iNow

This is wrong in so many ways. I ask you, Lance. Why do some people drink and not become alcoholic, yet others drink and do? Why do some people metabolise alcohol faster and more efficiently and hence experience fewer of its effects? There is nothing "purely moral" about the variables which impact alcoholism. It's an interesting thread idea you have here, but is completely bankrupt from the start since you begin with so many inaccuracies, including with your other examples.

It appears McCain is not the only one out of touch. Last week was a challenge for him. It reinforced the accusations he's been facing for months about lack of economic understanding, and goes further by scaring people that he's trying too hard to make a show rather than to make things right (i.e. talking about firing Cox).

And the iNow Phantom Pagination Syndrome has reappeared. I just noticed it here: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2941&page=22

Often described in psychological research as "perceptual salience." The hits tend to be more perceptually salient than the misses.

Pangloss - Tell me you're joking. You've never heard of the association between tree hugging hippies (oft criticized by the voices of the far right... and many not so far... of our country) and patchouli? I'll be darned, indeed!

A logical and well supported argument from you, first time poster riotgrrl_94, but I remain unconvinced by your vitriol, which itself strikes me as misplaced and uninformed.

I imagine he works on the manufacturing side of things.

Hmmm... Interesting question. I don't know of any acronyms. I just memorized them since there are only (IIRC) five.

It really puts things into perspective, doesn't it?

When did anyone EVER say there is NO oil closer than 50 miles? That's the strawman part, AFAICT. Oh, and Bascule... I shared that exact video back in post #10.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/obamas_fannie_mae_connection.html An already nasty presidential election campaign is getting nastier. The meltdown on Wall Street has touched off frantic attempts by both the McCain and Obama camps to secure political advantage and indulge in guilt by association. Over the last 24 hours, both campaigns have issued video press releases (let's not call them ads until they actually air somewhere) attempting to show that the other side's "advisers" are somehow responsible for the crisis. The latest McCain attack is particularly dubious. The Facts... <more at link> The Pinocchio Test The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama on "housing and mortgage policy." If we are to believe Raines, he did have a couple of telephone conversations with someone in the Obama campaign. But that hardly makes him an adviser to the candidate himself--and certainly not in the way depicted in the McCain video release.

Having a hard time figuring out what all this means? Having difficulty putting together the different pieces of this financial puzzle? A good review for the uninitiated here: http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/diamond-and-kashyap-on-the-recent-financial-upheavals/ As an economist, I am supposed to have something intelligent to say about the current financial crisis. To be honest, however, I haven’t got the foggiest idea what this all means. So I did what I always do when something related to banking arises: I knocked on the doors of my colleagues Doug Diamond and Anil Kashyap, and asked them for the answers. What they told me was so interesting and insightful that I begged them to write their explanations down for a broader audience. They were kind enough to take the time to do so. In what follows, they discuss what has happened in the financial sector in the last few days, why it happened, and what it means for everyday people.

For those who did not, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNdtZGqZA2Y I love how he states that you cannot trust the fact checking organizations.

August 21, 2008: AK State Policy Regarding Personal Use of State Office Technologies http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/Personal%20Use%20of%20Electronic%20Equipment.pdf And I read a lot of sources (mostly science related), so please quit with trying to paint my reading habits as partisan spin before you even know what they are. Is that pre-emptive partisanship on your part? http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/33965 The Alaska Attorney General issued an opinion on August 21, 2008 concluding that state employees have a right to privacy while using state-issued communication equipment shortly after it was revealed that Governor Palin and her staff used their state-issued blackberrys and computers for communications related to Governor Palin’s efforts to have her former brother-in-law, Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten, fired.

. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.” Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business. A campaign spokesman said the governor copied e-mail messages to her state account “when there was significant state business.” On Feb. 7, Frank Bailey, a high-level aide, wrote to Ms. Palin’s state e-mail address to discuss appointments. Another aide fired back: “Frank, this is not the governor’s personal account.” Mr. Bailey responded: “Whoops~!”

I've got better things to do. With all of the articles, papers, and blogs I read every single day, I have zero desire to try combing through my entire internet history for the past 2 weeks, and I'm going to have to ask you to either take my word for it and just disregard my post. I've been reading about this personal email thing with Palin for a while though... EDIT: maybe a week and a half is more accurate. burn me at the stake if you deem it appropriate. Lambaste me and do a fact check and say I'm no better than republicans...

Internet Exploder doesn't have a built-in spell checker...

Imagine - I find it funny how claims of cowardice are put forth, yet it is you running away after your ideas were challenged and critiqued. There was no censorship, just peer review, and you've failed. Now, if you'd rather take your ball and go home than learn where and why you're mistaken, then so be it.

imagine - You'll be missed.

You think Joe Biden's inaccuracies that you referenced are "every bit as bad as Republicans?" Interesting. I disagree. I think those are minor and trivial compared to the web of lies being spun by republicans right now. How's that for partisan?

Speaking for myself, I've been reading about the personal email issue and how her staffers were seeking ways to avoid audits and subpeoanas... for over 2 weeks already. That's hardly "leaping straight to the worst possible answer w/o waiting to see." There have been numerous articles about this, and if you haven't read them yourself it just means you're not paying attention as closely as some of the rest of us.

It might be more telling (and likely to get an honest response) to ask them if they'd consider having an atheist in a position of power. line[/hr] CNN Fact Checks McCain: Verdict He's Not Telling the Truth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLswpZtca48

You don't eat the caps?

Her staff were actively trying to determine if personal email records could be subpeoana'd, and after concluding that this was not likely decided that was the best way to communicate issues with the governor. What more do you need exactly before you realize what's happening here?

Average efficiency is ~20% at present.