October 30, 2003
Time to "Tout a Logical Fallacy"
Time to "tout a logical fallacy." Go read Vinny's post on Insignificant Thoughts about purported discrimination against Christians. After that come back here a read why Vinny's reasoning is fallacious. Toward the end of his post Vinny writes, "The documentation of example after example after example proves it." I will except for the sake of argument that all the cases that Limbaugh discusses are legitimate cases of discrimination. They still don't prove much.
We have to make a distinction here. Vinny could be saying that Limbaugh is proving that there is some kind of widespread, systematic discrimination going on or just that some individual cases of discrimination exist. If it is the latter, then there is no big surprise. Every group imaginable runs into some discrimination. I don't mean to say that this is exceptable or a good thing, but it is unsurprising. If he is saying that Limbaugh's examples prove widespread, systematic discrimination then his argument commits two logical fallacies.
There are two conditions that need to apply for Limbaugh's examples to prove widespread discrimination. First, the group of cases selected has to representative of a good cross section of cases. For example, suppose I am taking a poll to see what percentage of Americans support Democrats and what percentage supports Republicans. If in my poll I only ask Democrats who they support then it will come out that 100 percent of Americans support Democrats. That is obviously false. This is why you need a good sample. Limbaugh's cases are only examples of dicrimination, so we don't get a sense of how widespread this is from these examples. Read more on the fallacy of unrepresentative samples here.
The other issue is that there have to be enough people in the sample. Limbaugh needs at least a thousand examples for it to be a statistically significant representation of what happens in the American workplace. Using a sample which is too small to prove a statistical point is the fallacy of hasty generalization.
Limbaugh doesn't prove there is widespread discrimination against Christians, all he proves (if we accept them as cases of discrimination at all) that some cases might exist.
October 28, 2003
Kucinich Stands for True Democratic Principles
Published on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 by the Madison (WI) Capital Times
Kucinich Stands for True Democratic Principles
by Ed Garvey
To begin, I must admit to liking and respecting most of the Democrats who are seeking our support for president.
I have marched with Al Sharpton, contributed to Carol Moseley Braun's Senate campaign, met Dick Gephardt in college, and admired John Kerry's courage in opposing the Vietnam War after serving with distinction. (Those who never served but now urge us on to more and more pre-emptive strikes should, at a minimum, suit up and join our forces in Iraq.)
I'm impressed with Howard Dean's use of the Internet to raise money from, as Jim Hightower says, "the alley cats instead of the fat cats." And he took a bold and correct stance in opposing the invasion of Iraq.
I don't think we need a former general, Wesley Clark, to explain that President Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld screwed up. That is obvious to the majority of Democratic voters and, by his recent memo, apparent to Rumsfeld himself.
While I have never suffered from a migraine, watching and listening to Joe Lieberman's Bush apologia gives me some sense of how a migraine must feel.
I've written before that if Dean, Kerry or Dennis Kucinich wins the nomination, I'll be dancing in the street. And I must say that if Dick Gephardt wins, that's OK with me.
But primaries are about choices. When I ran for the Senate, I was opposed by a popular chair of the Democratic Party and by a state senator. I had to ask fellow Democrats to choose.
When we think back to Robert La Follette's reforms, the guts of the reforms rested on the selection of good candidates by the people, not the bosses. So I had to put people in the uncomfortable position of making a choice. If they chose someone else, that did not reduce them in my view nor did it make them "bad" progressives. They made a choice based on a myriad of issues, personalities or values.
The important thing is to make a choice, and I have made mine in the Democratic primary. I support, without any hesitation, the person I believe best articulates and lives our progressive values, Dennis Kucinich.
I first met Kucinich when he keynoted our first Fighting Bob Fest in Baraboo. He gave a wonderful speech but the next day at our home, speaking to perhaps only 25 people, he moved into the rarified atmosphere of a Paul Simon and Gaylord Nelson. He was not just thoughtful, he was profound.
My wife and I went to a neighbor's home years ago to hear a Southern governor who was exhibit A for the "new South." We thought that Jimmy Carter had no chance of winning the presidency, but there was something about him that compelled us to hope that he just might make it to vice president at a minimum.
Listening to Kucinich in Baraboo and at the Orpheum Theatre in the vain but valiant effort to stop the invasion of Iraq, I had that same feeling. I turned to a friend and asked, "Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could have a person with his vision and courage as president?" The response stuck with me: "And why not?"
Indeed, why not? If he carries Wisconsin, look out, Democratic Leadership Council.
He understands and voted against the Patriot Act. He opposed the invasion of Iraq, and while some others did as well, Kucinich wants our troops out of Iraq to be replaced by U.N. forces - now. He stands alone today, but just wait a few months.
He supports national health care without evasiveness. Could there be a more important issue than the life and death of our citizens?
And when I look at the decimation of our manufacturing base nationally and in Wisconsin, I want clear answers on the World Trade Organization and NAFTA. Kucinich boldly stakes out his position. "On the first day of my presidency, I will cancel NAFTA and WTO."
Joe Lieberman's first day? Appoint a hawk as secretary of defense. Dennis Kucinich would establish a Department of Peace.
Now the chickenhawks who don't mind sending the sons and daughters of the poor and working families into harm's way scoff at such a notion. Well, I don't know about you but the chickenhawks have as much credibility on "war" as Rush Limbaugh has on rehabilitation and addiction.
It is time for bold action, and Dennis Kucinich is the one who speaks out, tells the truth and makes the DLC cringe.
You know who else cringes? The Republicans, because with a choice between pre-emptive George Bush and Dennis Kucinich, guess who would get out and vote? Every Democrat, independent and Green in America. When we get a big turnout, we win. When we don't, the Republicans win. Offer the people a real choice and we win. Offer them Republican lite and get ready for Patriot Act II.
When you elect people to office, you can't stand over their shoulder day in and day out to determine if they are true to their word. Nor do we expect to be consulted on every action or vote, but we certainly don't expect them to hold a moistened finger in the air to see what is popular. We want people with integrity. We want a Bob Kastenmeier, Bobby Kennedy or Paul Wellstone. And I add one name to that group: Dennis Kucinich.
If you agree, contact www.kucinich.us and help us carry Wisconsin. If you disagree, send comments to fightingbob.com. Whatever you do, make a choice, get involved, don't let the bosses decide for us.
Ed Garvey, the Democratic nominee for governor in 1998, is a Madison lawyer and the editor of the fightingbob.com Web site.
Copyright ©, Capital Newspapers
October 25, 2003
Just Speculating
Just Speculating
by Calvin Trillin
So Limbaugh has been hooked on pills,
While Bennett's hooked on Slots.
Do all the right-wing morals police
Have copybooks with blots?
Does Falwell have a floozie, say,
Does Ashcroft, you suppose,
Get home from church and swiftly snort
Some white stuff up his nose?
Does Robertson crave demon rum?
Does Cheney make clerks promise
To hide the fact he's renting tapes
Last viewd by Clarence Thomas?
Published in the November 3, 2003 edition of The Nation.
October 24, 2003
My Site is More Evil than Yours
I was taking a look at Gamer's Nook today when I came across this post. Here are my results.
Gamer's Nook was only 27% evil. Nanner, nanner, my site is more evil than yours Scott. Anybody can rate their site or any passage this way here.
Take Back Your Time Day
In light of a previous post I thought this would be appropriate to link too. Today is Take Back Your Time Day, take the time to take a look.
October 23, 2003
Defend Religious Freedom -- Drop 'Under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance
Defend Religious Freedom -- Drop 'Under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance
by Peter Miguel Camejo
Published on Thursday, October 23, 2003 by the San Francisco Chronicle
The Democrats and Republicans in Congress continue to show disrespect for the founders of our nation in their protest of a court ruling that attempts to enforce the separation of church and state by removing the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.
On June 10, 1797, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution stating, ". . . the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on Christian religion . . . ." In 2002, the Senate unanimously voted to support the inclusion of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. This reflects a 180- degree reversal of an important founding principle of our nation.
One of the many reasons that our founders insisted on freedom of religion and the separation of church and state is that they were not Christians but lived in a nation of Christians. Most Americans are unaware that many of our early presidents, such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison and George Washington, as well as great patriots such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine and Ethan Allen, did not consider themselves Christians. Their views often were carefully camouflaged in public for fear of reprisal but quite clear in their private correspondence.
Adams once wrote Jefferson that "This would be the best of all worlds, if there were no religion in it." (Letter to Jefferson, April 19, 1817). Adams explicitly argued against any reference to our government being "under" the influence of "heaven." ("A Defense of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America,'' 1788).
Many of the founding fathers were persecuted for their stand in support of the separation of church and state. The main criticism lobbed at Jefferson in his successful campaign for president was that he was an atheist. Paine died in poverty, primarily for statements such as, "The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion." ("The Age of Reason ,'' 1794).
Probably the most explicit of the early "Deists" who fought for religious freedom and the earliest fighter for separation of church and state was Jefferson. In his private letters, Jefferson made it clear he did not accept Christianity. "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, the Supreme Being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classified with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." (Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823.)
While many religious groups have suffered discrimination, such as the Jews and, today, Muslims in America and Europe, the group who has suffered the longest and most generic oppression is of those who reject religion. In the past, those who openly challenged religious beliefs faced having their tongues pierced with red-hot irons (British law), or long imprisonment, banishment or torture and death. When Jefferson first dared to question religion, the law was death for holding the views he advocated.
The Green Party, for which I was the gubernatorial candidate, understands why many people who are repelled by the crass materialism that dominates our culture, turn to religion as an antidote to our mania with money. Greens also recognize the personal sacrifice and contributions made by religious people to global peace and social justice.
Greens, in fact, favor total religious freedom -- including the right not to believe in god(s), the devil, hell or purgatory. Such freedom can only exist when church and state are kept completely separate.
Your religion is your private business. It has no part in government, in the Pledge of Allegiance, or in U.S. currency, or our public schools if we are to remain a free people with "liberty and justice for all."
Peter Miguel Camejo was the Green Party gubernatorial candidate in the 2002 and 2003 elections.
©2003 San Francisco Chronicle
October 21, 2003
Time is Not Money
Nothing beats time spent in conversation over a nice cup of coffee. A Turkish proverb says that coffee is the milk of chess players and thinkers. I sat down at the Salt Lake Roasting Company with a cup of coffee to look over some chess games of past masters. Two friends of mine showed up and joined me at my table. We got talking about anything from the role of media in society to Chaos theory.
C got up and said, "I am going to get a refill, can I get you one."
I handed him my cup and reached for my wallet to get a dollar.
He said, "No this one is on me."
"No, no," I said, "Here is a dollar."
"Nope," he said, "Let me get this one for you."
"Okay, thanks."
When He came back with my coffee, I felt more grateful than I should have. I felt as though he had done me an enormous favor. But the refill was only seventy-five cents. It certainly was a nice thing, but it doesn’t deserve the feeling of extreme indebtedness that many of us often feel in situations like this. Why is it that we feel this way? I believe that in America money is the ultimate reality. If you are willing to back your belief up with some bucks… Well then, you ARE serious. Words and actions are nothing, but money is something. Nothing is real until money is involved. You make money therefore you are, that is our motto in America.
Ironically, when I give friends a CD I burned for them they are not as grateful. They appreciate it no doubt, but nevertheless it is less common for people to feel as indebted for something like this. I find myself feeling less indebted. The only time people do feel indebted is when they consider the cost of the blank CD. The time and thought it takes to choose the tracks and burn the CD is surely worth more than the price of one blank CD. Worth more not in money, but in the currency of goodwill.
The cliché "time is money" is just plain false. Time isn't money. Time is friendship, time is devotion, time is creating art, time is relaxation, time is pain, time is joy, time is love, time is love lost, time is life, time is the most valuable thing we have and money is not. Money is not time and time is not money. For a lucky few time spent making money is also time spent doing something good for others or good for oneself. For the vast majority of us time spent making money is just a means of survival, a job rather than a calling. Time is without monetary value. Time is invaluable
October 20, 2003
The Public Supports Universal Health Care
A recent poll says:
"By almost a 2-1 margin in this poll, 62 percent to 32 percent, Americans said they preferred a universal system that would provide coverage to everyone under a government program, as opposed to the current employer-based system."
So why do people support Republicans who vehemently oppose such a system? Even more puzzling, why do progressives support Howard Dean or Wesley Clark ahead of Dennis Kucinich? Kucinich is the only candidate who has a detailed proposal for universal health care coverage under a government program. All the other candidates just want to tweek the existing system. Health care is my number one issue right now and it is a big reason I support Kucinich.
October 16, 2003
Crusader Sent to Iraq
Bush has a way of finding the absolute worst person for the job and assigning him to the most critical position. Remember Henry Kissinger was chosen as an "independent" investigator to investigate the events leading up to 9-11. Kissinger is arguably a war criminal himself. Kissinger is wanted in foreign courts for a number of alleged war crimes. This is like putting Ken Lay in charge of accounting.
Bush's new brilliant move is to send Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin to track down Bin Laden and Hussein. Discussing the battle against a Muslim warlord in Somalia, Boykin told another audience, "I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol." This will go over well with Muslims in Iraq. I am sure they will tell such a man anything he needs to know in his hunt for Bin Laden and Hussein. The word duh comes to mind. Read some more religious gems from Boykin here.
October 13, 2003
Happy Genocide Day
In honor of Christopher Columbus I wish you all a happy genocide day. Margaret Cho Writes, "'In fourteen hundred and ninety two Columbus sailed the ocean blue' - then landed on an island inhabited by gentle people, and killed fucking everybody to prove that the world was round, not actually flat." I recommend reading her post in its entirety. I couldn't find a permalink so just look for a post titled "Happy Columbus Day."
October 09, 2003
Man vs. Machine - Who is Winning?
"Every year computers are becoming stronger at chess, holding their own against the very strongest players. So very soon they will overtake their human counterparts. Right? Not necessarily, says statistician Jeff Sonas, who doesn't believe that computers will inevitably surpass the top humans. In a series of articles Jeff presents empirical evidence to support his claim."
Jeff Sonas points out that humanity's chess abilities are improving as well and cannot be held static in comparison to the improvements made on computer hardware and chess software. Read his article on the Chessbase Website.
UPDATE:
Part II of Jeff Sonas' article is up. In this part he discusses evidence that the rate of improvement for computers and the rate of improvement for top Grandmasters is currently neck and neck.
October 08, 2003
Nofacts Novak Knows
The Bush administration has said that we may never find out who leaked Ms. Plame's status as a undercover CIA operative. The administration says there are a lot of possible suspects as people at his whitehouse like to leak things. Perhaps he should crack down on leaks in his administration. Perhaps he should hire more trustworthy people. Even more astonishing, Bush said that the press was good at protecting its sources. But surely Robert Novak could be subpoenaed and ask to reveal his source for the article. I am all for anonymity of press sources, but not when crimes are being committed. Novak knows who it is, lets just get him to tell us.
