We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Statists well understand that you don't need a president-for-life if you've got a bureaucracy-for-life. Sometimes your team has to take a time-out for a couple of years, but, even when they do, all the departments and agencies and bureaus are still in place, hyper-regulating away. I mean, how often does the party of small government actually abolish anything?
Masterful, but forget the clever lines. The guy projects an inner confidence and competence, not narcissism. Now I can post this myself, if you haven't listened to this amusing presentation from last night:
NPR reports, “48 percent of the money spent on food in the U.S. today goes to a restaurant, while in 1955, only a quarter of every food dollar was spent in restaurants.”
After the debate it is painfully obvious that Obama has no big (or medium-sized) ideas for a second term. The Bain and tax-return gambits have gone nowhere. Big Bird is now a punch line. So why not throw it all up in the air and see what will fly? That is what Obama and his spinners are doing. The antics are far from coherent, and the message is become more and more fractured. This is what a campaign in decline looks like.
Seems like it, given how embarassingly - insanely - they are behaving. Pure negativity. However, four or five weeks ago Romney was felt to be hopeless. Momentum is going the wrong way for the Dems, and it looks like Bill and Hillary got the memo. (May I ask what Bill Clinton is doing immersed in politics? Isn't it considered infra dig for ex-presidents? Or is he above all rules of decorum, boldly expanding the limits of appropriateness? Hey, Bill - it's a good season for golf and skirt-chasing right now.)
It's a big mystery. It is difficult to find any evidence for anything "before" time and space existed, before "matter" existed.
For my practical purposes, in the beginning was logos - the Word.
Which brings me to my topic of thought and communication as poetry and metaphor. I just completed one of Prof. Robert Sapolsky's Great Courses, Being Human: Life Lessons from the Frontiers of Neuroscience. It's only 2 DVDs, but it is an inspiring introduction.
“Geary . . . succeeds in making the case that metaphor is the meat of language and not a sauce.”
From a Platonic point of view, it's not just the meat of language, it's the meat of thought. Sapolsky says that most communication is the residue of poetry.
“I can’t stand whining,” XXXXXX told Marie Claire. “I can’t stand the kind of paralysis that some people fall into because they’re not happy with the choices they’ve made. You live in a time when there are endless choices … Money certainly helps, and having that kind of financial privilege goes a long way, but you don’t even have to have money for it. But you have to work on yourself … Do something!”
The practical validity of g as a predictor of educational, economic, and social outcomes is more far-ranging and universal than that of any other known psychological variable. The validity of g is greater the greater the complexity of the task.
When I applied to medical school, they gave us an IQ test and a personality-oriented interview (along with the usual exams we all took).
For every kind of task, g is the best single predictor of performance. Not the only, but the "best single" predictor for performance in all life settings (but diligence, adaptability, social skills, judgement, emotional maturity, integrity, collegiality, ability to delay gratification, sports skills, appearance, and all the rest of individual traits and talents and psychological traits obviously matter too, to varying degrees).
The claimed respect held by an organization of Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) anti-Israel California professors toward academic freedom and open exchange of views is contradicted by their actual activities and speech. On November 6, the electorate of California will vote on whether to increase their taxes, against the threat by Governor Brown that the state’s severe deficits will otherwise have to be made up by cuts to education funding. The letter from California Scholars For Academic Freedom and the facts behind it do not argue for taxpayers increasing their taxes in order to fund abusers and deniers of academic freedom.
Thirty-five of the 134 California Scholars For Academic Freedom (CSAF) wrote to each member of the California State Assembly denouncing their unanimous passing of House Resolution 35. As they say:
HR 35 does not create new law, but it calls upon university administrators to deny First Amendment rights to students and faculty. The Assembly resolution states,”[university] leadership from the top remains an important priority so that no administrator, faculty, or student group can be in any doubt that anti-Semitic activity will not be tolerated in the classroom or on campus, and that no public resources will be allowed to be used for anti-Semitic or any intolerant agitation.”
Common wisdom coming into today’s debate was that Obama needed a win to reverse Romney’s momentum, whereas a tie would have been sufficient for Romney to keep capitalizing on the new campaign dynamic. I think that was right. While I think Romney did a bit better than Obama tonight, neither side can point to an obvious, lopsided victory.
The core dynamic here is that Romney has proven himself to be a perfectly acceptable alternative to Obama. The silly portrayal of Romney in all those negative ads has been exploded. Obama’s inevitability is gone. The underlying state of the country, which is not at all good, has become the issue. All of that is bad for Obama and very good for Romney.
For those following the campaign, the Townhall is mostly repeat of talking points. For those who haven't, the collection of talking points may be informative. The questions come from the 82 uncommitted voters from the NY area chosen by Gallup. Their questions reflect a NY perspective, and did not come across as from an uncommitted voter. If it were a slugfest, it goes by slight points to Obama, but Obama fails to score big, still has no second term agenda, and Romney holds own well. Each's supporters got what they wanted. The undecideds? See the reactions below. -- If it were a snooze, we needed more colorful NY-type characters. Probably the most injurious moment to Obama was when a black man who voted for him in 2008 says he has doubts now. Probaly the other most injurious moments to Obama was the number of NY accents and the slant of their questions, a turn off to most of the rest of the country. A draw or slight edge in points won't get Obama re-elected. -- IMHO,post-Townhall fact-checking will expose more Obama falsehoods, which will impact undecideds.
Instapoll/Focus Groups:Fox-Luntz focus group has many 2008 Obama voters switching to Romney. Obama aggressive. Romney hammers on Obama's failures. Very fact-based. ---- CBS instapoll: Obama 37%, Romney 30%, Tie 33%; 65% say Romney won on economy, 35% Obama ; CNN 48% not persuaded to either, 25% to each, Obama spent 49% of time attacking, much less by Romney, Romney favored 58% on economy, 49% on healthcare, 59% on deficits, 61% say Obama does not offer clear plan for solving country's problems, otherwise the poll details are largely down the middle, overall 46% Obama, 39% Romney but the details lean Romney. That will tell in the post-Townhall fact-checking.
Round One, Jobs: Both promise jobs in the future. Romney has experience creating jobs. Obama has had 4-years not doing so.
Round Two, Energy: Obama says oil imports lowest in 20-years. Doesn't mention depressed economy uses less. Romney points out that all increases in production on private land and despite federal interference and opposition. Obama interrupts Romney repeatedly, showing his inner-Biden. Finally, Romney tells Obama to let him finish speaking. Obama lies and lies.
Round Three, Taxes: Romney will not raise taxes on middle class, and will broaden tax base. Obama channels his inner Occupy, and his Big Bird. Romney says Obama takes US on road to Greece. Candy Crowley keeps interrupting, expected.
The admissions officers seem to believe that those planning to attend college view it largely as a signaling device that directs the best and brightest young Americans to the best and highest-paying jobs. It is not primarily about acquiring knowledge ("human capital"), critical learning or leadership skills, or better perceiving the difference between right and wrong, but more about achieving the American Dream of a comfortable, moderately affluent
Frank Rich: The Tea Party Will Win in the End - This is a nation that loathes government and always has. Liberals should not be deluded: The Goldwater revolution will ultimately triumph, regardless of what happens in November.
The Politics of Impatience - For Michael Grunwald, the president’s vision matters more than his results.
That is, jury makes decision before completion of the argument. Whoever came up with this idea? Why not make voting year-round? In my opinion, no early voting. Election Day is Election Day. Show up, or don't vote. Absentee voting only for those overseas. Very simple.
If you're at your vacation place, too bad. If you're a lazy jerk, too bad. Show up on election day with your ID and vote as we have always done. It's an American ritual.
The VFW Magazine for October 2012 has an interesting article about the veterans vote.
Veterans alone make up some 13% of the population and historically they register their opinions at the ballot box. In 2008, they accounted for 15% of all voters, a bloc larger than single men (14%), blacks (13%) or Hispanics (9%).
Active duty troops, though, were less likely to vote. Only 29% of them cast ballots in the 2010 midterm elections, compared to 46% of eligible voters.
According to exit polls, in 2004, Bush led Kerry by 16% among veterans, in 2008 McCain led Obama by 10% among veterans. According to Gallup, in 2012, Romney leads Obama by 24% among veterans.
Wonder why there's been complaints about some localities not energetically following through on getting absentee ballots out to those on active duty? For examples, the Romney campaign today filed suit in Wisconsin to ensure that all absentee military ballots are counted, after at least 30 Wisconsin municipalities failed to send overseas ballots 45 days before the election, which is required under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voter Act (UOCAVA). In Michigan, there's a similar state suit against 24 townships and cities. Similar lowjinks in Vermont. More here. Democrat voting boards?
It's 
ADMISSIONS OFFICER: 
It's actually about general intelligence, aka "g," of which IQ is a standard measure. 
Commenter at Ace's 
