Frontrunners in the Republican presidential field are earning that position by rejecting the conclusions of the scientific community and the advice of groups like the National Academies of Science. Is this worse for the party or for the country?

Me: We have to get away from the word “belief”, which carries the connotation of something intangible, ephemeral and therefore inconsistent. Evolution, climate change and any other scientific based research carries with it an inherent confidence level based on experimentation and analysis. Hypotheses (proposed explanation for phenomenons NOT guesses) are put through rigorous and repeatable test for rejection or validation. Over time, and with continued testing, the hypotheses are held up and become theories (a system of ideas intended to explain something). 

So rather then say I believe in evolution, I prefer to say I have a high degree of confidence in the theory, with the underpinning of proven evidence. 

Confusion stems from the colloquial use of the word theory, most prevalent in the myriad of procedural crime dramas that clog the TV. This lack of depth of understanding of course is a reflection of the lack of math & science education within the US (which is the way the those who hold the money and power want it - a populous undereducated and underemployed following the carrot on the end of the stick of the “American Dream”).

(Source: addtoany.com)



Comments (View)
[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]


Comments (View)
"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
— ~ Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (1776), Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911 ~


Comments (View)
The problem with capitalism

You’re no doubt aware of Margaret Thatcher’s quote about socialism:

“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher

I was pondering on that and had this thought:

“The problem with capitalism is that eventually you run out of people to exploit.”

Now I don’t know if I read that somewhere long ago, or if it’s some amalgamation of my readings, but regardless or origin, I like it. (And I do hope it’s an original thought – I don’t have many of those.)



Comments (View)
My thoughts on “Liberal Branding”

Article from Mother Jones By Kevin Drum

| Sun Oct. 10, 2010 10:35 PM PDT

: http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/10/liberal-branding

My comment:

Read Paul Krugman’s “Conscience of a Liberal”. He beautifully states:
“I believe in a relativity equal society, supported by institutions that limit extremes of wealth and poverty. I believe in democracy, civil liberties, and the rule of law. That makes me a liberal, and I’m proud of it.”

The platform of a liberal progressive party should be modeled after FDR’s Economic Bill of Rights. Found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

The problem with finding a brand is that liberals embrace individuality and personal expression while conservatives demand conformity and group think. As a movement, the liberal cause is too fluid, too open-minded, to fit in a box - and that’s a good thing. It’s what makes us appealing to those who seek to affect change.

Conservatives don’t expect, they demand, ridged orthodoxy to the message. Conformity is key.

In contrast, liberals are more apt to remain broadminded, embracing change and allowing for a fluid, dynamic modeling of their message. In fact, there is rarely a single message to which to adhere.

This fluidity stems from a liberal camp that embraces a broad spectrum of disparate ideologies – ideologies that may or may not coexist harmoniously at any given moment. For example, one liberal may be fighting for better safety regulations for coal miners, while another is advocating for an end to fossil fuels and funding for alternative energies. Hence a mixed message, counter-productive to philosophical unity.

So the question becomes how do liberals and progressives coalesce and stay on point? Or does there need to be a reeducation of the audience to accept that seemingly conflicting messages may in fact be in accord?

In our present reality, liberals should be drawing a clear delineation - we are for the people, conservative are for the corporations. But when was the last time a liberal actually went on the attack and stood up, rather than meekly defend, social justice? He/she can’t, without being derided as a “socialist”. Conservative wave the flag and wrap themselves in Jesus - and as long as they paint themselves as the “family values” party, the Christian conservatives won’t care that they are voting against their economic interest.



Comments (View)

R is for Roadblock

IF you’re voting Republican, remember you are voting for the party of “No”. A party, that rather than work to find solutions crossed its arms, stuck out its tongue and said no. A party that threw temper tantrums (http://bit.ly/daPUUo) when they should have been working to clean up the mess of the Bush years.

Just remember this – that “R” next to the candidate’s name stands for “Roadblock”.

 

 



Comments (View)
Why do we need unions?

“In reaction to the economic injustice of the Gilded Age, workers helped transform the vistas of reform by bringing new concerns for the underclass of urban poor. They inspired and guided Progressives to challenge the reigning ethos of laissez-faire, and to address the problems of crowded tenement housings, sweatshops, child labor. Where industry was cruel or uncomprehending of the human beings it employed, labor insisted in the ten- and eight-hour day, time for leisure and the enjoyment of live, and ultimately health benefits and insurance that would protect workers and their families; none of these achievements came easily, indeed all were resisted fiercely, yet in time they became standard features of American life.” - “There is Power in a Union” by Philip Dray, p. 7. Buy on Amazon: http://amzn.to/dhHmFi



Comments (View)
FDR’s Economic Bill of Rights

Excerpt from President Roosevelt’s January 11, 1944 message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union:

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

  • The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
  • The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
  • The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
  • The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
  • The right of every family to a decent home;
  • The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
  • The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
  • And finally, the right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being. America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home, there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

(Source: Wikipedia & Jan 11,1944 FDR Fireside Chat)

YouTube: http://bit.ly/6IPBA



Comments (View)

“The strange alchemy of time has somehow converted the Democrats into the truly conservative party of this country - the party dedicated to conserving all that is best, and building solidly and safely on these foundations. The Republicans, by contrast, are behaving like the radical party – the party of the reckless and embittered, bent on dismantling institutions which have been built solidly into our social fabric.” - Adlai Stevenson in 1952



Comments (View)
[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]


Comments (View)
[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

Infant Sorrow - “The Clap” (music from the film “Get Him to the Greek”)

http://www.amazon.com/Get-Him-Greek-Infant-Sorrow/dp/B003J2QTV0



Comments (View)

In a trial using volunteers from families with and without a history of diabetes, researchers saw more problems in those with a genetic susceptibility to the disease.



Comments (View)

Soups are perfect for springtime, when fresh vegetables flood into farmers’ markets.



Comments (View)

There is theory about why warming up should work, but little solid research on whether it actually does.



Comments (View)

Can a soda tax and warning labels help dam the river of sugared drinks Americans pour into ever-fatter bodies each year?



Comments (View)
  1 of 31 
Based on a theme by Hunson (Designed by Josh) / Powered by Tumblr