Wow, what started as a somewhat interesting post devolved into paranoid lefty ranting pretty quickly. Just as many homophobes have never met a gay person, this guy reads like he’s never met a Republican.
Today’s GOP has a visceral distrust of scientists for the same reason that it has a visceral distrust of the “lamestream media†(particularly deeply reported news organizations like The New York Times), teachers, organized labor, regulatory agencies, National Public Radio, and protest movements that are have not been astroturfed for Fox News’ cameras by Koch Industries: They’re not with the program, whatever this week’s program might be — more windfalls to Big Oil, justifying torture, or floating amendments to officially brand gay people as second-class citizens.
1. Fuck. Off.
2. It’s pretty embarrassing that an academic journal like PLoS would host this on its site and it does a serious disservice to the open publishing movement.
3. “Diverse Perspectives on Science and Medicine” is a tagline I bet they’ll have trouble living up to if they mean “ideological” diversity.
What you quote seems like an accurate description of the current political situation to me. Clearly (at least) one of us is blinded by our ideological leanings. I’m not sure what else there is to say.
As to your second point, I disagree even more strongly. The notion that science is best served by somehow keeping it above the fray of politics (or “partisan politics”) seems laughably naive.
There are ways to make his points with evidence rather than the broad brushstroke accusations that look like they’d be better suited for balloon juice.
I’m not saying sciencists should be above the fray, but a little less hysteria would go a long way. It’s one thing to be political, or even partisan, but to be nakedly hysterical is stupid.
I think a problem here is that many traditional conservatives would like to continue to identify themselves as Republicans, despite the fact that the GOP policy apparatus has been thoroughly usurped by the Faithful Know-Nothings, remarkably in service to the vastly monied few.
I grew up in a Republican household, and understood what it meant — personal responsibility, high value for education and science, rational (vs. sentimental) thinking, investment in infrastructure, private sector bias, strong defense, etc. This bunch would be barely recognizable to that edition of the Grand Old Party.
I wonder how long the traditional conservatives will continue to hold their noses? It’s clear that Obama won’t have to move far to capture the “middle,” which may not be such a good descriptor anymore. I think it includes that group of traditional conservatives who are/should be scared shyteless of the implications of a Palin/Perry/Pawlenty/Bachmann-type ticket. I don’t think Romney stands a snowball’s chance of being nominated because of both the Masscare thing and The Faithful’s distrust his religion. Maybe he’ll run anyway and give those TCs a reason to vote?
The meaning of life is not so much found, as it is Made. -- Opus
Especially if it’s to make room for someone who seems to truly be the other “F” word (as opposed to being the victim of freak collisions popularly misrepresented as fragility).
There's a wild thing in the woolshed and it's keeping me awake at night.
Yeah, could just be some minor league depth in exchange for someone who was about to be the odd man out in the bullpen.
It wasn’t clear to me why we wanted Purcey in the first place. And still isn’t.
we have a minor-league track record of well over 2000 plate appearances to go along with scouting reports that consistently say that this is not some kind of 4-A mistake hitter. Clearly he had worn out his welcome in Detroit, but he could end up quite the find for Oakland as a potential .280 hitter with plenty of doubles, a fair share of walks, and 10-12 home runs annually.
There is really no logic in the deal for the Tigers, as between Daniel Schlereth, Adam Wilk, and Charlie Furbush, they have plenty of capable left-handers in their bullpen, and merely being capable is the best they could hope for from Purcey. This is a case of a team getting too frustrated too soon with a prospect struggling in the big leagues, and Oakland swooped in on Friday afternoon to take advantage of the situation.
Everyone’s mocking this for the large type, but the motivation for that seems obvious to me.
OTOH, Drum haz a smart.
OTOH, Drum haz a stupid.
(It’s impossible to square this with his Yglesian anti-frequent-shopper-card obsession, isn’t it?)
Seems like maids should get the same security protection afforded to cabbies (one of the suggestions).
I think this may be how Kz got his job.
“Perhaps after 34 years it’s time for us to confess that we invented cello scrotum.”
I’m getting warmer.
salb8
Wow, what started as a somewhat interesting post devolved into paranoid lefty ranting pretty quickly. Just as many homophobes have never met a gay person, this guy reads like he’s never met a Republican.
It’s paranoid ranting to say people are anti-science just because they go around attacking science and the very notion of objective truth?
1. Fuck. Off.
2. It’s pretty embarrassing that an academic journal like PLoS would host this on its site and it does a serious disservice to the open publishing movement.
3. “Diverse Perspectives on Science and Medicine” is a tagline I bet they’ll have trouble living up to if they mean “ideological” diversity.
What you quote seems like an accurate description of the current political situation to me. Clearly (at least) one of us is blinded by our ideological leanings. I’m not sure what else there is to say.
As to your second point, I disagree even more strongly. The notion that science is best served by somehow keeping it above the fray of politics (or “partisan politics”) seems laughably naive.
There are ways to make his points with evidence rather than the broad brushstroke accusations that look like they’d be better suited for balloon juice.
I’m not saying sciencists should be above the fray, but a little less hysteria would go a long way. It’s one thing to be political, or even partisan, but to be nakedly hysterical is stupid.
I think a problem here is that many traditional conservatives would like to continue to identify themselves as Republicans, despite the fact that the GOP policy apparatus has been thoroughly usurped by the Faithful Know-Nothings, remarkably in service to the vastly monied few.
I grew up in a Republican household, and understood what it meant — personal responsibility, high value for education and science, rational (vs. sentimental) thinking, investment in infrastructure, private sector bias, strong defense, etc. This bunch would be barely recognizable to that edition of the Grand Old Party.
I wonder how long the traditional conservatives will continue to hold their noses? It’s clear that Obama won’t have to move far to capture the “middle,” which may not be such a good descriptor anymore. I think it includes that group of traditional conservatives who are/should be scared shyteless of the implications of a Palin/Perry/Pawlenty/Bachmann-type ticket. I don’t think Romney stands a snowball’s chance of being nominated because of both the Masscare thing and The Faithful’s distrust his religion. Maybe he’ll run anyway and give those TCs a reason to vote?
I’m tellin’ ya, Obama/Huntsman ’12.
No chance.
Just filed an amicus brief in support of Judge Walker. Today is a good day.
Very cool indeed.
Good on you.
Yay!
Nevermoor amicuses Judge Walker! Hopefully you’re keeping this on the down low from mrs. nevermoor.
Well, that’s BASF. I just helped them express their amicosity.
Yesterday was a nice day for A’s prospects:
Choice went 3-4 with a double
Taylor went 3-5 with a HR
Weeks went
oops, little premature there. Weeks went 2-4 with a walk.
I almost like it better the other way.
I definitely liked it better the other way.
It’s going to be hard to let go of our dear sweet Dakotan.
Especially if it’s to make room for someone who seems to truly be the other “F” word (as opposed to being the victim of freak collisions popularly misrepresented as fragility).
Brenly for manager.
Uh … who? What?
Purcey -> Tigers for 2b/3b Scott Sizemore
Looks
pretty Quad-Alike an A’s infielder to me.Purcey traded for Scott Sizemore
Take that John Baarda Sr.
This has got to mean that either Kz or Andyman is gone, right? Or … Ellis?
Whoever they can trade for a half-dozen baseballs.
he’s going to AAA. Not clear what the plan is.
Yeah, could just be some minor league depth in exchange for someone who was about to be the odd man out in the bullpen.
It wasn’t clear to me why we wanted Purcey in the first place. And still isn’t.
I still think it is all a cunning plan to piss off John Baarda Sr.
KG on Sizemore:
I like this part the best:
Yeah. That sounds about right (I’ll trust the scouts over my B-R scan as to AAAA vs. potential).
Purcey is nothing to give up at all.
Between Charlie Furbush is one of the lost underground porno Judy Blume books.
/came here to see what MB would do with that name.
/leaving satisfied.
TWJBS
Re Kz: Not quite. He’s still not in the lineup today. The A’s are still quite intent on playing short handed.
Yeah. I got this one.
{hangs head in shame}
Seriously, I totally failed that one.
42/83.
Don’t mind me, I’ll be off trying to re-earn my “geek” stamp.
You did better than I did.
I got all the filler words — the, of, a, an…
Same. And obvious things like “death” and “star,” which prompted me to also guess “weapon”…
50/83 largely because of filler words and stringing together certain phrases…
Good, then we can still be friends…
It was kind of dirty to not start with the galaxy far far away part.
Definitely. Threw me off my game.
46.
This reads like an exasperated editor spent 30 hours editing Christina Kahrl’s piece down from the original 40,000-word submission.
Sizemore–>3B
Oh Jesus, I hope one of you FKers didn’t post this a year ago. I’m so excited to post it here. Via Noava/Cody on **.
SSSSS: 5 BB in 2 games