Month: September 2009

Nate Silver compares and contrasts:

The difference between Beck and Limbaugh is that Beck is much more of an anti-establishment figure. I have posited before that running perpendicular to the traditional liberal-conservative spectrum is an establishment/anti-establishment spectrum; Beck is conservative but anti-establishment. And that may be working out pretty well for him, since the country seems to be becoming more anti-establishment too.

A Free Exchange blogger strikes an optimistic tone:

This downturn is like the last in some key ways: it followed a bubble, and it occurred in an environment of very low interest rates. But in depth, it's more like the recessions of 1981 and 1929, which means much more growth can be wrung out of putting good workers back to work than was the case in 1991 and 2001. For that reason, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to be a little more bullish than is the current conventional wisdom.

Calculated Risk differs.

PZ Meyers was unsatisfied by the study released yesterday:

All the low frequency of self-reported atheists in the survey tells you is that the long-running campaign in American culture to stigmatize atheism has been highly successful — and it's an attitude that we still see expressed in reports like this. The most important news they try to transmit is not the increase in unbelievers, it's "Thank God they aren't atheists! They're just rational skeptics, instead!"

James Joyner pipes up:

I suspect part of the reason that people are reluctant to call themselves “atheists” is a fear of being lumped in with the likes of Myers, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins.  Not satisfied to use their considerable brainpower to argue for scientific explanations over supernatural ones, they instead show utter disdain for the overwhelming majority of their fellow citizens who were brought up in a religious tradition and cling to parts of it.  “Atheism” in this sense isn’t a mere belief that there is no supernatural overlord controlling our universe but a quasi-religion of its own, with many of the worst traits of organized religion.

Similarly, AllahPundit likes the trend but is baffled by the non-believers who have a “personal god” or otherwise quasi-religious beliefs.   But that strikes me as a cultural phenomenon rather than a purely religious one. 

A reader writes:

I'm a husband, married to a beautiful, intelligent woman for almost 18 years. I'm a father to the brightest, most spirited, most wonderful four-year-old girl you'll ever meet. I'm also a survivor of childhood sexual abuse. I was coerced and molested several times, at the age of 8, by a 14-year-old boy. Most often it was just me and the boy in question; on at least one other occasion (my most vivid and horrific memory), other youth were involved.

I don't deny that the horrors "cls" describes in his post, take place. I don't deny that, yes, at least some of the boys listed on sex offender registries are there for the wrong reasons. I also won't deny that there are double standards, or even triple standards, for how society, families, and the legal system react when young people are abruptly discovered in the middle of sexual exploration.

I do think, however, that "cls" could've served his/her readers… his/her own credibility… and the blogosphere in general, a lot better, had (s)he taken a day or two to conduct more research on sexual abuse, pedophilia, and so forth.

Whenever you have a sexual situation involving young people, it's important to consider the age differences between the parties involved. If the age difference is less than three years, you're most likely dealing with innocent exploration; if the age difference is three years or more, there's a good chance that some sort of coercion is involved.

The occasion I referenced above that involved more than one person? That involved two boys and a girl, and myself. Now, I always knew that I was the youngest one in that situation–but it was only after I'd done extensive research via old public records, city directories and the like, that I discovered that the one boy, my primary perpetrator, was 14, his friend was 11, and the friend's younger sister was only four or five months older than me. I had always viewed this girl as a "perp"; now, in light of my counseling, and some further research, it's *very likely* that this girl was not a perpetrator, but a victim, like myself.

Again, I don't doubt that some of the young boys listed on sex offender registries are there for the wrong reason–but some of them might be there because they did, in fact, commit sexual assault on younger children.

That was the subtext (and barely sub) of many of the Prop 8 ads in California. The exact same ad – literally the same – is now running in Maine. It portrays what looks like two ordinary parents complaining about their kids being indoctrinated by gays in school. They are not ordinary parents:

Ms. Bansley is the state director of the Concerned Women For America of Maine, and has appeared onstage at many Stand For Marriage Maine rallies. She has made her interest clear time and time again. And while she is a teacher, she doesn't teach at a public institution. She teaches at Calvary Chapel Christian School. A Christian school where she is already freely stifling pro-gay speech, at least according to one of her very own students. To identify Ms. Bansley as merely a "teacher" is like simply calling Barack Obama a CEO of an important entity.

But if fear worked once, they will use it again.

For legal reasons, that bill against ACORN was written broadly enough that it could defund defense contractors and other recipients of government money charged in fraud cases. AL gloats:

I can't think of a better way of illustrating the double standard at work here. Republicans have singled out a group to demonize based on the supposed bad acts of a few employees. Based on these incidents, we're supposed to conclude that the entire organization is corrupt and unworthy of continued existence. But when you apply that very same standard to defense contractors, they fair no better than ACORN.

John Cole asks: when we can expect to see this story posted at BigGovernment.com?

"A set of animated loops made out of wood. Music by Metronomy, 'The End Of You Too'."

A reader writes:

My husband is a geologist who went through a long bout of unemployment; his specialty is water quality, and the environment was not a concern of the Bush administration. At one point, he attended a relocation fair sponsored by the Government of Alberta. The primary target was skilled foreigners frustrated by the U.S. immigration process. Geology was on the list of target occupations,

and at that time, oil companies were desperate for employees.

Had he been hired by a Canadian employer, he would have received a visa not tied to the job. I would have also been given a visa with the right to work, and we would have been eligible for health insurance from day one. He applied for a few jobs in Calgary, but then two things happened: the price of oil fell and Barack Obama was elected. My husband has been employed since January at a firm that is receiving Federal stimulus money.  

We know many scientists who have come here from other countries, and we know that the U.S. isn’t offering them the same deal that Canada is.

(Hat tip: Likecool)