The microbiology of zombiefication, or at least one potential type.
The research on aerosols made of Mad Cow mentioned in the article is truly terrifying.
4.15.2011
Why do they hide this Obama?
Obama, with his mike open, at a private dinner. MORE OF THIS, IN PUBLIC, PLEASE:
"When Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure, he's just being America's accountant and trying to you know be responsible, this is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my health care bill -- but wasn't paid for. So it's not on the level."
Teddy Roosevelt: Republican
Can you imagine what he would be called today if he gave this speech, say, in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United, or in a rebuke to Congressman Paul Ryan's misanthropic joke of a budget?
"Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics. That is one of our tasks to-day. Every special interest is entitled to justice-full, fair, and complete-and, now, mind you, if there were any attempt by mob-violence to plunder and work harm to the special interest, whatever it may be, that I most dislike, and the wealthy man, whomsoever he may be, for whom I have the greatest contempt, I would fight for him, and you would if you were worth your salt. He should have justice. For every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office. The Constitution guarantees protection to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation.
The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being.
There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.
* * *
The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need to is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows. Again, comrades over there, take the lesson from your own experience. Not only did you not grudge, but you gloried in the promotion of the great generals who gained their promotion by leading their army to victory. So it is with us. We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community. This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.
No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective-a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate."
Teddy Roosevelt, The New Nationalism Speech, 1910
"Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics. That is one of our tasks to-day. Every special interest is entitled to justice-full, fair, and complete-and, now, mind you, if there were any attempt by mob-violence to plunder and work harm to the special interest, whatever it may be, that I most dislike, and the wealthy man, whomsoever he may be, for whom I have the greatest contempt, I would fight for him, and you would if you were worth your salt. He should have justice. For every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office. The Constitution guarantees protection to property, and we must make that promise good. But it does not give the right of suffrage to any corporation.
The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being.
There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.
* * *
The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need to is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows. Again, comrades over there, take the lesson from your own experience. Not only did you not grudge, but you gloried in the promotion of the great generals who gained their promotion by leading their army to victory. So it is with us. We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community. This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.
No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective-a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate."
Teddy Roosevelt, The New Nationalism Speech, 1910
4.13.2011
Rep. Eric Cantor is a terrorist
What else do you call someone who threatens devastation if he doesn't get his political way?
4.12.2011
What Chris Says
What is going on now in Raleigh in the name of "tort reform" is little more than criminality. Chris Nichols says it far better than I can. Go read it.
Defects in Legal Education
So the President is going to adopt the debt reduction position of the Simpson-Bowles Catfood Commission. Wonderful.
It astounds me that a guy can become editor of Harvard Law Review and a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago, let alone President of the United States, and, from all appearances, never once have learned anything about the strategy and tactics of negotiation. One class in Alternative Dispute Resolution would have done it.
Instead, we get to see the President tell his opponents exactly how far he's willing to go, which is much farther than he should go, and then fight off their intransigent opposition, get pulled to their side, and anger his base.
Stop me if you've heard this before. The President is going to announce a major initiative, after first giving in on a point that a significant portion of his base feels should be non-negotiable. Then he's going to propose it, and it will be met by complete rejection by the other side, who will propose some draconian ridiculousness that they will claim is the only acceptable position. Then they will bash him as a communist because he doesn't accept their position.
The President will then slowly negotiate his way to their side, using certain "moderate" Senators to float his series of cave-ins, all with the net effect of making him look like his original position is losing support in the Senate, leading to a series of stories about how he is weakening.
Then, in a last push just before a crucial deadline, he will win support of something that has the same name as what he proposed, but, because the GOP controls the House, contains things we never would support. And then the President will declare victory.
He is doing this all within two years of a major election, so that his base will be demoralized just in time to face the opposition, who will never have ceased calling him a traitor and a communist, such that his signature achievement is belittled, watered down, and ultimately politically damaging to his own party.
Sound familiar?
All for the want of a negotiation skills seminar.
It astounds me that a guy can become editor of Harvard Law Review and a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago, let alone President of the United States, and, from all appearances, never once have learned anything about the strategy and tactics of negotiation. One class in Alternative Dispute Resolution would have done it.
Instead, we get to see the President tell his opponents exactly how far he's willing to go, which is much farther than he should go, and then fight off their intransigent opposition, get pulled to their side, and anger his base.
Stop me if you've heard this before. The President is going to announce a major initiative, after first giving in on a point that a significant portion of his base feels should be non-negotiable. Then he's going to propose it, and it will be met by complete rejection by the other side, who will propose some draconian ridiculousness that they will claim is the only acceptable position. Then they will bash him as a communist because he doesn't accept their position.
The President will then slowly negotiate his way to their side, using certain "moderate" Senators to float his series of cave-ins, all with the net effect of making him look like his original position is losing support in the Senate, leading to a series of stories about how he is weakening.
Then, in a last push just before a crucial deadline, he will win support of something that has the same name as what he proposed, but, because the GOP controls the House, contains things we never would support. And then the President will declare victory.
He is doing this all within two years of a major election, so that his base will be demoralized just in time to face the opposition, who will never have ceased calling him a traitor and a communist, such that his signature achievement is belittled, watered down, and ultimately politically damaging to his own party.
Sound familiar?
All for the want of a negotiation skills seminar.
4.11.2011
Hey, how ya been?
So I've been thinking that facebook and twitter, with their instant feedback and quick-shot ability to tell the world what you are thinking, are resulting in my thought processes being truncated, half-baked and aimed solely at the cheap laugh or the cutting insult.
Gone are the days of well-thought out posts about any number of issues, in long form, inviting comment and challenging readers to open their minds and weigh in.
But enough about Sharpedo and Shoveldog's posts, let's talk about mine.
I put so much of myself into this blog for so long, that I really want to get back into it. I want to keep writing, and I want to quit overwhelming my friends with my political posts on facebook.
So, if all goes as planned, I will begin again here at The Stinging Nettle, nearly 10 years after it originally started. It had become a diary of sorts. An uncomfortably public diary at times, but one in which I did much of my best writing. I haven't written a thing in two years on facebook of which I can say that.
So, let's see if we can get this started again, shall we?
Gone are the days of well-thought out posts about any number of issues, in long form, inviting comment and challenging readers to open their minds and weigh in.
But enough about Sharpedo and Shoveldog's posts, let's talk about mine.
I put so much of myself into this blog for so long, that I really want to get back into it. I want to keep writing, and I want to quit overwhelming my friends with my political posts on facebook.
So, if all goes as planned, I will begin again here at The Stinging Nettle, nearly 10 years after it originally started. It had become a diary of sorts. An uncomfortably public diary at times, but one in which I did much of my best writing. I haven't written a thing in two years on facebook of which I can say that.
So, let's see if we can get this started again, shall we?
9.22.2010
Renee Ellmers's Racist Ad
Congressman Bob Etheridge is the Congressman from the Second District of North Carolina. The Second District stretches from downtown Raleigh, through the suburbs of Southern Wake County, and into the surrounding suburbs and farmland of Johnston and counties south. It's a changing area, formerly rural, now rapidly urbanizing. It is the very definition of a swing district.
Now, thanks to the Tea Party, Congressman Etheridge is in a dogfight. And he's fighting a woman, Renee Ellmers, who has risen to Tea Party prominence on the back of a campaign against the Health Reform Plan, a campaign based on misinformation and gullible people who don't read for themselves.
But she just outed herself as a racist Islamophobe in her new campaign ad.
I promise you, you won't believe this one.
Today, the racist Mrs. Ellmers issued her very first ad. It's not about Congressman Etheridge. It's not even about Renee Ellmers, who she is, or why she's running for Congress.
It's a racist appeal to the worst elements of the Republican Party. Take a look:
If you want another Tea Party embarrassment to get elected, then ignore this, and let Bob Etheridge fight by himself.
But if you want to fight this kind of crap, and show the world that North Carolina and America do not reward extremists of ANY sort, then help Bob.
If you want to reward a true Democrat who cast tough votes FOR our agenda, then reward Bob. Unlike some Democratic Congressmen in this state who opposed their President's agenda (ahem, McIntyre, ahem, Shuler) or promised to support it and then voted against it (looking at you Kissell), Bob Etheridge told you how he would vote and then he supported the health care reform plan when asked to do so. He's a good man in a bad fight.
Here is Bob's wonderful statement on his health care vote.
And now you know what is opposing him. Racism. Ugliness. Extremism. Ignorance.
I think it's the worst ad ever in North Carolina politics.
And that is saying something.
Really saying something:
.I just gave money to Bob Etheridge.
.You can too.
Cross posted at The Daily Kos.
*edited. She's not a doctor. Good.
Now, thanks to the Tea Party, Congressman Etheridge is in a dogfight. And he's fighting a woman, Renee Ellmers, who has risen to Tea Party prominence on the back of a campaign against the Health Reform Plan, a campaign based on misinformation and gullible people who don't read for themselves.
But she just outed herself as a racist Islamophobe in her new campaign ad.
I promise you, you won't believe this one.
Today, the racist Mrs. Ellmers issued her very first ad. It's not about Congressman Etheridge. It's not even about Renee Ellmers, who she is, or why she's running for Congress.
It's a racist appeal to the worst elements of the Republican Party. Take a look:
If you want another Tea Party embarrassment to get elected, then ignore this, and let Bob Etheridge fight by himself.
But if you want to fight this kind of crap, and show the world that North Carolina and America do not reward extremists of ANY sort, then help Bob.
If you want to reward a true Democrat who cast tough votes FOR our agenda, then reward Bob. Unlike some Democratic Congressmen in this state who opposed their President's agenda (ahem, McIntyre, ahem, Shuler) or promised to support it and then voted against it (looking at you Kissell), Bob Etheridge told you how he would vote and then he supported the health care reform plan when asked to do so. He's a good man in a bad fight.
Here is Bob's wonderful statement on his health care vote.
And now you know what is opposing him. Racism. Ugliness. Extremism. Ignorance.
I think it's the worst ad ever in North Carolina politics.
And that is saying something.
Really saying something:
.I just gave money to Bob Etheridge.
.You can too.
Cross posted at The Daily Kos.
*edited. She's not a doctor. Good.
4.28.2010
4.08.2010
Interesting post showing the differences between American and non-American attitudes
I'm watching the UK elections with some interest so this article, linked via Andrew Sullivan (who's starting to annoy me but that's another post), was of interest too. Background: the person who would become Home Secretary (equivalent to Secretary of the Interior) was commenting on a B&B operator who wanted not to rent rooms to gay couples. I'm not so concerned here about the subject matter of the article as about this comment:
Americans often find it curious how non-Americans don't see the world the same way they do. This felt like a good way to show one difference in how a legal principle can set your way for viewing society.
(*) Yes I know that hotels are addressed specifically by an interstate commerce judgment whose cite I can't remember right now. But since it's the Masters and Augusta discriminates against women with no sanction, maybe you'll take the bigger point.
Grayling's excuses for allowing on-going discrimination against gay people are bizarre. Nobody is forced to open a B&B. They choose to do so – and that means they can't turn away people based on arbitrary prejudices.In the USA, that example would be turned completely on its head. It would read: "Nobody is forced to stay in a particular B&B. They choose to do so - and that means they can't force the owners to accept people they would want to turn away based on arbitrary prejudices." Because in the USA private parties are allowed to discriminate if they want to and there's not really all that much one can do about it.(*)
Americans often find it curious how non-Americans don't see the world the same way they do. This felt like a good way to show one difference in how a legal principle can set your way for viewing society.
(*) Yes I know that hotels are addressed specifically by an interstate commerce judgment whose cite I can't remember right now. But since it's the Masters and Augusta discriminates against women with no sanction, maybe you'll take the bigger point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
