Argh, I can't believe I wasted 20+ minutes on that Nation article, which might as well have been written in 2006 (since nothing in it has been new since then). How is it that the mainstream media response to New Atheism remains so weak? It's such an easy target, too.
I feel compelled to point out that Smith's version is significantly better, and this just sounds like a sort of half-assed cover. It doesn't really reinterpret it, it just slows it down (likely because playing it as fast as Smith does is pretty difficult).
Also that every time I hear Smith, I get sad at the thought of how he went out.
"it sometimes feels like there is an undercurrent of “the point of the education system is to provide jobs and job security to teachers and their associated assistants."
It's true, teachers unions do lobby for smaller class sizes, but again, this is largely limited by the factors I mentioned before. Prison populations are, effectively, unlimited in size.
By the way, if lobbying for smaller class sizes is the comparison, then I'm not going to complain. That results in teachers looking pretty good.
Unlike most public sector unions, the CCPOA has essentially created its industry. Most unions, public or otherwise, are fiercely protective of the jobs of their members, but in most cases, creating new jobs through legislation and policy is beyond their power, at least on a large scale (as in the case of the CCPOA).
The number of teachers, for example, is largely limited by the number of students and the number of schools that a state/municipality can afford, and there's not a whole hell of a lot that teachers unions can do to increase the numbers of students (though they can lobby for increased property taxes). If we analogized teachers unions to prison guard unions, then teachers would be lobbying for increased regulations on abortions and birth control so that there would be more children to teach, and therefore a need for more teachers.
Tim's spot on here, even if he doesn't understand what unions are for (as he's shown in previous posts). But then, the California prison guards union is pretty low hanging fruit. Hell, even labor-centric lefties hate them.
As long as Tims' not using this to make points about unions in general, or even about public sector unions, his connection to the almost parody site UnionWatch is irrelevant.
Prison reform may not be a big political issue for liberals, but it tends to be for the actual left. And it will always be in the interest of prison guards to prevent reform.
Mike, if anti-abortion violence is less common than many liberals think, it is certainly much more common than the vast majority of conservatives think:
It's not a coincidence that most clinics that provide abortion require escorts for employees and patients, to go along with expensive security. Threats are pretty much constant, and violence is all too common.
Tom, apparently you don't know how to follow a link. Since it debunks both of your claims, namely that the research shows harm and that the APA removed its claim to the contrary, I think I've done quite enough.
Tom, I provided you with a link that summarizes the entire literature. It finds something quite different than what your one source does. But because your one source agrees with you, you're going to stick with it, through thick and thin, because you couldn't handle the literature saying anything else. Good on ya, man. We each have to get by as best we can. It's just a shame that the truth gets trampled so often in the process.
Oh, you mean you weren't the one who wrote, "The Left suddenly turn into dopplegangers of libertarians?"
Oh wait, you were the one who wrote that. I stand by what I said. You can say you understand where liberals are coming from on a particularly issue. Hell, you may actually understand where they're coming from on a particular issue. But if you think it's somehow out of character for them to come from that place on that issue, when they come from somewhere else on every (or most) other issues, which the "suddenly turn into" seems to imply, then you sure as hell don't understand liberals.
Elias, I don't see a need for "incentivizing" doctors and nurses to learn and perform abortions, if doing so is both safe for the practitioners and not a form of career suicide. And I see it being both safe and not a form of career suicide if the laws are enforced and the government actually targets anti-abortion violence.
That last bit does require money, and if that's what you mean by the government funding, or subsidizing, abortion, then I'm all for it.
This only applies in or current system, of course. I'm actually for a single-payer system, in which the government would of course pay for abortion services. But I don't think that's the conversation we're having.
The Left suddenly turn into dopplegangers of libertarians and start talking about the importance of personal liberty in the face of troublesome social questions.
It never ceases to amuse me that libertarians' views of liberals are as off base as liberals' are of them. I remember thinking, at one point, that Amanda Marcotte's views of libertarians were so completely divorced from reality that one would think she'd never actually encountered one, even in text. Then I see libertarians, who've encountered many a liberal, act like liberals are all radical statists who are convinced that the government can and should solve every problem, and I realize it has nothing to do with contact. It's simply an unwillingness to understand those with whom you disagree, likely because arguing against straw targets is much easier and more fulfilling.
I don't see why government funding of abortion would be necessary. I do think government enforcement of laws is necessary, and that it's necessary to combat systematic intimidation, to the point of terrorism, against abortion providers. The problem of access, right now, has little to do with funding, and a great deal to do with the fact that it's difficult to build clinics that perform abortions, much less to find doctors and nurses who are brave enough to perform them. Hell, if you've ever been to an abortion clinic in a conservative area of the country, you know it's difficult to even get into an abortion clinic without being harassed and threatened. The solution is to protect providers, not to fund them. Well, that and to make laws like the one just passed in Texas requiring a sonogram and a waiting period (that's small government conservatism for you, eh?) go away.
Tom, as someone who's deeply, deeply concerned, to the point of paranoia, about ideological bias, one would think you'd look up the study and the APA's position on it before quoting an anti-choice (or pro-life, whatever) site. The APA has never changed their tune on abortion and psychological harm, because they've reviewed all of the literature:
No. Lebron left in the prime of his career, Favre at the end of his. The Packers had drafted Favre's replacement. The Cavs couldn't replace Lebron, and suffered an historically bad season. Plus, Lebron left them live on ESPN. Cavs fans were piiiiiiissed. Favre was bad; Lebron was much, much worse, for the fans he left.
I can't think of any type of surgery that isn't "ugly and gruesome." I can't imagine that's a good reason to think one way or the other about abortion. It's a shame that's the tactic so many anti-choicers have taken.
That said, I don't see abortion becoming illegal ever in this country, even if restrictions on it become more and more intrusive (as the recent law passed in Texas, say. Reproductive freedom is economic freedom for women, and ultimately, that will trump religious misogyny.
Bob, like I said, give me some data, by which I mean any evidence of any kind. Since you can't, I'm just going to keep pointing out that you are the one flinging poo. But fling on, brother. I know it helps you feel better.
On “A New Political Dialectic”
Argh, I can't believe I wasted 20+ minutes on that Nation article, which might as well have been written in 2006 (since nothing in it has been new since then). How is it that the mainstream media response to New Atheism remains so weak? It's such an easy target, too.
On “What the hell is going on?”
I feel compelled to point out that Smith's version is significantly better, and this just sounds like a sort of half-assed cover. It doesn't really reinterpret it, it just slows it down (likely because playing it as fast as Smith does is pretty difficult).
Also that every time I hear Smith, I get sad at the thought of how he went out.
Also too, in addition.
"
Wait, UB40's getting back to gether? Oh my god... oh my god!
On “The Role of the Prison Guards Union in California’s Troubled Prison System”
"it sometimes feels like there is an undercurrent of “the point of the education system is to provide jobs and job security to teachers and their associated assistants."
That's an odd feeling to have.
"
It's true, teachers unions do lobby for smaller class sizes, but again, this is largely limited by the factors I mentioned before. Prison populations are, effectively, unlimited in size.
By the way, if lobbying for smaller class sizes is the comparison, then I'm not going to complain. That results in teachers looking pretty good.
"
Unlike most public sector unions, the CCPOA has essentially created its industry. Most unions, public or otherwise, are fiercely protective of the jobs of their members, but in most cases, creating new jobs through legislation and policy is beyond their power, at least on a large scale (as in the case of the CCPOA).
The number of teachers, for example, is largely limited by the number of students and the number of schools that a state/municipality can afford, and there's not a whole hell of a lot that teachers unions can do to increase the numbers of students (though they can lobby for increased property taxes). If we analogized teachers unions to prison guard unions, then teachers would be lobbying for increased regulations on abortions and birth control so that there would be more children to teach, and therefore a need for more teachers.
"
Tim's spot on here, even if he doesn't understand what unions are for (as he's shown in previous posts). But then, the California prison guards union is pretty low hanging fruit. Hell, even labor-centric lefties hate them.
As long as Tims' not using this to make points about unions in general, or even about public sector unions, his connection to the almost parody site UnionWatch is irrelevant.
"
To be fair, Unionwatch is pretty fishin' bad. It reads like satire, almost... almost.
"
I think that was a movie or a book or something.
"
This is, I feel like pointing out, something that the "left" has noticed as well:
http://crookedtimber.org/2011/06/03/more-on-the-us-prison-system/
Prison reform may not be a big political issue for liberals, but it tends to be for the actual left. And it will always be in the interest of prison guards to prevent reform.
On “Questions about abortion become less complicated as long as you refuse to recognize that they’re complicated”
Mike, if anti-abortion violence is less common than many liberals think, it is certainly much more common than the vast majority of conservatives think:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/1998/summer/anti-abortion-violence
It's not a coincidence that most clinics that provide abortion require escorts for employees and patients, to go along with expensive security. Threats are pretty much constant, and violence is all too common.
"
Tom, apparently you don't know how to follow a link. Since it debunks both of your claims, namely that the research shows harm and that the APA removed its claim to the contrary, I think I've done quite enough.
"
Tom, I provided you with a link that summarizes the entire literature. It finds something quite different than what your one source does. But because your one source agrees with you, you're going to stick with it, through thick and thin, because you couldn't handle the literature saying anything else. Good on ya, man. We each have to get by as best we can. It's just a shame that the truth gets trampled so often in the process.
"
Oh, you mean you weren't the one who wrote, "The Left suddenly turn into dopplegangers of libertarians?"
Oh wait, you were the one who wrote that. I stand by what I said. You can say you understand where liberals are coming from on a particularly issue. Hell, you may actually understand where they're coming from on a particular issue. But if you think it's somehow out of character for them to come from that place on that issue, when they come from somewhere else on every (or most) other issues, which the "suddenly turn into" seems to imply, then you sure as hell don't understand liberals.
"
Elias, I don't see a need for "incentivizing" doctors and nurses to learn and perform abortions, if doing so is both safe for the practitioners and not a form of career suicide. And I see it being both safe and not a form of career suicide if the laws are enforced and the government actually targets anti-abortion violence.
That last bit does require money, and if that's what you mean by the government funding, or subsidizing, abortion, then I'm all for it.
This only applies in or current system, of course. I'm actually for a single-payer system, in which the government would of course pay for abortion services. But I don't think that's the conversation we're having.
"
The Left suddenly turn into dopplegangers of libertarians and start talking about the importance of personal liberty in the face of troublesome social questions.
It never ceases to amuse me that libertarians' views of liberals are as off base as liberals' are of them. I remember thinking, at one point, that Amanda Marcotte's views of libertarians were so completely divorced from reality that one would think she'd never actually encountered one, even in text. Then I see libertarians, who've encountered many a liberal, act like liberals are all radical statists who are convinced that the government can and should solve every problem, and I realize it has nothing to do with contact. It's simply an unwillingness to understand those with whom you disagree, likely because arguing against straw targets is much easier and more fulfilling.
"
I don't see why government funding of abortion would be necessary. I do think government enforcement of laws is necessary, and that it's necessary to combat systematic intimidation, to the point of terrorism, against abortion providers. The problem of access, right now, has little to do with funding, and a great deal to do with the fact that it's difficult to build clinics that perform abortions, much less to find doctors and nurses who are brave enough to perform them. Hell, if you've ever been to an abortion clinic in a conservative area of the country, you know it's difficult to even get into an abortion clinic without being harassed and threatened. The solution is to protect providers, not to fund them. Well, that and to make laws like the one just passed in Texas requiring a sonogram and a waiting period (that's small government conservatism for you, eh?) go away.
"
Tom, as someone who's deeply, deeply concerned, to the point of paranoia, about ideological bias, one would think you'd look up the study and the APA's position on it before quoting an anti-choice (or pro-life, whatever) site. The APA has never changed their tune on abortion and psychological harm, because they've reviewed all of the literature:
http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/index.aspx
Anyway, I always enjoy when you show that your concerns for bias go only one way. Thanks.
On “Lebron James Is Only What You Want Him To Be”
Welcome back, Heidi.
"
No. Lebron left in the prime of his career, Favre at the end of his. The Packers had drafted Favre's replacement. The Cavs couldn't replace Lebron, and suffered an historically bad season. Plus, Lebron left them live on ESPN. Cavs fans were piiiiiiissed. Favre was bad; Lebron was much, much worse, for the fans he left.
"
Them's fighting word.
On “Somalia and Binary Thinking”
I can't think of any type of surgery that isn't "ugly and gruesome." I can't imagine that's a good reason to think one way or the other about abortion. It's a shame that's the tactic so many anti-choicers have taken.
That said, I don't see abortion becoming illegal ever in this country, even if restrictions on it become more and more intrusive (as the recent law passed in Texas, say. Reproductive freedom is economic freedom for women, and ultimately, that will trump religious misogyny.
On “The Limits of Knowledge in the Education Debate”
Bob, like I said, give me some data, by which I mean any evidence of any kind. Since you can't, I'm just going to keep pointing out that you are the one flinging poo. But fling on, brother. I know it helps you feel better.
"
Bob, in otherwords, you have nothing to back your assertion. That's pretty much the definition of flinging poo.
"
Bob, can you provide some data? Otherwise, I'm pretty sure I'm not the one flinging poo in this case.
But then again, you have absolutely no idea what a socialist or communist is, so flinging poo is par for the course.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.