I just realized last night why I'm so addicted to reading about the election. It's because the content is as fluffy and juicy as something I'd read in People Magazine - except the players are Barack, John, Sarah, Joe, Michelle, and Cindy instead of the celeb set. But because the news is wrapped in the cloak of the NYT and The Economist, and has David Gergen commenting, it feels legitimate, and I feel all good about myself for staying up-to-date.
Do I go to The Economist and read the articles on why economies in post-communist countries are steadying, or how the credit crunch has now reached Brazil? Nope. I skip straight to reading about the U.S. elections (in the Celebrities/Entertainment section, of course). 5% of the brain capacity required to read about the election, 95% of the credibility is granted!
Friday, November 07, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
the most offensive thing I've read in a while
Wow this article, "Will Obama Kill Science?" is unbelievable.
Here's the argument: This guy, Derbyshire, writing for the National Review, claims that Barack Obama is a "cultural marxist." From what I can tell, this charge means that Obama believes we should not leave the poor and underprivileged to rot. Why is Obama's belief bad? Because helping the downtrodden stinks of Marxism, seeing that the poor are only poor because they are genetically inferior and lazy, and genetic inferiority is their own damn fault. See, the poor should pull themselves up out of their genetic inferiority with their own bootstraps, with hard work just like everyone else. Those entitled, welfare-taking, affirmative-action-using lazy bastards obviously haven't been trying hard enough, because if they were trying at all, they would have managed to get a job and change their lazy, stupid, inferior genotypes by now. [You see, while we have all been freaking out about being PC, "research results were steadily trickling in, building up the water pressure behind the nurturist dam" - that tenuous wisp of an concept that nurture somehow has a role in shaping the people that we are.]
OK, having established the evidence that Obama is a "cultural marxist" that believes in all that hogwash about equal rights and opportunities (did you know, Obama might even believe in that rancid tripe that "all men are created equal" - he's such a leftist wingnut!!!!!), the author then claims that Obama must be against scientific research since science is on an inevitable march towards proving that some races (we won't name which ones, wink wink!) are inferior to other races. Why? Because if we learned that some races are inferior to other races, the only possible course of action would be to leave those inferior people to putrefy in a neighborhood (before you say anything, I did NOT use the word "ghetto") far away from Derbyshire's gated community. And you know what? That goes directly against Obama's marxist sentiments.
Q.E.D.: Barack Obama is against science, and is aiming to kill it. He probably doesn't even believe that high cholesterol is inherited, he's such a cultural marxist.
Derbyshire takes heart, though, because "Some of us, mulling over these things, have found consolation in the thought that even if the U.S. authorities shut down human-sciences research, it will go on in other countries where these issues are less fraught, and the results will come out anyway." Yep, the truth will prevail. For good measure, Derbyshire sheds a few tears about Jewish scientists being forced to flee Germany, because that proves that he's not a Racist Nazi. See, he's not a racist. If he were a racist would he have sympathy for the Jews? I don't think so! So don't you dare say Derbyshire might be racist. He's just not afraid of the cold, hard, scientific truth.
Holy freaking crap. I did not just read that, did I? Is that unusually offensive? Or is it just par for the course? Living in Berkeley has made me politically provincial, and that article makes me never want to leave my rainbows, love, armpit-hair and marijuana haven of the Elitist West Coast.
At the end, Derbyshire posts this "charming" "joke":
Q: What’s the difference between a geneticist and a genomicist? A: Geneticists are female, genomicists are male. A young woman of nontrivial attractiveness carefully adding drops to a Petri dish from a pipette... that’s a geneticist... Two young guys arguing about some long string of numbers displayed on a computer screen - those are genomicists …”
Damn, after all that, he tells me that I am a young male computer nerd. I've had it wrong all these years!
Here's the argument: This guy, Derbyshire, writing for the National Review, claims that Barack Obama is a "cultural marxist." From what I can tell, this charge means that Obama believes we should not leave the poor and underprivileged to rot. Why is Obama's belief bad? Because helping the downtrodden stinks of Marxism, seeing that the poor are only poor because they are genetically inferior and lazy, and genetic inferiority is their own damn fault. See, the poor should pull themselves up out of their genetic inferiority with their own bootstraps, with hard work just like everyone else. Those entitled, welfare-taking, affirmative-action-using lazy bastards obviously haven't been trying hard enough, because if they were trying at all, they would have managed to get a job and change their lazy, stupid, inferior genotypes by now. [You see, while we have all been freaking out about being PC, "research results were steadily trickling in, building up the water pressure behind the nurturist dam" - that tenuous wisp of an concept that nurture somehow has a role in shaping the people that we are.]
OK, having established the evidence that Obama is a "cultural marxist" that believes in all that hogwash about equal rights and opportunities (did you know, Obama might even believe in that rancid tripe that "all men are created equal" - he's such a leftist wingnut!!!!!), the author then claims that Obama must be against scientific research since science is on an inevitable march towards proving that some races (we won't name which ones, wink wink!) are inferior to other races. Why? Because if we learned that some races are inferior to other races, the only possible course of action would be to leave those inferior people to putrefy in a neighborhood (before you say anything, I did NOT use the word "ghetto") far away from Derbyshire's gated community. And you know what? That goes directly against Obama's marxist sentiments.
Q.E.D.: Barack Obama is against science, and is aiming to kill it. He probably doesn't even believe that high cholesterol is inherited, he's such a cultural marxist.
Derbyshire takes heart, though, because "Some of us, mulling over these things, have found consolation in the thought that even if the U.S. authorities shut down human-sciences research, it will go on in other countries where these issues are less fraught, and the results will come out anyway." Yep, the truth will prevail. For good measure, Derbyshire sheds a few tears about Jewish scientists being forced to flee Germany, because that proves that he's not a Racist Nazi. See, he's not a racist. If he were a racist would he have sympathy for the Jews? I don't think so! So don't you dare say Derbyshire might be racist. He's just not afraid of the cold, hard, scientific truth.
Holy freaking crap. I did not just read that, did I? Is that unusually offensive? Or is it just par for the course? Living in Berkeley has made me politically provincial, and that article makes me never want to leave my rainbows, love, armpit-hair and marijuana haven of the Elitist West Coast.
At the end, Derbyshire posts this "charming" "joke":
Q: What’s the difference between a geneticist and a genomicist? A: Geneticists are female, genomicists are male. A young woman of nontrivial attractiveness carefully adding drops to a Petri dish from a pipette... that’s a geneticist... Two young guys arguing about some long string of numbers displayed on a computer screen - those are genomicists …”
Damn, after all that, he tells me that I am a young male computer nerd. I've had it wrong all these years!
Is evolution by means of natural selection a sufficient explanation...
From Nature magazine, where Barack Obama "accepted Nature's invitation to answer 18 science-related questions in writing:"
Do you believe that evolution by means of natural selection is a sufficient explanation for the variety and complexity of life on Earth? Should intelligent design, or some derivative thereof, be taught in science class in public schools?
Obama: I believe in evolution, and I support the strong consensus of the scientific community that evolution is scientifically validated. I do not believe it is helpful to our students to cloud discussions of science with non-scientific theories like intelligent design that are not subject to experimental scrutiny.
Not too surprising. Although when he went to Google and was advised by his staff to archly expound that "a bubble sort is the wrong way to go," he really raised the bar for himself. Too bad Obama wasn't allowed to show off some high-science talk about the neutral theory, but that would have been pretty hilarious. Ok maybe just hilarious to about 1000 people on earth but still.
Do you believe that evolution by means of natural selection is a sufficient explanation for the variety and complexity of life on Earth? Should intelligent design, or some derivative thereof, be taught in science class in public schools?
Obama: I believe in evolution, and I support the strong consensus of the scientific community that evolution is scientifically validated. I do not believe it is helpful to our students to cloud discussions of science with non-scientific theories like intelligent design that are not subject to experimental scrutiny.
Not too surprising. Although when he went to Google and was advised by his staff to archly expound that "a bubble sort is the wrong way to go," he really raised the bar for himself. Too bad Obama wasn't allowed to show off some high-science talk about the neutral theory, but that would have been pretty hilarious. Ok maybe just hilarious to about 1000 people on earth but still.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
Hold on, a second, I thought we aren't supposed to like the French! I'm so confused.
There is a movement afoot that's occurring and part of that is whole philosophical idea of multi-cultural diversity, which on the face sounds wonderful. Let's appreciate and value everyone's cultures. But guess what? Not all cultures are equal. Not all values are equal.
And one thing that we're seeing is that in the midst of this violence that's being encouraged by al Jazeera and by the jihadists that's occurring, is that we are seeing that those who are coming into France -- which had a beautiful culture -- the French culture is actually diminished. It's going away. And just with the population of France they are losing Western Europeans and it's being taken over by muh...by a Muslim ethic.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Love that leather jacket. And those boots!
Well now we know that $150,000 is how she looks so awesome! I must admit I have been coveting her closet, big time.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Who are New York Times readers?
From this article in the Times:
“I feel like I’m at home,” Ms. Palin said, looking out at a boisterous crowd of about 6,000. “I see the Carhartts and the steel-toed boots,” she said, the first reference being to a clothing brand favored by construction workers and the burly types who make up much of the “Sarah Dude” population. “You guys are great,” she said while signing autographs.
The fact that the NYT has to badly explain the "first reference being to a clothing brand..." is a nice giveaway about the Times, and the NYT readership. Imagine a parallel in a small-town paper: "I feel like I'm at home - I see the pumpkin soy chai lattes and iPhones," he said, the first reference being to a hot beverage favored by urban yuppies who make up much of the Obama base.
“I feel like I’m at home,” Ms. Palin said, looking out at a boisterous crowd of about 6,000. “I see the Carhartts and the steel-toed boots,” she said, the first reference being to a clothing brand favored by construction workers and the burly types who make up much of the “Sarah Dude” population. “You guys are great,” she said while signing autographs.
The fact that the NYT has to badly explain the "first reference being to a clothing brand..." is a nice giveaway about the Times, and the NYT readership. Imagine a parallel in a small-town paper: "I feel like I'm at home - I see the pumpkin soy chai lattes and iPhones," he said, the first reference being to a hot beverage favored by urban yuppies who make up much of the Obama base.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Yesterday night I went online and read headlines on multiple news sites - including CBS - that Palin was cleared in "Troopergate." Great, I thought, let's move on!
However, on closer examination, I saw that in fact, she had cleared herself, and that the report has yet to come out. Huh? Since the entire campaign is already based on utter fiction, did you know that Obama is a cannibal, and that his victims included Mother Theresa and the Pope? Let's spread that one at the McCain-Palin hate-rallies and see if it sticks!
People SUCK.
However, on closer examination, I saw that in fact, she had cleared herself, and that the report has yet to come out. Huh? Since the entire campaign is already based on utter fiction, did you know that Obama is a cannibal, and that his victims included Mother Theresa and the Pope? Let's spread that one at the McCain-Palin hate-rallies and see if it sticks!
People SUCK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
