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.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Monday, February 18. 2013
Four out of every five animals on Earth is a nematode.
Primates are fancified nematodes, and humans are fancified worms with legs and a spark of God.
Is the meaning of life the pursuit of sloth?
Not for us Yankees. We work 'til we drop.
It's high time for a Coolidge revival
The Real Problem with Gentrification - A phenomenon that revived cities can also make them monotonous
Germany And Spain Throw Green Energy Under the Bus
Mort Zuckerman: "America Remains In A Jobs Depression"
I don't care about Repubs. I want Conservatives.
The protesters want the Keystone Pipeline blocked in the United States so that Canada can send the oil to China.
Barone: Obama’s Gangster Government - The president has repeatedly shown he thinks himself above the law.
A nation of Chicago.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I think it might be of interest to MF readers to see how much research is being done in the academic community regarding the subject of communication; everything from 'Big Data' to a science of the impact of 'comments' is being studied. The subject of mobbing and social networks is just now starting to become public.
Here is one piece (please check for permission to post first)
If I understand your comment about "mobbing" to mean many academics, terrified about losing their jobs/worthwhile, gather social media to verify how they are truly valued? I get you.
It's the same thing as waking up this morning to find that counties across the nation are seeking Federal Disaster Funds in light of snow storms that have incapacitated them during a period of Global Warming.
Gentrification...Problems with. Simply stated you can't go back to something that never existed, rather one can continue what was. My personal example is the Crescent Hill neighborhood in Louisville, Ky. In 1900 it was a mixed neighborhood with small houses on one block, large ones next, White blocks, then Black blocks. In 2013 it is nearly the same with a few of the large houses converted to apartments and some large lots built with apartments, but for the most part the ethnic and socioeconomic mix remains the same.
Is the purpose of life sloth?
I sure hope so, but I’m not going to do anything about it.
so Canada can send the oil to China
The oil will end up where it is wanted. Obamunists want to destroy America; Greens want to end industrial society—together they are a majority of Americans. Neither wants oil
"Republicans will lead again"
I seriously doubt it.
Among the beliefs listed, they forgot to mention that they believe when the negotiations turn difficult, it is best to cave in on every principle the party claims to "believe" in. They can believe anything they wish. Standing firm on one's beliefs is quite different from just repeating them like a mantra.
There is a reason why they are now referred to as Dead Elephants.
OK, I'm going to risk this:
Why do so many educated, thoughtful, experienced, seasoned, witty, multi-tasking, entrepreneurial, hardworking contributors to MF take the time and space to reply to Zachriel?
Zach adds something. Like Coombs did on Hannity. It's OK with me.
I have no problem with Zach posting here. My social set and neighbors include Emma Goldman anarchist types, Bill-Ayres-is-an-OK-guy-from-the-neighborhood advocates, way too many overly-educated academics who have never entered their local public school, lots of financial gurus now sneaking into Costco, a few with tons of guns who regularly sojourn to the wilds for "camping" experience, a Cuban and Mexican who argue about which culture speaks the most educated form of Spanish, a few Christian Palestinians who play poker with a former Jewish F.B.I. agent and a Chinese surgeon (I just wish they'd argue about who cheats whom in English)...you get my gist. Debate is the smorgasbord of life.
I just don't understand the enjoyment of arguing with his points of view.
Zach appears to be my personal frustration. Mea culpa.
I remember a time when a few individuals like Zachriel began to dominate the discussion threads at Don Surber's wonderful blog. Eventually, when a tipping point was reached and those long exchanges came to overwhelm almost everything else, I figured it wasn't worthwhile going there to look, much less to post. As far as MF is concerned, when the threads with Zachriel appear, I either scroll over them or else stop visiting until the avalanche of back-and-forth comments subsides. Another option is to get deeply involved in the discussion, which some people enjoy for the repartee. To each his own.
If you are at all interested, you might Google "Zachriel" and if you then dumpster dive into the links you will notice that he/they have been banned from posting by at least one blogger in the recent past for the same behavior he/they display at MF. Make of that what you choose, I'm just sayin'.
Thanks. I'll just breathe deeply and move on as you suggest.
I read blogs widely across the political spectrum. I most appreciate the ones where people with opposing viewpoints are noticeably present and presenting their side of the argument. It is far too easy to become an echo-chamber where we reassure ourselves that our side is right, without ever confronting the fact that people on the other side came to their opposite conclusion through logic and the information available to them. If we don't know their arguments, then we don't really understand the issue.
as a liberal tool representative, Z and others like him prevent forums like this from choir/preaching by forcing conservatives to respond to moderately coherent criticism and opposing view points, all the while allowing a circle-the-wagons mentality (us true american patriots against those commie heathens) which itself isn't healthy.
gods forbid the day comes when you get a bona fide conservative who will call BS on some of the cherished assumptions and beliefs of the conservative movement itself when BS needs to be called.
If we don't know their arguments, then we don't really understand the issue.
Exactly. It's crucial to really understand contrary arguments; you know what you have to argue against, and it helps you better understand the strengths and weaknesses of your own positions. You might even change your mind!!
When somebody's trying to convince me that I should take x position over y, especially on a subject I don't know much about, a good way to gauge that somebody's real understanding of the issue is to ask them to give the best arguments they know that their position is in fact wrong. Then see what they come up with.
If they can't really articulate the contrary argument, or it sounds like a squad of hastily stuffed straw men, it tells you that they might not really know what they're talking about.
How do you know you're right, if you haven't looked into why you're not wrong?
If they come up with a credible counter-argument, and why their position is superior, it shows you they have put at least some thought into the issue. Also, if you don't know much about the subject, it gives you a starting point to go and investigate the issue yourself.
PFffff, I agree with you JMA. I just end up feeling embarrassed for the guy. He spend a paragraph trying to sound smart and just showed he had no common sense (doesn't know what a significant figure is). Or that post about Archimedes' principal. Glad he kinda knows what it is but I'd flunk him on the exam. Couldn't even re-construct what I thought he might be trying to say. Yes so ice is less dense than water. So was he trying to say that if some ice fell of a glacier and SUNK to the bottom it would cause a rise due to it having volume? I suppose, but then how did it sink? More so than an equivalent weight of water if it were melt? Or was he saying the body of water got cold enough to freeze from the bottom. Not sure that's a practical argument either (there's a pressure component to take into account - the weight of water plus atmospheric will show where you land on the phase diagram) but then you could argue that the ice is less dense so it takes up more room causing a rise in water level. Then again he was talking about the weight part of the equation and glaciers so maybe he was trying to say you can discount the displacement volume of ice dropped into water that floats vs the sinking iceberg by aprox 10%? It hurts to even try to figure out what he was trying to saying. I hope as he continues to post he'll become a better scientist with well reasoned, thoroughly thought out and accurate arguments.
Wow... Mr. Heilbrunn did not even attempt to hide his contempt for conservative ideals, Republicans, and the political Right. I'm surprised he got through the piece without mention of the Tea Party...
So, ever find yourself hoping history repeats itself? As Coolidge followed the abomination of Woodrow Wilson, who can we hope will follow the ObamaNation era?
As a result of the expansion of the internet, mobbing has gone from being an organized attack on an individual by multiple people within the confines of the workplace, to being an organized attack on an individual on the internet as well as in the physical workplace. A huge expansion of the powers of organized assault that no one in academia yet really wants to discuss openly. But, some are beginning to acknowledge that it does exist, and guess what? Now, we can see that a few are even getting federal research monies to study the problem! Link here:
BD: Please advise as to whether or not it is ok to publish the links to Chronicle of Higher Education articles. Thank you.
Did I miss something? Has anyone here received their federal tax forms yet? Is our enlightened government going to set the date back to accommodate for the delay in releasing the new instruction booklet?
Does a country have to be perfectly, ideally Libertarian to count as a Libertarian country? This country is the most Libertarian ever to be founded, and has been phenomenally successful for exactly that reason. It's dragged much of the rest of the world along in that direction, sometimes kicking and screaming, and resulted in their increased success as well.
With all this highfaluting talk about liberals, conservatives and communications, I'd....
Oh- Shiny Object!!!!