Month: December 2008

Spencer Ackerman is having none of it. And rightly so.

The American Spectator asks "Joe The Plumber" for his Christmas book recommendations.

Megan points to an article in the Economist affirming broken windows theory:

The most dramatic result, though, was the one that showed a doubling in the number of people who were prepared to steal in a condition of disorder. In this case an envelope with a EUR5 ($6) note inside (and the note clearly visible through the address window) was left sticking out of a post box. In a condition of order, 13% of those passing took the envelope (instead of leaving it or pushing it into the box). But if the post box was covered in graffiti, 27% did. Even if the post box had no graffiti on it, but the area around it was littered with paper, orange peel, cigarette butts and empty cans, 25% still took the envelope.

The Atlantic introduced the theory with a 1982 article by George Kelling and James Q. Wilson.

Yglesias discusses the SecDef’s magnanimous position on his soon-to-be-replaced subordinates:

To provide some background and context, you need to understand that a lot of these guys were never Gates’ people anyway.

Gates and Donald Rumsfeld had some pretty different ideas about a lot of stuff, but when Gates joined the Bush administration he wasn’t given the opportunity to clean house, fire everyone, and bring his own people on board. Since he’s been in office for a couple of years there’s been some turnover since that time, but still a guy like Edelman has always been a Cheney/Rumsfeld guy who happens to be serving as one of Gates’ top deputies, not a Gates guy who Gates is desperate to hang on to. In fact, I think we can be fairly certain that Gates’ views are closer to those of a moderate Democrat like Flournoy than to Edelman. So whether or not to get rid of people probably wasn’t a bone of contention between Gates and the transition. What needs to be negotiated isn’t whether or not some of these folks need to go, it’s who to replace them with.

A clip of extraordinary skill that for some reason makes me think of the problems president-elect Obama is about to take on:

Yesterday, the president and Christianist Rick Warren had a conversation about HIV and AIDS. As the epidemic continues in this country – still largely among men who have sex with men, especially black men who have sex with men – neither Warren nor Bush could mention homosexuality, or the role that homophobia plays in fueling the epidemic among African-Americans. To leave out combating the stigma of homosexuality from a discussion of preventing HIV transmission is like leaving water temperature out of a discussion of hurricanes. The president deserves praise for helping many people in Africa to overcome this disease. But because he cannot address homophobia and cannot even say the word ‘gay’ in public or address this issue directly, his legacy in America is actually an increase in HIV transmission.

The atitudes among African-Americans that brought 70 percent of black voters to support Prop 8 in California are the attitudes that are killing black men at historic rates. It’s communal suicide by homophobia. And this president’s legacy is the entrenchment and exploitation of the attitudes that fuel that suicide. He is basking in praise and self-congratulation. But his denialism runs deep.

Marc tackles the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism’s report:

The Obama national security cabinet includes nuclear alarmists, proponents of preclusion, opponents of preclusion, and those who’ve seen first hand how difficult it is to create policy on the basis of what we think we know and what we most fear.  Some are interventionist: the best way to prevent nations from decaying into breeding grounds for terrorists is to prevent them from decaying in the first place. Don’t be surprised if Obama links these sorts of interventions to the WMD question, which is to say, don’t be surprised if, to Obama, the threats of failed states and WMD profileration are indelibly linked.

Donny Osmond on my marriage:

"We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society."

I particularly cherished this sentence:

In fact, some of my best friends are gay.

I suspect he has as many gay friends as Sarah Palin. There’s a marriage equality news round-up from Andy Towle here.

The Supreme Court backs California’s sane and humane medical marijuana laws.

Joe Gandelman praises memeorandum and points to this Guardian article on the news aggregator:

Memeorandum is based on the idea of "memes" or ideas that spread across the web (along with a pun on memorandum). Someone publishes an interesting story, other people find it, discuss it, and link to it. That’s how the web works. Small stories come and go quickly, while big ones generate lots of comment and dominate the page for hours.

The developer, Gabe Rivera, says it’s all done in software. He provides a list of publications as "seeds," but the software still finds stories on sites he’s never heard of. It’s just a question of following links, and then trying to assess the contents. The algorithms are, obviously, secret.

Google also follows links and assesses content, but Memeorandum is embarrassingly better than Google News. Google reckons that the more coverage a story gets, the more important it is. Unfortunately, broad coverage takes a long time to develop, so Google News can run hours or even a day behind Memeorandum. This is fine for casual consumers, but if you’re a news junkie – or a journalist – it’s hopeless.

For memeorandum buffs, it’s must reading.