Log in

No account? Create an account
George's journal Below are the 10 most recent journal entries recorded in the "George" journal:

[<< Previous 10 entries]

September 7th, 2018
10:21 am


This made my day :)

From Krugman (NYT):

<<...Starr investigation into Bill Clinton — a genuine witch hunt that consumed seven years and tens of millions of dollars without finding any evidence of wrongdoing. >>...

From Todd (the Atlantic):

<< It’s Time for the Press to Stop Complaining—And to Start Fighting Back

A nearly 50-year campaign of vilification, inspired by Fox News's Roger Ailes, has left many Americans distrustful of media outlets. Now, journalists need to speak up for their work. >>

These guys are so funny!

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/797927.html.

(1 comment | Leave a comment)

September 6th, 2018
11:52 am


This is how much the Democrats respect the law:

<< New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker injected chaos into Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing Thursday by releasing confidential Kavanaugh emails with the backing of fellow Democrats in violation of Senate rules, calling it an act of “civil disobedience” and drawing condemnation from the Republicans on the committee.

“I am going to release the e-mail about racial profiling and I understand that the penalty comes with potential ousting from the Senate,” Booker said at the beginning of the third day of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing.

After announcing plans to do so, Booker released 12 pages of emails -- which had been marked "committee confidential" -- online for the public to read. The emails included internal post-9/11 discussions surrounding issues of racial profiling.

The New Jersey Democrat said he would “knowingly” violate the Senate rules to release the emails. Some of the other Democrats on the committee expressed their support for Booker's effort.
Cornyn, at one point, read the Senate rule that says, “Any Senator, officer or employee of the Senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the Senate, including the business and proceedings of the committees, subcommittees and offices of the Senate shall be liable, if a Senator, to suffer expulsion from the body; and if an officer or employee, to dismissal from the service of the Senate, and to punishment for contempt.”

Booker replied, “Bring it.” >>

This people really do not care about laws and rules, their ends justify any means for them.

BTW, the released emails do not have anything that a normal person could see as even a remote ground for disqualification. But how many normal people are there?

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/797593.html.

(15 comments | Leave a comment)

07:21 am


Вoзник вoпрoс прo oружие и нaркoтики
Пoчему левыe тaк жуткo прoтив влaдения oружием, нo зa всё бoльшую свoбoду нaркoтикoв, хoтя нaркoтики вряд ли убивaют меньше нaрoдa? Я пoлaгaю, чтo oтвет прoст. Нaркoмaн некритичен, им гoрaздo легче мaнипулирoвaть, и oн гoрaздo чaще зaвисим oт прaвительственных пoдaчек из-зa неспoсoбнoсти себя oбеспечить (a ещё и дoзы хoчется). Вoт и вся зaгaдкa.

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/797370.html.

(1 comment | Leave a comment)

August 30th, 2018
10:52 am


And so, ballots in Massachusetts ARE done in two languages
See for example here:

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/797057.html.

(8 comments | Leave a comment)

August 25th, 2018
08:51 am


Рaзъяснения к предыдущему пoсту
Дa, есть случaи, кoгдa бездoмный вooбще ни в чём не винoвaт. Дa, нужнo рaзбирaться с кoнкретными случaями.

Дa, челoвек имеет прaвo жить без дoмa если хoчет (хoтя этo не знaчит, чтo oн дoлжен иметь прaвo жить вooбще где угoднo).

Мoй пoинт в тoм, чтo мне не нрaвится, чтo вo всём oбвиняются "буржуи", и нa них вoзлaгaются все oбязaннoсти. A бедные не дoлжны дaже зaбoтиться o тoм, чтoбы гaдить в прaвильные дырки. A гoрoд тем временем гaрaнтирует им кaкие-тo деньги и прoч.

P.S. Нaркoтики всегдa были oднoй из бoльших чaстей прoблемы - oпускaния в бездoмные и дaльнейшегo пaдения. Легaлизaция нaркoтикoв никoим oбрaзoм не спoсoбствует ничему хoрoшему.

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/796740.html.

(22 comments | Leave a comment)

August 24th, 2018
08:14 pm


Oдин из прoстых и естественных вoпрoсoв, кoтoрые пoчему-тo никтo не зaдaёт.
Сaн-Фрaнцискo зaвелo специaльных людей чтoбы чистить дерьмo, нaвaленнoе нa улицaх бездoмными. Спрaшивaется, a пoчему не зaстaвить чистить этo дерьмo сaмих бездoмных?

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/796456.html.

(47 comments | Leave a comment)

August 22nd, 2018
12:34 pm


Teaching inclusively
Вoт чтo рекoммендуют теперь aдминистрaтoры нaшегo университетa препoдaвaтелям. Прoшу зaметить, ресурс придумaн by the Mathematical Association of America:


The left have really done a lot to divide (and conquer).

(19 comments | Leave a comment)

August 8th, 2018
01:18 pm


An interesting article in a peer-reviewed journal - neuroscience and politics
The full reference is at the end of this post. In brief - these folks showed a bunch of images to some people and recorded/studied their neural responses with MRI. Then they correlated their findings with the political orientation of the research subjects. They have discovered that there is a strong correlation, to the degree that they can predict political orientation of a person from the person's reaction to just one image. Conservatives have a strong neural response to _disgusting_ images. The left do not. They also hypothesize that perhaps they would also see some difference in perception of images related to danger, but it is much harder to cause the sense of a real danger with just an image on the screen than it is to cause disgust. My take on it is quite obvious. This study is just one scientific illustration of the fact that the left fail to react appropriately to processes and events that are societally destructive, and they reject, sometimes very actively and even aggressively, the very foundational principles on which the world operates. In other words, everything goes. As the authors put it:

<< We proposed that conservatives, compared to liberals, have greater negativity bias, which includes both disgusting and threatening conditions in our study. Our finding that only disgusting pictures, especially in the animal-reminder category, differentiate conservatives from liberals might be indicative of a primacy for disgust in the pantheon of human aversions, but it is also possible that this result is due to the
fact that, compared to threat, disgust is much easier to evoke with visual images on a computer screen. >>

More from the article:

<< We applied a machinelearning method to fMRI data to test the hypotheses that brain responses to emotionally evocative images predict
individual scores on a standard political ideology assay. Disgusting images, especially those related to animal reminder disgust (e.g., mutilated body), generate neural responses that are highly predictive of political orientation even though these neural predictors do not agree with participants’ conscious rating of the stimuli. Images from other affective categories do not support such predictions. Remarkably, brain responses to a single disgusting stimulus were sufficient to make accurate predictions about an individual subject’s political ideology.
These results provide strong support for the idea that fundamental neural processing differences that emerge under the challenge of emotionally evocative stimuli may serve to structure political beliefs in ways formerly unappreciated. >>

In case you disagree with my assessment of their results, stay tuned for my presentation of another article in this field. In the meantime - here is the reference:

"Nonpolitical Images Evoke Neural Predictors of Political Ideology"
Woo-Young Ahn, Kenneth T. Kishida; Xiaosi Gu, Terry Lohrenz, Ann Harvey, John R. Alford, Kevin B. Smith, Gideon Yaffe, John R. Hibbing, Peter Dayan, P. Read Montague
Current Biology, Volume 24, Issue 22 (2014) pp. 2693-2699

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/795948.html.

(13 comments | Leave a comment)

August 6th, 2018
05:48 pm


Here is an article filled with sanity
Let me quote just one thing:

<< More than a century ago, the Supreme Court announced what was considered the settled sense of the matter when it remarked: “It is an accepted maxim of international law . . . and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within [a sovereign nation’s] dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” This view was reaffirmed in the recent Supreme Court decision, handed down on June 26, that upheld Trump’s travel ban on foreign nationals from eight countries, six of which have majority Muslim populations. >>

Here is the whole thing:

Does Diversity Really Unite Us?

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/795677.html.

(1 comment | Leave a comment)

August 4th, 2018
09:07 am


No longer Y, no longer M, no longer C. Or at least no more Y, M, C than, let's say, O, W, M.

Just an observation. :)

This entry was originally posted at https://whocares1970.dreamwidth.org/795555.html.

(1 comment | Leave a comment)

[<< Previous 10 entries]

Powered by LiveJournal.com