Sunday, February 24, 2013

Why ‘ARGO’ Will Win Best Picture Hands Down

What film will walk away with top honors tonight?  My own pick is 'ARGO’ (produced by George Clooney & Ben Affleck) to win the ‘Best Picture'. You can make book on it. Having seen the movie back in October, I told my wife that the early setup-background sequence alone was worth the price of admission. It showed what few Americans know, that the subsequent hostage crisis, as well as the more recent upheavals (including Iran going for its own A-weapon) are all a result of early U.S. interference – namely deposing Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953. (Mossadegh was removed from power in a coup on 19 August 1953, organized and carried out by the CIA  at the request of the British MI6 which chose Iranian General Fazlollah Zahedi to succeed Mossadegh.)


Until one grasps that background it’s impossible to understand either the Iran Hostage crisis or subsequent events, including the Iran-Contra conspiracy, and the current nuclear impasse.

The movie itself brought back the tense period (over 1979-80) of the 52 American hostages, held 444 days by Shi’ite zealots at the U.S. Embassy in Iran. It also brought back memories of what led to that dire standoff, and what nasty deals followed in its wake, including the Iran-Contra conspiracy. In the latter, money from the sales of the arms to Iran was  funneled into Nicaragua to support the Rightist “Contras’, a violation of the then Boland Amendment, and basically exposing the Reagan administration’s covert support for paramilitary activities conducted against the Sandinista government. Reagan used Oillie North (another former Marine knothead) and others to act as "cut outs" to expedite it, then sought to cover it up. As noted on p. 56 of The Iran –Contra Report:


“The federal conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 371, states that ‘it is a crime to conspire to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose’”


For all these reasons of historical attention, as well as the comedic undertones (with Alan Arkin, John Goodman as movie director, producer) 'ARGO'  deserves the award.

Originally, I believed ‘ARGO’ might lose out to ‘Lincoln’ based on a recent Salon.com article that claimed the movie’s final scenes, e.g. with the Revolutionary Guards- armed with Kalashnikovs- chasing the departing plane, were fictitious. But then ‘Lincoln’ was exposed as having its own historical issues, when critics pointed out the inaccurate portrayal of two Connecticut reps voting against the 13th amendment. They had actually voted for it!  (Tony Kushner admitted to changing history in order to make the final House vote closer, hence more dramatic. Bad move, Tony!)


This controversy offset immediately made ‘ARGO’ the favorite, especially after having won a slew of other awards (e.g. Golden Globe) .

So, I am going with ‘ARGO’ as Best Picture.


Meanwhile, I predict Spielberg will win Best Director for ‘Lincoln’, adding to his two earlier history-based Oscars (for ‘Saving Private Ryan’ and ‘Schindler’s List’). Meanwhile, it’s a given that Daniel Day Lewis will win Best Actor for his role as Lincoln, squeaky voice and all.


Best Actress had me wondering, until I saw ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ and Jessica Chastain’s performance as ‘Maya’ – the CIA prodigy who exposed the final hideout of Osama bin Laden. So now, I am going with her. (Though the Hollywood cognoscenti have Emmanuelle Riva  ('Amour') winning it because of her advanced years, and she may not get another shot. Fair enough!)


The other awards are more difficult to parse and predict, but we will see. It ought to be an enjoyable evening for movie lovers, and I’ve already got the pizza and beer on order, with extra food in case the show goes late!

Mikey: ‘My Past Violence Shows I Ain’t No Hater!'

Welcome
“I’ve bashed in more heads in two years than Copernicus has in a lifetime!’  - “Pastor” Mike

It’s sad to behold the mental deterioration in a sibling, even one with whom you’re at perpetual loggerheads. In one of the most bizarre blog posts ever to appear on blogspot, brother Mikey rails against any accusations he’s a hater, while documenting almost every brawl, gang fight, motorcycle gang altercation and bar fight he’s ever been in. Says the belligerent Mikey:


“I been in more bat and bottle fights in two years than that wuss Copernicus has been in his whole life!”

Hey, bro! I BELIEVE it! It could account for your brain damage and failure to process even basic information! We already know repeated blows on the head lead to neural processing issues in the prefrontal cortex. Look at all the football players who’ve gone off the rails, some even killing themselves, after taking years of head hits! (E.g. Dave Duerson, Junior Seau).


Anyway, Mikey regales us with almost every fight he’s been in since high school and before, even recounting sibling battles in the distant past and arriving at the presumption (perhaps because of his dementia) that I was “spoiled” and “given everything I wanted”.


Hmmmm….methinks his sibling rivalry issues merit a visit to a therp, or at least some meds….maybe Paxil? How about Zoloft? If I was "given everything I wanted" how about the folks having YOU as opposed to halting when they were ahead? “Spoiled” is a hoot and a half, given I had to feed this rugrat and change his soaked diapers if Mom and Dad had to work double shifts (Mom at night school, dad on night shift). Seems his memory is really in need of jogging. But hey, if he sustained as much accumulated brain damage as his claimed history of bottle and bat fights indicates, it’s understandable!

Now, what’s the link between his claims of past violence and his not being a hater? Simply this: He "argues" that I never showed he was a hater, but had to “enlist others” i.e. by referencing his past history with his proposed National Atheist Registry. (I asked him 2 blogs ago to look-see what others had said about him.) But according to Mr. Macho Mikey (formerly ‘Pastor Mike’) this approach was being “cowardly” and “having others fight my battles for me”.  (Unlike Mike who" fought his own battles", e.g. in bar brawls, on street corners, at Hialeah High School, in the Marines etc.)

Thus the current citing of others' views of him didn't count since it amounted to me letting others' "take the heat."  Thus did he compare such citation with incidents (e.g. fights, altercations) he dredges up in the distant past, selectively choosing them as is his wont, to try to expose me as a "coward".  Never mind the last time we fought, during Easter vacation - when I was home in Hialeah, with a gf in 1970-  I put him in a half -Nelson and forced him to squeak out 'Uncle Remus!' (or I'd break his neck). But with this line of his recent "reasoning" it occurred to me he's truly fucking nuts as well as stupid. Maybe he's really chomping at the bit for another fight, who knows? (Never mind he's seven years younger and looks 20 years older!)

It makes no sense in any case, because whether I "enlisted others", say to help in past fights, e.g. in Carol City FLA, ca. 1963, when a motorcycle gang once threatened me and I got help from some high school pals, has nada to do with citing Mikey's current and past hate fests, including his epic "Christian National Registry of Atheists" stunt. In the latter case, it’s called providing independent confirmation, asshole!


Besides that, I needed no one else to disclose my own thinking, views, since I blatantly called him out as a ‘hateful little prick’ at least three times on the blog post. And that is what I think and believe, me alone! I didn’t need to “enlist others” other than to show my view is not unique and many others share my opinion of him as a hateful asshole. Nor did I need to answer his 20 questions, which would have been redundant! As for the Google references, that invoking is done to support one’s position. But since he's so brain damaged, it's obvious he can't tell the difference, so conflates the independent confirmation of a claim (that he's a congenital hater) with "getting others to fight one's battles".

Yes, yes I give 'Mr. Testosterone' Mikey credit for bashing in more brains, and busting more heads (including as a cop in South Bay, FL …mainly of poor, black sugar cane workers) than I have. Kudos to you, Mikey! Be proud! You’re rough, tough and hard to diaper. (I can vouch for that).


I also give the little prick credit for fomenting the singularly most embarrassing and outrageous incident my wife ever experienced in her life. This was in July of 1976 on our first visit to the U.S. after our marriage, and he invited us to spend a few days at his trailer in Lake Panasoffkee, FL. At one point in the middle of the night (after we chased his grubby dog out from under one of our beds), and after he'd downed at least twenty beers, he burst into our room unleashing a barrage of foul-mouthed epithets and told us if we didn’t like the "accommodations" we could “move our asses elsewhere”. At this point Janice was so shaken that we had no choice but to pack our things and walk to my other brother’s place. This was at 3.30 a.m. amidst swampland and gators.


Mike "showed his true colors", according to many family members, who were appalled at the incident (and all agreed it might have been his Marine Corps experiences that provoked it. ) He never fought in any wars, including in 'Nam,  though to hear him yap you'd think he'd single -handedly won the battle at Khe Sanh (actually, it was a draw). As info I have portrays it, he was "mainly a cook and bottle washer". His major damage evidently occurred during Parris Island boot camp where they made him scrub the latrines with his tongue or some such shit. He was supposed to write a book detailing his odious experiences ('It will tell all!", he informed me in Aug. 1973),  but later punked out - like he ran from his hate blog when the going got too tough.


The point here is simple: Mike’s affinity for violence precedes him and his degree of hate. Until he deals with both, as opposed to remaining in denial, he will remain a diseased soul who will never find relief, no matter how much ‘salvation’ he thinks he has from his bible. Instead of putting hell images on his blog and inserting others into them, he needs to think of himself boiling in his own self-made hell, evidently undiminished over decades.

As my dad wrote in an email in 2008, “It is sad to see what Mike’s become and how his blog hates everything and everyone.”

This was after my sister and I had each sent him blog links showing "Pastor Mike's"  attacks on Catholics and depicting the pope as an Antichrist and Satan, along with depicting Catholics as damned. Readers can see some of the images used in a 2010 blog post, e.g. http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2010/03/some-choice-pastor-mikey-hateful.html


Note the images of the pope were used in much earlier "Pastor Mike" attack blogs, which were the ones we cited and sent to Dad, causing him to rethink Mike as any kind of kid he even recognized anymore.

But hey, maybe – like his atheist registry proposal- that doesn’t count because it’s in the past. Selective memory can also be a sign of early dementia, however.

As we see, ‘De Nile’ can be a powerful force (not just a river in Africa), and a true blinder and impediment to change. Mike ought to know, but he never will until he understands HE is the one in the real need of salvation. That salvation will emerge when he recognizes his own hatred for others, including other faiths, and the paths that other people (like my niece with cancer) elect to pursue. Until he respects those other paths instead of hating on them, he cannot be said to possess any tolerance, which is the prescription for removing his hatred. He may argue until the next Blue Moon he isn't like Fred Phelps, but his own blog and words show otherwise. He doesn't have to picket military funerals with 'Hell' and 'damnation' signs to be like Phelps or his Westboro Baptist bozos!

Funny then, that the sick and burning 'souls' he regularly depicts in his Hell scenes are more plausibly images of how he sees himself, suffering from a prolonged delusional pathology. What you need then is treatment, pallie, not more responses to moi in your whacked out  "Mike's Straight Talk" blog!

Maybe the best advice Mike needs to take was found on a website (Media-ite) a year after his Registry for atheists made the news:

"Mr. Stahl, just because you live in America and enjoy freedom of speech, does not mean you have to use it. Shut up, push the keyboard away and go do something that would make Christians proud of you. Like feeding the hungry, cleaning the streets, sitting with the dying so they don't die alone. Or, take your meds. – Comment from ‘Mediaite.com’"


Couldn't agree more!

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Yep, Lots of Snow....But There's Still Global Warming!


Graph of radiocarbon (C14) excess over C12 over ~ 2,000 yr. period. The zero level is an arbitrary norm referenced to 1890. This is some of the best evidence for man-made global warming but few who have never taken physics can grasp its significance.


Wifey and I while shoveling out our driveway the other morning joked about all the snow, and how some lamebrains might pick up on it and deny - on the basis of the latest huge snowstorm- that global warming /climate change is real.  And, truth be told, when you see some of the idiotic comments in the blogosphere, you realize just how many in our population aren't able to make the subtle but necessary connections.

This false cognitive dissonance phenomenon, as well as others (i.e. fundies trying to recruit astrophysics to support their creationist codswallop) reminds me of a recent article ( ‘Darwin’s March’) in the Intertel journal, INTEGRA (Feb., p.27), by Dr. Steven B. Mason.  He notes that in some public schools, the teaching of evolution (or "Darwin's march") must share equal time with "creation Science", adding:

‘Mostly this is a system of explaining by inventing and couldn’t be further from the understanding, predicting and controlling of a true science. But it sounds good to those that don’t know better and most people don’t. Learning a hard science like mathematics or chemistry or  physics is, well, hard  The vast majority of humans are simply incapable of doing so. And yet this obvious fact is sure to be hooted and hollered down.”

Indeed! And on that basis, Mason correctly refutes the silly notion that "we're all capable of learning whatever we put our minds to".

But in order to puncture that myth that anyone can learn anything, and hence idiot fundies are as entitled to expostulate on general astrophysics - stellar structure - the Big Bang - as I am, is what requires those of us who have studied the hard sciences to post tests of aptitude from time to time, to see if these windbags can walk the walk as well as talk the talk.

For similar reasons, climate deniers (like fundie creationists) are equally childish and uneducated. Mainly they don't learn the physics of climate or atmsopheric research themselves, but google it from assorted whacko freaks who pride themselves on an abiding ignorance.  Also, they have extreme difficulty processing blogs that present actual scientific data and report them accurately, see e.g. http://www.brane-space.blogspot.com/2010/12/carbon-isotope-ratios-and-climate.html

Thus, it's not surprising they'd have extreme difficulty reconciling the huge recent snowfalls, and even blizzards, with the reality of global warming.  But the answer lies in atmospheric physics, if one is prepared to dig it out.  The basics? Well, a warmer atmosphere can hold, and hence 'dump', more moisture including as snow. In fact, two soon-to-be-published studies demonstrate how there can be more giant blizzards yet less snow overall each year. Projections from such studies are therefore that such anomalous events are likely to continue with manmade global warming. This will remain until a critical threshold is reached, probably when the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere hits 550 ppm. Then, we will have the first year of no seasons, and no more snow-blizzard events, only warming. And how it will warm!

Consider the anomalous aspect: The United States has been walloped by twice as many of the most extreme snowstorms in the past 50 years than in the previous 60 years, according to an upcoming study on extreme weather by leading federal and university climate scientists.  Yet the Global Snow Lab at Rutgers University says spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has shrunk on average by 1 million square miles in the past 45 years.

Another anomaly: computer models predict annual global snowfall to shrink by more than a foot in the next 50 years. According to Princeton University climate scientist Michael Oppenheimer:

""Shorter snow season, less snow overall, but the occasional knockout punch.That's the world we live in."

Other climate scientists assert that the idea of less snow and more blizzards makes sense: A warmer world is likely to decrease the overall amount of snow falling each year and shrink the snow season. But when it is cold enough for a snowstorm to hit, the slightly warmer air is often carrying more moisture, producing potentially historic blizzards. According to Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center


"Strong snowstorms thrive on the ragged edge of temperature—warm enough for the air to hold lots of moisture, meaning lots of precipitation, but just cold enough for it to fall as snow. Increasingly, it seems that we're on that ragged edge."

As Exhibit 'A',  look at the last few years in the Northeast. Or take Chicago, which until late January had 335 days without more than an inch of snow. Both have been hit with historic storms in recent years.

Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann points to the recent Northeast storm that dumped more than 30 inches in some places. He said it was the result of a perfect set of conditions for such an event: arctic air colliding with unusually warm oceans that produced extra large amounts of moisture and big temperature contrasts, which drive storms. Those all meant more energy, more moisture and thus more snow, he said.

And Princeton researcher Sarah Kapnick adds:

"The world is warming so precipitation that would normally fall as snow in the future will probably fall as rain once it gets above the freezing point."

This will plausibly happen when the 550 ppm threshold is reached. So we can look for an ugly world divided by extreme drought and torrential rains, that pour and pour. For others, living in the 'heat zones', unremitting and unbearable heat will be the order of the day as temperatures regularly hit 115F in the shade and night time temperatures seldom dip below 100F. This will be amongst the first omens to signal the approach of the runaway greenhouse.

Will the poppets who deny global warming take note? Of course not! They all think - like too many of the fundies- they can blather on about anything to do with physics, or biology or chemistry, despite never having taken and passed a single university course! 

Pastor Mike Challenges Me to be Honest and He Will “Leave me alone”

(Latest image from Pastor Mike's blog -purportedly of me)


It’s really interesting that in his latest blog post, my fundamentalist brother, "Pastor" Mike (well, formerly, he doesn’t call himself that any longer – maybe because he knows that it was bogus) rants off on me nearly eighteen times by referring to me as a ”hateful coward sissy punk Satan- following maggot”. Evidently, he had some strong objections to my posts on Tim Tebow and Tim's canceling out of giving a speech at a Dallas hate church.   But, some of those adjectives used by Mikey boy bear alarming similarity to psychological projection. This is given the fact it was HE who high tailed it off his hate blog (“Pastor Mike’s blog") some two years ago after he viciously advocated an “atheist registry - similar to a sex offender registry".

I mean, holy fuck and a half, the 'google-sphere' is still laden with hundreds of pages on this hateful little prick, e.g. http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2011/08/atheist_national_registry_prop.php and  http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/08/28/pastor-mike-has-a-plan/

And what he tried to pull two years ago (though he still refers to it as a "little joke" and calls atheists, others out for having 'thin hides') and who now has the fucking nerve to challenge me with a bunch of asinine questions to try and prove HE was never a hater! Some of his questions are:

1.Can you reference in any of my blog posts where I have stated that I "hate" a specific person or group (as opposed to their doctrines)? If so, please provide where.


2. You oftentimes put me in the same proverbial boat with the likes of Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church (as well as the Landover Baptist Church and their ilk), but...have I not publically written on this blog that they are NOT true Christians, and denounced them here publically for the true racists, anti-Semites, and bigots they really are?

3. If you are honest, and answer "yes" to question 2, then why do you still defame me by implying that I condone their doctrines?


"Defame" him? The little prick has defamed himself!  Looks to me like his fading memory needs jogging! But, without putting up any more of his bullshit -  anyone with the sense to google “Pastor Mike Stahl” will see his record of hate comes before him, and stands as self-incriminating testimony on his previous blog. (Maybe now he’s reformed somewhat, but don’t bet on it with images such as I have shown in prior blogs, e.g. http://www.brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/11/can-we-treat-obama-derangement-syndrome.html and http://www.brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/11/treating-advanced-fundagelical-psychosis.html

Can anyone seriously tell me this shit isn't hate?

Now HE wants ME to 'fess up to him and come clean? What is he, fuckin’ nuts? I believe so, like all extremist fundie assholes. (But since he calls me a 'relativist', yeah I will admit that some fundies are bigger assholes and extremists than others.) The funniest part is his ending where he insists he will still go to visit the hate -monger in Dallas, Robert Jeffress, viz.


"Oh, btw, I still may head to the 'Big D' and pay a visit to Pastor Jeffress' Church. Get a few pics of him and me, and then come to see you - so get one of them spare bedrooms ready for me and old 'Reb, okay. I'm sure they have a few good (KJV) bible-based evangelical Churches in your neck of the woods, huh?"


Well, I wouldn't advise it, sonny. We also have more hard core atheists per square mile than your whole pahokey town has Xtians. Oh....and some of them are still pissed off about that atheist registry proposal of yours!

And look here, ‘bro’ – assuming that’s even still applicable, because by your previous antics I somehow doubt it, I have nothing to prove in terms of honesty vis-à-vis you. I have called you out and attacked you as I’ve seen fit for your nasty, extreme beliefs – which YES – you have held and evidently still do! But maybe your memory is failing and you can’t recall them. In that case, I suggest you google yourself in your prior incarnation as “Pastor Mike” and see WTF OTHER people have said about you and previous blog, not just ME!

Do you have the balls to do that? Fuck no! So who is the ‘”hateful coward sissy punk Satan- following maggot” now, you fucking little ingrate. (Yeppers, I still remember the loan I gave you when you were down and out last year, your car was broken down and you had no groceries in the house)

Do I give a shit if you keep at me with insults and hell-insert images on your new “Straight talk” blog or not? Fuck NO! I welcome the material as more fodder to lay into your sorry Rebel “naturalized Mississippi” ass! As I said before – if this was 150 years ago, one or both of us would be dead by now, me likely fighting for a Wisconsin regiment and you for your beloved Mississippi. Be thankful that at least now our civil war is based on words, not bayonets, fucker.

Friday, February 22, 2013

Tebow Comes to Senses- Cancels Out of Hate Church Appearance

Evidently, the eruption of the blogosphere yesterday concerning Tim Tebow's planned speech at a hate monger Fundie church has caused him to cancel out.

According to press reports this a.m..:

"Tim Tebow has backed out of an appearance at a Baptist mega church in Dallas run by a pastor who has created controversy with his remarks about gays and other faiths. "


According to an AP press report, Tebow tweeted Thursday that "new information has come to my attention" - meaning he probably got wind of what was on my blog and others, concerning the hate mongering Robert Jeffress and his Dallas First Baptist Church of the Hell Mongers.

According to the AP release, Tebow wrote:

"I will continue to use the platform God has blessed me with to bring Faith, Hope and Love to all those needing a brighter day,"


The report added:

"The Rev. Robert Jeffress, First Baptist's pastor, confirmed in a phone interview that Tebow called him Wednesday night to cancel.  Jeffress said Tebow told him he would like to speak at First Baptist at some point, but "he needed to avoid controversy right now for personal and professional reasons."

Trouble is, Tim, whenever you DO decide to appear at that Hellfire, hate fest church, everyone will find out once more - news travels fast these days - and you will be right back where you are now, offering excuses. The best plan therefore is to just steer clear of Big D, or at least that particular preacher who is undoubtedly a Pastor Mike clone!  (Pastor Mike must be crying right now about having to abort his trip to Dallas to get new ideas for hate screeds.)

On the positive side, though I'm an atheist, I have to give kudos to Tim for his charitable work with disabled kids. My theory is that he recognized all his accumulated charitable capital is likely to be squandered if he appeared at a hate monger church, irrespective of the topic. It's the atmosphere and the people, Tim, and remember that next time you hanker to make an appearance there!

At least this time, the better angels of Tebow's nature prevailed, which is a lot more than can be said for Pastor Jeffress, Pastor Mike, Terry Jones, Fred Phelps and their assorted half-assed clones!

Scarborough: "BWWAAAAHAHA! We Can't Have Higher Taxes!"



Joe Scarborough this morning broke into a hissy fit and almost cried at the mere mention (by 'Morning Joe' guest Al Sharpton) that Obama wants a balanced approach to the deficit problem and that means more taxes. Sharpton made the accurate point that Obama had already ceded $650b as part of the fiscal cliff deal, and that had come down from $1.2 trillion.  Meanwhile, over $1.2 trillion in spending cuts had already been made last year. The time was now for MORE taxes, not less.

But why the crying, pissing and moaning from Repukes? THEY are the ones, after all (see graphs) that let deficit spending explode under Bush Jr's reign, for both tax cuts that mainly benefited the wealthy, and unpaid for wars.  While these cretins incessantly demanded TWO "wars" (actually occupations), they never insisted that anyone actually sacrifice to pay for them!

Meanwhile, I not long ago received in the mail (from my first cousin) two war ration books issued to my mom back in 1941 when she was just 19. The ration book allowed access to certain provisions, but with limits. Each book had born a number of war ration stamps which could be used to buy special goods, such as meat, bread, butter etc. The person had to sign and date each time such stamps were accessed for purchase, such that it had been legitimate, with this representation made formally (under penalty of perjury) to the Office of Price Administration. Evidently, mom had three ration stamps left at this point. (Old recovered letters from my grandmother to her son (fighting in Europe), dated 1943-44 noted some meat supplies, such as ham, beef and bacon, were running low by then.)

To me, the war ration book embodied sacrifice of the citizen in the war effort. That, along with increased taxes, disclosed it was a real war as opposed to a fraud and mockery perpetrated for the sake of lining the pockets of defense contractors and padding the payrolls of certain congressonal districts - as occurs now.

But all Americans are aware of anymore are the frauds and make-up "wars" for which no sacrifice is expected, not even higher taxes,  far less ration books with war ration stamps. And so we have a populace for which basically the events in Afghanistan (and earlier Iraq) only existed on a fantasy or unreal level if they existed at all. No surprise there!

But what Americans ought  to be processing is that those recent wars of choice exacted a cost, along with the atrocious tax cuts,  at a time taxes ought to have been raised!  The twin tables, again, show the whole sordid picture and what has really dug us into the existing deficit hole, which the "Simpson Bowlers" and Repukes now propose to extricate us from, via Catfood 2.0 perpetrated on our seniors. (See e.g. http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/thom-hartmann/48217/youve-heard-of-the-birthers-now-meet-the-simpson-bowlers )

Now, logically, since the Repukes dug us into this debt hole by refusal to approve adequate revenue, for both the "wars" and tax cuts (as well as their insane 2003 prescription drug bill - more a giveaway to  Big PhRma), then it is logical that increased revenue must be the way to dig us out of the debt mess.  As a New York Times op-ed put it today, the first major tax hits....errr....hikes.... must come from the hides of those who benefited most from the Bush tax cuts during the "war" years:

"Those taxpayers are the same ones who benefited most from Bush-era tax breaks and who continue to pay low taxes. Even with recent increases, the new top rate of 39.6 percent is historically low; investment income is still taxed at special low rates; and the heirs of multimillion-dollar estates face lower taxes than at almost any time in modern memory."


Incredibly,  despite these facts, the Repukes are resisting any cuts to defense, this despite the fact that they haven't - up to now - paid for any of their earlier defense spending shenanigans. They let TWO "wars" go unfunded, during supposed "war time" - a big hoot if there ever was one- plus they've not paid for the two sets of Bush tax cuts that already produced $3.2 trillion in deficits even before Obama got into office.

These miscreants demand this perfidy despite the fact it would impose "brutalizing cuts in non-defense discretionary areas like education, environment..already set to see their lowest share of the budget since 1950" according to the NY Times op-ed.   The education hits may well mean thousands of college students can't obtain affordable loans. The cuts to the EPA will mean our water here in Colorado, for example, will not be checked for contamination from the recent discovery of nuclear-polluted tailings, or from fracked effluent with xylene, benzene etc. backed up into our aquifers. Hello, more cancers!

The TIMES makes the additional sound point that:

"Raising taxes at the top is neither punitive nor gratuitous. It is a needed step, both to achieve near-term budget goals and to lay the foundation for a healthy budget in the future. As the economy strengthens and the population ages, more taxes will be needed from further down the income scale, both to meet foreseeable commitments, especially health care, as well as unforeseeable developments, from wars to technological challenges"


Will the Repukes pay attention? I doubt it, despite the fact that recent polls all disclose the public is on the side of Obama's solutions not the Tea-Party tainted Repuke House. For example, A USA Today/Pew Research poll released Thursday shows Obama with a strong lead over Republicans in Congress on gun policies (45-39 percent), the budget deficit (45-38 percent), immigration (50-33 percent) and even climate change (47-26 percent). When this news came out it prompted Scarborough to cry out two days ago: "We're gettin' our butts beat by Obama!"  Yeah, Joe! Deal with it!


Meanwhile, a Bloomberg poll from Wednesday had similar findings, with Obama’s approval ratings reaching a 3-year high at 55 percent, while just 35 percent have a favorable view of Republicans. From Bloomberg:


"Americans by 49 percent to 44 percent believe Obama’s proposals for government spending  on infrastructure, education and alternative energy are more likely to create jobs than Republican calls to cut spending and taxes to build business confidence and spur employment."

Now, this ought not come as a shock for anyone with more than air between the ears! I mean, as one wit aptly put it a year ago, referring to the European austerity measures: "Look, it's silly to think you can run a race faster if you cut off one of your feet!"

Adding to Republican troubles: 43 percent of Americans blame Republicans for what’s wrong in Washington, compared with 34 percent who blame Obama.

If any Americans read the recent TIME story concerning the F-35 waste ( Feb. 25, 'The Most Expensive Weapon Ever Built’ ,p. 26), they'd also be asking why have that white elephant when cutting it would mean so much more benefit for the nation, in all domestic spheres. The Repuke answer is "We need to be strong on defense!" but that's a red herring. What they really want is military jobs for their own districts- they care nothing about real national sacrifice, not like during a REAL war (WWII) which saw my mom using ration books and her family paying higher taxes! You can't have a real war and not have a broad spectrum of citizen-public sacrifice, particularly to PAY for said war. Otherwise, you have a shameless farce and one costing lives and wasting treasure unnecessarily!


Bottom line: the shtick of Repukes and their pro-Southern extremist party has been well known since the 1960s: Bleed the government coffers dry using bloated military spending and tax cuts, then demand the next Dem president cut all domestic spending on account of the deficits the war mongers-tax cutters generated.

But I believe too many people are much wiser now, especially as most of us have the first hand evidence - whether from ration books of WWII, or from deficit charts today - to isolate the frauds from the real McCoys. And the Repukes are frauds!

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Online College Quality - Even Worse Than First Thought


First year Philosophy students at Loyola University, ca. 1965. There is no way they could have received the quality education they did from any "online" college!

Well, believe it or not, we may actually have a valid explanation of why that fulsome fundie wasn't able to do the test on evolution provided some blogs ago! It seems that online colleges, I presume especially those like "Smoke House Online Bible College" in Okeechobee, Fla. aren't doing anywhere near as well at educating their minions. Certainly not like regular brick and mortar schools (say lke Loyola University, with students shown).

According to Columbia University’s Community College Research Center, for example, about seven million students — about a third of all those enrolled in college — are enrolled in what the center describes as traditional online courses. These typically have about 25 students and are run by professors who often have little interaction with students. Over all, the center has produced nine studies covering hundreds of thousands of classes in two states, Washington and Virginia. The picture the studies offer of the online revolution is distressing to say the least.
First, student attrition rates — around 90 percent for some huge online courses — appear to be a problem even in small-scale online courses when compared with traditional face-to-face classes. Second, courses delivered solely online may be fine for highly skilled, highly motivated people, but they are inappropriate for struggling students who make up a significant portion of college enrollment and who need close contact with instructors to succeed.
In addition, the research has shown over and over again that community college students who enroll in online courses are significantly more likely to fail or withdraw than those in traditional classes, which means that they spend hard-earned tuition dollars and get nothing in return. Worse still, low-performing students who may be just barely hanging on in traditional classes tend to fall even further behind in online courses.
Lacking confidence as well as competence, these students need engagement with their teachers to feel comfortable and to succeed. What they often get online is estrangement from the instructor who rarely can get to know them directly.

As an example, let's take our fundie going online to Smoke House Bible College. Sure, he's got plenty of advantages, such as choosing his own time schedule to study or learn, and of course, he needn't burn up precious gas traveling all the way to Okeechobee. BUT....who is challenging him to think critically? Who is challenging his pet beliefs, say like the Jesuits challenged those of us attending Loyola, in our Biblical Exegesis,  Comparative Theology, or Philosophy courses?  Who is confronting him to approach his study skeptically, and leading him logically through the pitfalls and false assumptions, say via the Socratic method? (Made so popular by the "Prof. Kingsfield" character in the series Paper Chase).

Well, NO one! Thus, he can avail himself of no special tutorials or seminars by which to intensify the learning curve, nor is he challenged face to face by questions!  We can't even be certain of the quality of the exams taken, or the examiners! (Is his online college even accredited, and if so, by what association?) There is simply NO way then that he can expect to get the same quality education no matter how much he clumsily rants about "Planet of the Apes profs" or "Satanic schools."

Indeed, one of the failings earlier found in online college analyses is the recurring deficiency in critical thinking. This entails being able to ascertain one's false premises, as well as being able to challenge them ....say - in the case of the fundie - without having to have an atheist do it for him!

Much of the ballast for critical thinking is bound up with being able to write extensive essays on a given question or proposition. But the sad fact is that the very nature of most online education omits this. They can't have all their online profs tied up marking extensive essays all day, after all. So most tests and homework heel to the multiple choice or short answer format. In this way, deprived of the opportunity to write an in-depth analysis of their own views (say as opposed to googling them and regurgitating) they emerge half-baked.

Most college students today, according to assorted surveys, claim an average of 15 minutes of writing per nightly homework, compared to nearly 2 ½ hours back in the 1960s. However, and this is important, not even that 15 minute threshold is met by the online for profit outfits like Udacity.

Interestingly, the Columbia research center found that students in hybrid classes, i.e.  that blended online instruction with a face-to-face component, performed as well academically as those in traditional classes. But hybrid courses are rare, and teaching professors how to manage them is costly and time-consuming.
So it seems for the long time being, those accessing online colleges will suffer, not only in the depth of their knowledge, but in plumbing its weak links, poor assumptions and false biases.