Politics

So a bit of background on this: in 2002 the Republican-controlled Congress and Presidency, in an unmitigated act of irresponsible deregulation allowed corporations without a bank or S&L charter to issue loans and furthermore relaxed restrictions on keeping interest rates above prime. The result: The US housing market experienced an unprecedented bubble driven by a previously untapped base of irresponsible mortgagors. These people had bad or no credit. This was further impacted by subprime mortgages: these mortgages offered an "interest only" grace period where no principal was due. Clearly this is in the lender's best interest as it makes the initial span of th…

In terms of their political platform, the democrats have largely used the Iraq war as the big issue that separates them from the republicans. Largely, they are against the way, except for a group conservative democrats called the "blue dogs" that are waiting for General Petraeus report in september (I think) before throwing there weight one way or another. Without this group's support, the dems won't be able to push through anti-war legislation. However, what if, Gen. Patraeus's report turns out positive? The gloom and doom-ists would have us believe success in Iraq is impossible, but why is it a lost cause? I heard a statistic today that the military has dest…

I was just reading a blog on Scientific American website and it discussed how in even in modern times various people have chosen to trump political ideals over scientific ones. Of course, this is nothing new, this type of thing has been happening for millenia. But you'd think that in this day and age people would know better. As it turns out, that is not the case, and I find that quite disturbing. This was an article published very recently by the New York Times and placed on the Scientific American web blog. Apparently, the US government and the Bush Administration have been interfering with the publication of articles related to Stem Cell Research, Sex Education, …

Recent develops have discredited John Edwards' assertion that the "war on terror" is a bumper sticker.

Am I the only one getting sick of the overblown and quite disturbing practice of the reporting of politicians and their affairs? Why is it any of our business? What does it have to do with their job capacity? My employer doesn't inquire about whether I'm paying hookers or cheating on my wife. Good thing too, because it's none of my employer's business and, contrary to republican belief, is NOT an indication of my trustworthiness in a job capacity. Just because they're a public office holder, suddenly we have to know all about their personal life? I'm not buying it. I'm not buying the idea that their personal life is required to be in an order that I find…

How many people out there believe that we can wipe out the Hydra of terrorism with force? We chop one head off and three grow back, because of IDEALS. We use our doctrines of enforcing our ideals in order to control the world so we can protect our interests. Granted, terrorism is a big problem, but realistically, is it really sound to think that we can use practically unlimited freedoms in order to justify the invasion and control of people who live extremely conservative lives? Why not just leave them alone and let the rest of the world look out for itself unless they ask for help? Wouldn't that send a message, saying "Hey, take a chill pill," but no, we are ready …

Well' date=' wait a minute. Now, don't mistake this for being argumentative because I'm completely ignorant on the subject. But do we know, for a [i']fact[/i], those conclusions you just drew? Man was pretty convinced the earth was flat at one point too, although I'm not sure whether or not it was touted as fact. So, my question is, if it turns out it is a physiological symptom that can be treated, then doesn't that change the whole implication of homosexuality? Would we still insist on allowing gay marriage and teaching tolerance, when we're really talking about a medical condition? [Admin edit] This thread was split off from the thread on Gay Marriage.

My thread title refers to what I thought was a marvelous book by Chris Mooney. His premise is that for the past 40 years the modern conservative movement has been abusing scientific data to undercut regulation and advance the moral agendas of religious conservatives. I realize I might be opening a flood-gate here, but I was just wondering if anyone had any particular opinions on the book. Praise, criticisms?

I personally think live and let live. I think that ammeding the US constitution saying that marriage is only between man and woman devolves the society quite back. With the USA standing on such a high moral ground nowdays, i dont think it would send the right message to the world about freedom in America. Ultimately, americans must make the choice themselves.

Enjoy http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4467655342219448521

Just as it was starting to look like NASA was overcoming an awfull 2006, this painful story breaks. Apparently the investigation into the Lisa Novak incident (the astronaut who got involved in a love triangle and ended up stalking another NASA employee) produced another startling revelation. Not only did some astronauts fly drunk, but NASA knew this and covered it up. http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage_c_online.php?leftnm=11&bKeyFlag=IN&autono=25959 I still think NASA has undergone significant change since 2003, and deserves a chance to carry out its new program for lunar and martian manned exploration. But it appears they have a few more…

What happened to two news choppers covering a car chase in Phoenix on Friday: Four people died. Following the crash the other news choppers immediately swooped in to film the aftermath, and the local televisions stations, whose employees had just died a fiery death, immediately and repeatedly aired the last video footage from the two choppers, including the shouts and screams of the dying men. All of the footage was immediately picked up and transmitted over national video services and broadcast on the cable stations, and on all the major network outlets at the usual hour. But hey, at least they died for entertain- er, I mean the news! Yeah, that's it …

Was watching an hour long interview with Dr. Ron Paul on a Google special - I guess they're interviewing candidates in some kind of town hall setting. And the subject of war, of course, came up and Ron made a point that I haven't really considered before. Many of my conservative friends are turned off by Ron because he sees no moral obligation to protect Israel, or come to the defense of Taiwan. But, and this is one of the reasons why I really like Dr. Paul, he spends more time making the point that you shouldn't be looking to your president to wage war in the first place. Only congress can declare war and only congress should declare war. It doesn't matter if t…

So the situation is basically this: most Democrats and a small number of Republicans want out of Iraq. Senator Dick Lugar ® wants out now but doesn't want to force Bush to do it. Harry Reid wants out now and wants to force Bush to do it. What just happened in the Senate is just a continuation of the extremely polarized political climate in this country. I said Reid and Lugar should cosponsor a bill, but it'd have to be one everyone can agree on. So how about this: The bill would sponsor an international summit between the U.S., Iraq, and the surrounding nations (Iran, Kuwait, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia). At this international summit America would…

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/16/reid-filibuster/ Will this technique work, or is it just another vain attempt by the Democrats to force a vote on Iraq withdrawal? It comes at a time when two Republicans are also pushing Iraq withdrawal, much to the chagrin of the White House: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1034793420070715

Obviously, the short answer is "depends." Different offices and different points in history require different sorts of leaders. I acknowledge that. But I'm speaking generally, and am talking not so much about personalities as resumes. For example, the most obvious path would be from lawyer to politician: the formal study of law is the most obvious training for a lawmaker. A competent lawyer understands how the law works and why it works that way, and must be adept at quickly learning about diverse and unexpected subjects, must know how to see issues from multiple angles (well enough to argue either side of an issue), and, of course, must know how to convince people. T…

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3359764&page=1 A recent spat of Republican mind-changing regarding the situation in Iraq has the White House in "panic mode", according to ABC. Do you feel like public opinion on the situation in Iraq is finally changing to the point that a drastic departure from past strategy is on the horizon, or will the "crack in the dike" among Republican opinion be patched up by more Tony Snowballing?

I have observed in a lot of different forums that as soon someone starts discussing and questioning sexual taboos, there is always someone else who immediately assumes the worst about this person and start denigrating and stigmatizing him with malevolent insinuations. The usual stereotyped assumption is that if he discusses this or that taboo is because he is a “pervert” and that he actually questions a taboo because “he has an interest” in such sexual practice. Some individuals even go as far as insinuating that the poster gets aroused just for discussing the matter !!! But making this inference is as true as saying that a psychologist who studies sexual behaviou…

I can't tell if this is just pre-G8 political maneuvering or if there's real substance here. I'm not a huge fan of missile defense (marginal effectiveness + marginal need = high profit for the military-industrial complex). But on the other hand, Putin isn't exactly scoring points with me either. (Are we really supposed to believe that he's afraid that we're so upset about his humanitarian and freedom gaffs that we're going to... nuke Moscow?!) I suspect this is really about what "plays in Perm". (Sorry.) What do you all think?

One of the arguments for nationalism is that if you allow different groups to live together then conflict will erupt. For example, Jews and Muslims living in the Middle East just don't seem to get along. The answer, according to nationalists is to divide people up so they can live among their "own people." Jews live among Jews and Muslims live among Muslims. Every day I hear about homophobia. Most people in the world are religious and most people tend to follow an Abrahamic religion, i.e. Christianity, Islam, or Judaism. The Abrahamic religions all seem to denounce homosexuality. Throughout history this has been the case. Sometimes I wonder why so many Christians hate…

I really hate thinking about this... but as far as I can tell any Democratic success, and many failures, inevitably seem to lead to this According to the polls Hillary is set to claim either the #1 or #2 spot at the primaries. Even if Obama wins, she's likely to get the VP slot. About the only way out of this, as far as I can tell, is a Gore/Obama ticket (yeah, I'll keep dreaming) I think in all likelyhood we'll see either an Obama/Clinton ticket or a Clinton/Obama one. In the latter case, Hillary is the presidential candidate. In the former, either they win or they don't. If they win, then it would seem almost inevitable that Hillary, as VP, would seek th…

Here in the Real World, I have to deal with things like schedules, time estimates, deadlines, and taking the heat for when I miss them. It would be unacceptable for me to give some excuse like "I don't know how long it will take, I just need more time" Condi did just that yesterday, asking for more time before the House takes any action, in response to them passing a withdrawal schedule: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/13/us.iraq.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories Is the Administration's inability to set deadlines and stick to them indicative of incompetence? Is their inability to even give a time estimate indicative of their complete inability to e…

Was thinking on this yesterday, and admittedly, I don't have my thoughts finalized on this... I think the federal government has ruined America. I believe the intent of this great experiment was to unite states with an open architecture they can all operate differently in, but still with each other. But, with all of the federal laws and power gained incrementally over the years, states don't have much individuality at all. We habitually force laws on all of the states without a moment's consideration to leaving it up to the states to decide individually. And when someone suggests such a thing, they are an "extremist". I don't understand why the idea of a l…

I'm a little swamped at the moment and behind on reading here (always a little crazy at the start of a new term), but I did want to drop by and leave this Associated Press clipping that I thought you all might find informative. It's basically a little Q&A about what constitutes Contempt of Congress, and it has a couple of tidbits that I wasn't aware of, such as the fact that the President can give a pardon for it, and what the maximum sentence is. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070901162.html Here's another source for the same AP article in case that one gets locked out: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul09/0,467…

Two apparently conflicting stories: Google Wants More Vista Changes (re: Microsoft desktop search) Google Extends iPhone Partnership With Apple We haven't had a good debate about the politics of computer science recently. I think Google is very rapidly losing its "cool kid" appeal and becoming quite the evil empire. What do you all think?