinks were an important measure of popularity -- a link to a webpage counts as a vote for it.
- The use of anchortext (the text of hyperlinks) in the web index, giving it a weight close to the page title.
First generation search engines had used only the text of the web pages themselves. The addition of these two additional data sets -- hyperlinks and anchortext -- took Google's search to the next level. The PageRank algorithm itself is a minor detail -- any halfway decent algorithm that exploited this additional data would have produced roughly comparable results.
Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's attack on secularism is based on a heavily edited history of Christianity
Obama Proposes 50/50 Michigan Split: Just Say No - TalkLeft: The Politics Of Crime
Obama Proposes 50/50 Michigan Split: Just Say No
A few weeks ago I wrote a long post on why Barack Obama's suggestion that he and Hillary split the Michigan delegates 50/50 was tanatamount to vote-stealing:
On January 15, 2008, 594,398 Democrats went to their polling places and voted in their state's primary. The official Michigan election results are here.
328,309 Democrats in Michigan voted for Hillary Clinton. She won all but two counties, Washtenaw and Emmet. 238,168 voted uncommitted. 21,715 voted for Dennis Kucinich. 3,845 voted for Chris Dodd. 2,361 voted for Mike Gravel.
Hillary got 55% of the vote. The uncommitted, who either were truly uncommitted or for Obama, Edwards or Biden, all three of whom voluntarily withdrew their names from the ballot, got 40%. Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel won 5% of the vote.
Barack Obama now proposes he get 50% of the state's delegates. That would be vote-stealing. It would be disenfranchising 5% of Hillary's voters. It would be assuming that every uncommitted voter and every voter for Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel now want their vote to go to Obama.
That's called stealing an election.


In the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved American capitalism from its own self-inflicted wounds by erecting a new financial infrastructure—often over the vociferous opposition of the bankers and investors whose poor judgment had helped precipitate the Great Depression. During the New Deal, the government reacted to a disastrous systemic failure by creating the sort of backstops, insurance, and risk-spreading mechanisms the market had failed to develop on its own, such as deposit insurance, federal securities registration, and federally sponsored entities that would insure mortgages.
Textbook accounts of how the Americas were first populated may have to be re-written following the discovery of the oldest DNA of prehistoric humans who lived 14,300 years ago in what is now Oregon.Scientists said that the DNA is about 1,200 years older than the previous oldest human artifacts produced by the Clovis people, who are named after the site in New Mexico where the exquisitely shaped spearheads of the first Americans were found.
It is a debate you could only really have in a country that accords its intellectuals the kind of status other nations - to name no names - tend to reserve for footballers, footballers' wives or (if they're lucky) rock stars; a place where structuralists and relativists and postmodernists, rather than skulk shamefacedly in the shadows, get invited on to primetime TV; a culture in which even today it is considered entirely acceptable, indeed laudable, to state one's profession as "thinker".That country is France, which is currently preoccupied with the fate of its ailing semicolon


Chill out.
Hillary, good to the last drop.

And a third don't know or are confused. Will this be like 9/11 and Iraq, no matter how often Barack repeats the phrase I'm a Christian there will be a large number of people who hold to the belief that he's a Muslim.
Hillary did an admirable job of staying on message. She took the lead by raising recent controversies before being asked, a good strategy, I think. I believe she helped herself.
The New York Times "On Language" columnist relates how the candidates pepper their speeches to reach key audiences.
Excellent Question
Why pollsters are flummoxed over Clinton and Obama - opinion - 30 March 2008 - New Scientist
IT'S a battle that has energised the American electorate and caught the attention of the world. But for the pollsters, predicting who will win the Democratic Party's nomination for US president has been a nightmare. From the first primary, when they failed to predict Hillary Clinton's victory in New Hampshire, polling firms have struggled to make accurate forecasts of her state-by-state battles against Barack Obama. Something about the Clinton-Obama tussle - with its overtones of race and gender - has exposed flaws in the science of pre-election polling. The causes are being hotly debated, but the leading contenders are the models used to predict who is likely to get out and vote. "They have no scientific basis," argues Jon Krosnick, a survey methodologist at Stanford University in California.

How do I choose a book to give away next week. I know, I'll ask the readers to choose. Here are three possible choices:
Monkeyluv
The Metaphysical Club
The Yiddish Policeman's Union
Now you decide which of the three would you like to be next week's offering.
Oh my, John is having a bit of a memory lapse. I think I can help. John there is Dick Others, Condie Others, and your hugging buddy George W. Others. There are still others, but this little prod to your failing memory should help others remember why you aren't fit to be our president.
Richard Dawkins: An Atheist's call to Arms, part of the Is there a God? theme was recorded in 2002 but recently added to the TED site. You can also download audio and video from link above. Most of you have already bookmarked Richard Dawkins site, but if not why not do it now.
It's that time again. I've just discovered that I have an extra copy of Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. I'll take the first ten requests for the book left in the comments and then use a random number generator to determine a winner. I'll then ship the book at my expense to the lucky person. I'm going to have to limit this to residents of the United States and Canada until I find a less expensive way to ship to other locations.
Howard's latest book is A People's History of American Empire

I believe that makes junta_kinte this week's winner. So please send me a name and mailing address and I'll dispatch the book posthaste. Send the information to normjenson at yahoo.com If I don't acknowledge please resend to onegoodmove at gmail.com
I understand why conservatives, in their zeal to protect their children, in their zeal to show others that they know best, in their zeal to bury their fear and ignorance—come to their anti-science, anti liberal-arts education position. But I'd never, before Sunday, heard of anyone who wanted to protect his children from this four letter word.

For the past eleven years the organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), representing the 57 Islamic States, has been tightening its grip on the throat of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yesterday, 28 March 2008, they finally killed it.
Research over the past several years has steadily contradicted the capitalistic assumption about human nature. For instance, it is well known that there is only a weak correlation between income level and self-reported happiness across the globe, with the relationship plateauing (meaning that additional money does not increase happiness) at surprisingly low levels of income. And yet, people keep playing the lottery, or its white collar equivalent, the stock market. Why?Dunn and colleagues have recently published an intriguing paper in Science magazine (21 March 2008) which begins to present us with a surprising answer: apparently, we literally don’t know what makes us happy. The researchers conducted two surveys and one controlled experiment, with the results of each clearly pointing toward the same conclusion: people feel significantly happier when they spend money on others, regardless of how much money they make. For instance, one of the data sets concerned the self-reported happiness of a group of people before and after they got a bonus at work. The results clearly showed that “prosocial spending was the only significant predictor of happiness” after people received the bonus, and this effect “was significant when controlling for bonus amount.” In other words, it didn’t matter how much of a bonus people received.
More than half of U.S. doctors now favor switching to a national health care plan and fewer than a third oppose the idea, according to a survey published on Monday..The survey suggests that opinions have changed substantially since the last survey in 2002 and as the country debates serious changes to the health care system.
Of more than 2,000 doctors surveyed, 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, researchers reported in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.
The 2002 survey found that 49 percent of physicians supported national health insurance and 40 percent opposed it

Hillary Clinton is just beginning a live speech as I type. And I just failed in my purpose.(would it have defused the criticism of her Bosina lies?)I tried to reach the Clinton campaign to suggest that she could get a big, heartwarming laugh if she came onstage wearing a flak jacket.
“All across this country, we’ve seen how it’s becoming harder and harder for working families to make ends meet. That’s because for far too long, the rules in our economy have been written to benefit Wall Street at the expense of Main Street.Go Barack!“We saw this again today when we learned that two executives at Countrywide, the nation’s top subprime lender, are set to walk away with nearly $20 million in payouts. This is an outrage. Top mortgage lenders spent $185 million in recent years lobbying Washington to look the other way, while they tricked families into buying homes they couldn’t afford, forcing millions of Americans to face foreclosure and pushing our economy toward recession.
“These executives crossed the line to boost their bottom line. We should be reprimanding them, not rewarding them. Rewarding their bad behavior just encourages others to pursue the same kinds of irresponsible practices that led us into this financial mess in the first place.
Paul Krugman and Robert Reich agree on which Democratic candidate for president is most liberal. Pick one, and then watch the video to see if you're correct.
Commenting Policy
note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.
jonathan becker on:
Links With Your Coffee Wednesday
Betty Jo on:
Daily Show Recap 4-30
JoAnn on:
Links With Your Coffee Monday
Norm on:
Links With Your Coffee Tuesday
RedSeven on:
Links With Your Coffee Friday
Betty Jo on:
Links With Your Coffee Tuesday
Syngas on:
Empathy
Andyo on:
Alain de Botton: Atheism 2.0
Andyo on:
Atheism and Agnosticism are not incompatible
Norm on:
Starting a topic, but can't comment - Moveable Type Account
Syngas on:
Homeopathic Cough Syrup II
gypsy sister on:
Norm: Forum and other thread spam posts
Tim on:
What Happened to Obama?
Powered by Movable Type Pro
Copyright © 2002-2012 Norman Jenson