Posts
FOXNews.com - Iranian Cleric Says Promiscuous Women Are to Blame for Earthquakes: "A senior Iranian cleric says women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes."
What about promiscuous men?!?
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
FOXNews.com - Poll: Trust in Big Government Near Historic Low
FOXNews.com - Poll: Trust in Big Government Near Historic Low: "The survey found that Obama's policies were partly to blame for a rise in distrustful, anti-government views. In his first year in office, the president orchestrated a government takeover of Detroit automakers, secured a $787 billion stimulus package and pushed to overhaul the health care system.
But the poll also identified a combination of factors that contributed to the electorate's hostility: the recession that Obama inherited from President George W. Bush; a dispirited public; and anger with Congress and politicians of all political leanings."
"'This should be a wake-up call. Both sides are guilty,' said Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. She pointed to 'nonsense' that goes on during campaigns that leads to 'promises made but not promises kept.' Still, she added: 'Distrust of government is an all-American activity. It's something we do as Americans and there's nothing wrong with it.'"
But the poll also identified a combination of factors that contributed to the electorate's hostility: the recession that Obama inherited from President George W. Bush; a dispirited public; and anger with Congress and politicians of all political leanings."
"'This should be a wake-up call. Both sides are guilty,' said Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill. She pointed to 'nonsense' that goes on during campaigns that leads to 'promises made but not promises kept.' Still, she added: 'Distrust of government is an all-American activity. It's something we do as Americans and there's nothing wrong with it.'"
FOXNews.com - GM Pays Off Debt to U.S.
FOXNews.com - GM Pays Off Debt to U.S.: "GM still owes $45.3 billion to the U.S. and $8.1 billion to Canada, money it received in exchange for large stakes in the company. The U.S. government now owns 61 percent of the company and Canada owns roughly 12 percent. GM plans to repay both with a public stock offering, perhaps later this year."
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
The tooth fairy teaches... - The Quotations Page
Quote Details: David Richerby: The tooth fairy teaches... - The Quotations Page: "The tooth fairy teaches children that they can sell body parts for money.
-- David Richerby"
-- David Richerby"
Friday, April 16, 2010
FOXNews.com - Tea Party Protesters Descend on D.C. With New 'Contract From America'
FOXNews.com - Tea Party Protesters Descend on D.C. With New 'Contract From America': "the top ten planks were:
(1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
(2) Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health care
(3) Demand a balanced budget
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
(5) Enact fundamental reform to simplify and lower taxes
(6)Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs
(7) Reject cap-and-trade
(8) Pass an “all of the above” energy policy
(9) Stop the 2011 tax hikes
(10) Stop the pork."
(1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
(2) Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health care
(3) Demand a balanced budget
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
(5) Enact fundamental reform to simplify and lower taxes
(6)Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs
(7) Reject cap-and-trade
(8) Pass an “all of the above” energy policy
(9) Stop the 2011 tax hikes
(10) Stop the pork."
Meet Russian President Medvedev, Internet geek | Politics and Law - CNET News
Meet Russian President Medvedev, Internet geek | Politics and Law - CNET News: "During an appearance at the center-left Brookings Institution, the head of the Russian Federation suggested that he and President Obama should dispense with their legions of aides and chat on iPhones through text messaging instead.
'We don't e-mail each other (but) that would be the fastest possible way to talk to each other,' said Medvedev, according to a translation. 'In this case, we could just have a couple of iPhones and we could just exchange text messages or e-mails. I am quite familiar with that, as well as President Obama, as far as I understand.' (Obama has a BlackBerry.)"
That would save a lot of money, time, and environmental impact!
"Web sites let politicians go directly to the source of news articles, reports, or other information, Medvedev said. 'We don't need our aides that much today. We can immerse ourselves into information...The time has changed. Whatever I read or President Obama reads, we always have the possibility to go online and see what is happening in reality.'"
'We don't e-mail each other (but) that would be the fastest possible way to talk to each other,' said Medvedev, according to a translation. 'In this case, we could just have a couple of iPhones and we could just exchange text messages or e-mails. I am quite familiar with that, as well as President Obama, as far as I understand.' (Obama has a BlackBerry.)"
That would save a lot of money, time, and environmental impact!
"Web sites let politicians go directly to the source of news articles, reports, or other information, Medvedev said. 'We don't need our aides that much today. We can immerse ourselves into information...The time has changed. Whatever I read or President Obama reads, we always have the possibility to go online and see what is happening in reality.'"
FOXNews.com - Taxpayers Foot State Department's Stiff Liquor Bill
FOXNews.com - Taxpayers Foot State Department's Stiff Liquor Bill: "Taxpayer watchdogs say while accounting for a small fraction of the State Department's overall budget, some of the liquor expenditures reflect larger concerns about stewardship of federal tax dollars at a time when many recession-weary Americans find themselves struggling to hold onto jobs and pay mortgages."
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Our View: One vote can make a huge impact | Hudson Star-Observer | Hudson, Wisconsin
Our View: One vote can make a huge impact | Hudson Star-Observer | Hudson, Wisconsin: "Also, keep in mind that if you vote, it gives you right to complain when you are upset with government. We believe that voters who refuse to go to the polls give up the right to complain!"
Are You Dying for a Fix of Burger and Chips? | Patrick Basham and John Luik | Cato Institute: Commentary
Are You Dying for a Fix of Burger and Chips? | Patrick Basham and John Luik | Cato Institute: Commentary: "There are a number of problems with Johnson and Kenny's rat study.
* First, there is the major problem about rat research in general, namely, it is rat research. It proceeds on the unargued-for assumption that conclusions about animal dependency are transferable to issues of human dependency and that any behavioural differences are trivial. But behavioural differences are not trivial. The dominant model of human beings proceeds on the assumption that they, in fact, can resist and, indeed, can act in defiance of compulsive drives. Altered brain circuitry is not destiny, as the empirical evidence about other addictions amply shows.
* The rat study makes the unfounded assumption that overweight and obesity are caused by overeating. The study fails to provide any evidence in support of this assumption and there is considerable evidence against it. One of the major problems about the war on fat is that there isn't much clear evidence about what exactly causes overweight and obesity. For example, studies have shown that obese people do not routinely eat more than the non-obese - something that calls into question the entire relevance of the addicted rat study to the obesity debate.
* The entire idea of addiction cannot be substantiated as a scientific theory since there is no way in which it can be independently established beyond the subjective claims of the addicted individual. Whatever a supposed food addict might claim, there is no scientific way in which his alleged inability to stop eating can be distinguished from the fact that he either does not wish to stop or has not tried hard enough to stop. Indeed, being unwilling to stop or failing in self-discipline to stop is as probable an explanation as being 'addicted'.
* Unlike smoking, where the addicting agent is nicotine, proponents of food addiction fail to specify which particular chemical or combination of chemicals or nutrients is actually addictive. Instead, they make the claim that what is addictive is an entire food category, that is, junk food, or specific nutrients like carbohydrates. The problem is that junk food contains an enormous number of chemicals, as well as proteins, fats and carbohydrates, making it impossible to specify either which individual ingredient or combination of ingredients is supposedly addictive. And this is true of other foods as well.
* There are additional problems with carbohydrates as the supposed source of food addiction. Human, as opposed to rat, studies have found that obese women prefer high carbohydrate and high fat foods while obese men prefer high protein foods. If the cravings — the driver of addiction — of the obese are for foods with carbohydrates, fat and protein, then it is difficult to believe that carbohydrates alone are the addictive substance. Moreover, addiction, rat or human, supposedly involves compulsive cravings, yet carbohydrate consumption does not involve craving. Several studies have shown that supposed carbohydrate addicts do not improve after a carbohydrate-laden meal, which they should do if they are in fact addicted.
* Pharmacological treatments for supposed food addiction do not work, whereas behavioural therapies do. If food addiction were in fact produced through some sort of opioid-like process in the brain, then we would expect that opioid antagonists, which are used to treat drug dependency, would work. But there is no evidence that opioid antagonists prevent food cravings or the desire to overeat.
If addiction is pharmacologically produced, as the authors of the rat study claim, then animals who have been genetically modified so that their neuro-reward networks cannot process an addictive drug should not display addictive behaviours. But a number of studies have shown that this is not the case, as dopamine deficient animals still display so-called addictive behaviours.
* Finally, Johnson and Kenny's claims about food addiction fall apart with their comparison of addiction to junk food to addiction to such drugs as heroin. That's because human beings, unlike rats, are regularly able to escape the so-called addictions to psychoactive substances. The scientific literature is full of studies in which drug users were able, despite their 'addiction', to stop using their drug of choice. For instance, a 1974 study of Vietnam veterans by Leen Robbins found that only 50 per cent of those who used drugs in Vietnam continued using them after returning to the US, and only 12.5 per cent of these became regular users. And in their study on heroin addiction, Gerry Stimson and Edna Oppenheimer found that users of heroin and other substances move through a cycle of addiction and recovery that is inconsistent with the model of pharmacological compulsion and brain circuitry that dictates behaviour."
* First, there is the major problem about rat research in general, namely, it is rat research. It proceeds on the unargued-for assumption that conclusions about animal dependency are transferable to issues of human dependency and that any behavioural differences are trivial. But behavioural differences are not trivial. The dominant model of human beings proceeds on the assumption that they, in fact, can resist and, indeed, can act in defiance of compulsive drives. Altered brain circuitry is not destiny, as the empirical evidence about other addictions amply shows.
* The rat study makes the unfounded assumption that overweight and obesity are caused by overeating. The study fails to provide any evidence in support of this assumption and there is considerable evidence against it. One of the major problems about the war on fat is that there isn't much clear evidence about what exactly causes overweight and obesity. For example, studies have shown that obese people do not routinely eat more than the non-obese - something that calls into question the entire relevance of the addicted rat study to the obesity debate.
* The entire idea of addiction cannot be substantiated as a scientific theory since there is no way in which it can be independently established beyond the subjective claims of the addicted individual. Whatever a supposed food addict might claim, there is no scientific way in which his alleged inability to stop eating can be distinguished from the fact that he either does not wish to stop or has not tried hard enough to stop. Indeed, being unwilling to stop or failing in self-discipline to stop is as probable an explanation as being 'addicted'.
* Unlike smoking, where the addicting agent is nicotine, proponents of food addiction fail to specify which particular chemical or combination of chemicals or nutrients is actually addictive. Instead, they make the claim that what is addictive is an entire food category, that is, junk food, or specific nutrients like carbohydrates. The problem is that junk food contains an enormous number of chemicals, as well as proteins, fats and carbohydrates, making it impossible to specify either which individual ingredient or combination of ingredients is supposedly addictive. And this is true of other foods as well.
* There are additional problems with carbohydrates as the supposed source of food addiction. Human, as opposed to rat, studies have found that obese women prefer high carbohydrate and high fat foods while obese men prefer high protein foods. If the cravings — the driver of addiction — of the obese are for foods with carbohydrates, fat and protein, then it is difficult to believe that carbohydrates alone are the addictive substance. Moreover, addiction, rat or human, supposedly involves compulsive cravings, yet carbohydrate consumption does not involve craving. Several studies have shown that supposed carbohydrate addicts do not improve after a carbohydrate-laden meal, which they should do if they are in fact addicted.
* Pharmacological treatments for supposed food addiction do not work, whereas behavioural therapies do. If food addiction were in fact produced through some sort of opioid-like process in the brain, then we would expect that opioid antagonists, which are used to treat drug dependency, would work. But there is no evidence that opioid antagonists prevent food cravings or the desire to overeat.
If addiction is pharmacologically produced, as the authors of the rat study claim, then animals who have been genetically modified so that their neuro-reward networks cannot process an addictive drug should not display addictive behaviours. But a number of studies have shown that this is not the case, as dopamine deficient animals still display so-called addictive behaviours.
* Finally, Johnson and Kenny's claims about food addiction fall apart with their comparison of addiction to junk food to addiction to such drugs as heroin. That's because human beings, unlike rats, are regularly able to escape the so-called addictions to psychoactive substances. The scientific literature is full of studies in which drug users were able, despite their 'addiction', to stop using their drug of choice. For instance, a 1974 study of Vietnam veterans by Leen Robbins found that only 50 per cent of those who used drugs in Vietnam continued using them after returning to the US, and only 12.5 per cent of these became regular users. And in their study on heroin addiction, Gerry Stimson and Edna Oppenheimer found that users of heroin and other substances move through a cycle of addiction and recovery that is inconsistent with the model of pharmacological compulsion and brain circuitry that dictates behaviour."
The Inhumanity of War | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
The Inhumanity of War | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, recently made an astonishing admission of civilian deaths, so often euphemistically referred to as 'collateral damage.' At a meeting with U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, Gen. McChrystal discussed the problem of shootings at checkpoints: 'We've shot an amazing number of people and killed a number and, to my knowledge, none has proven to have been a real threat to the force.' He added that he knew of no case when 'we have engaged in an escalation of force incident and hurt someone has it turned out that the vehicle had a suicide bomb or weapons in it.'"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)