17 June 09 (pm)

Last night in Austin; I’ll probably try to swim tomorrow. It has been about a week.

Posts

Security
Here is an interesting post on people who were taken in by scams:

And some stuff that surprised me:

…it was striking how some scam victims kept their decision to respond private and avoided speaking about it with family members or friends. It was almost as if with some part of their minds, they knew that what they were doing was unwise, and they feared the confirmation of that that another person would have offered. Indeed to some extent they hide their response to the scam from their more rational selves.

Another counter-intuitive finding is that scam victims often have better than average background knowledge in the area of the scam content. For example, it seems that people with experience of playing legitimate prize draws and lotteries are more likely to fall for a scam in this area than people with less knowledge and experience in this field. This also applies to those with some knowledge of investments. Such knowledge can increase rather than decrease the risk of becoming a victim.[....]

Science Here is a comment about “science and the transcendent” at Jerry Coyne’s blog:

Over at Metamagician and the Hellfire Club, Russell Blackford takes on the idea that only faith can tell us what’s true about the transcendent world.

. . There is no good reason for scientists or advocates of science to suggest that a so-called “transcendent world” exists, that there are spooky beings such as gods, spirits, and the rest, or that religion in general, or any particular religion, can give us reliable information about anything of the kind. Stories of such things may well be charming, they may have cultural and aesthetic value, they may be worth preserving and studying. I don’t say that such stories are entirely without value. On the contrary, I love myth, legend, and folklore as much as anyone. Ask my friends about it if you don’t believe me. But that’s not the same as suggesting that any of these stories are actually true.

Exactly. I have been reading posts on other websites attacking New Atheists (they’re “new” because their books make money!) for not dealing with the subtle theological issues involved in the science/faith debates. This is the famous “courtier’s reply” described by P.Z. Myers. But all of these critiques neglect one important point: is there any evidence for the reality of the divine? It’s the hallmark of a desperate argument to worry about philosophical nuances when the big elephant in the room– the evidence for God — goes unmentioned.

(emphasis mine)

Politics

This is the price that the Democrats pay for a “large tent”; rural Democrats are very different from urban ones.

Angered by White House decisions on everything from greenhouse gases to car dealerships, congressional Democrats from rural districts are threatening to revolt against parts of President Barack Obama’s ambitious first-year agenda.

“They don’t get rural America,” said Rep. Dennis Cardoza, a Democrat who represents California’s agriculture-rich Central Valley. “They form their views of the world in large cities.”

Cardoza’s critique was aimed at Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency, but it echoes complaints rural-district Democrats have about a number of Obama administration decisions.

“I wouldn’t say it’s a complete strikeout, but they’ve just got a few more bases to it when it comes to the rural community,” said Louisiana Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu.

A rural revolt could hamper the administration’s ability to pass climate change and health care legislation before the August recess.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23828.html#ixzz0IjkXhsXE&C

This is one reason I don’t support the DCCC and the DSCC; I don’t care to contribute to the “blue dogs”.

Republicans Some Republicans in Congress have said that their “struggles” are similar to the struggles of those in Iran. Really.

What about the fired Inspector General? He is no martyr:

Walpin was reportedly informed of his termination on June 11. In a June 16 letter to members of Congress, special counsel to the president Norman L. Eisen explained Walpin’s termination:

Mr. Walpin was removed after a review was unanimously requested by the bi-partisan Board of the Corporation. The Board’s action was precipitated by a May 20, 2009 Board meeting at which Mr. Walpin was confused, disoriented, unable to answer questions and exhibited other behavior that led the Board to question his capacity to serve. Upon our review, we also determined that the Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, a career prosecutor who was appointed to his post during the Bush Administration, had filed a complaint about Mr. Walpin’s conduct with the oversight body for the Inspectors General, including for failing to disclose exculpatory evidence. We further learned that Mr. Walpin had been absent from the Corporation’s headquarters, insisting upon working form his home in New York over the objections of the Corporation’s Board; that he had exhibited a lack of candor in providing material information to decision makers; and he had engaged in other troubling and inappropriate conduct. Mr. Walpin had become unduly disruptive to agency operations, impairing his effectiveness and, for the reasons stated above, losing the confidence of the Board and the agency. It was for these reasons that Mr. Walpin was removed.

In an April 29 letter to the chair of the Integrity Committee of the Counsel of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, which the administration cited in explaining Walpin’s termination, Brown “express[ed] … concerns about the conduct of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) Inspector General, Gerald Walpin, and his staff in the handling of United States v. St. HOPE Academy, Kevin Johnson & Dana Gonzalez,” a case which “resulted from the alleged misuse of AmeriCorps grant funds by St. HOPE Academy” and its “then Chief Executive Officer Kevin Johnson, and Executive Director Dana Gonzalez.” Brown noted that Johnson “is a former NBA basketball player and was a Sacramento mayoral candidate, subsequently elected Mayor, when this matter first came to light during fall 2008.” In his letter, Brown wrote:

In our experience, the role of an Inspector General is to conduct an unbiased investigation, and then forward that investigation to my Office for a determination as to whether the facts warrant a criminal prosecution, civil suit or declination. Similarly, I understand that after conducting such an unbiased investigation, the Inspector General is not intended to act as an advocate for suspension or debarment. However, in this case Mr. Walpin viewed his role very differently. He sought to act as the investigator, advocate, judge, jury and town crier.

Brown further alleged that Walpin and his staff “did not include” or “disclose” relevant information regarding the case to Brown’s office; that Walpin repeatedly discussed the case in the press after being advised “under no circumstance was he to communicate with the media about a matter under investigation”; and that Walpin’s “actions were hindering our investigation and handling of this matter.” Brown concluded: “Although I recognize that a strong IG is necessary to ensure that allegations of wrongdoing are investigated, I believe that Mr. Walpin overstepped his authority by electing to provide my Office with selective information and withholding other potentially significant information at the expense of determining the truth. I believe that rather than ensuring protection of a respected federal agency, he tarnished its reputation.”

Supreme Court

Judge Sotomayor’s membership in an all-female club:

In a June 17 article on Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s membership in an all-women’s club, The Washington Times reported, “Gender politics have proved a minefield for male Supreme Court nominees. The wife of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. broke down in tears after aggressive questions at his 2005 Senate confirmation hearings about his reported involvement in a Princeton alumni group that opposed affirmative action.” In fact, the group in question — the now-defunct Concerned Alumni of Princeton — did not merely “oppose affirmative action,” but, as Media Matters for America has noted, actively resisted Princeton’s increased admission of women and minorities. In fact, according to The Nation, the executive committee of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton even issued a statement declaring explicitly that the group “oppose[d]” a “sex-blind admission policy” that would abolish limits on the number of women admitted. [...]

Marsha Levy-Warren, graduate of the first coeducational class (1973) and former vice president of the student government, told The Daily Princetonian that Concerned Alumni of Princeton was “a far-right organization funded by conservative alumni committed to turning back the clock on coeducation at the University,” according to a November 18, 2005, article in the campus newspaper. The Princetonian reported that the group, during its formation, was co-chaired by Asa Bushnell and Shelby Cullom Davis, both outspoken opponents of coeducation at the university. The campus newspaper described Davis as “a strong traditionalist, firmly opposed to the many of the new directions Princeton was taking, including coeducation.”

According to the Princetonian, Davis wrote in Prospect:

“May I recall, and with some nostalgia, my father’s 50th reunion, a body of men, relatively homogenous in interests and backgrounds, who had known and liked each other over the years during which they had contributed much in spirit and substance to the greatness of Princeton … I cannot envisage a similar happening in the future,” Davis added, “with an undergraduate student population of approximately 40% women and minorities, such as the Administration has proposed.”

Additionally, The New York Times has reported that in the 1980s Concerned Alumni of Princeton opposed the integration of three all-male ” ‘eating clubs.’ where many upper class Princeton students took their meals.”

These aren’t the same thing at all. All too often our conservative friends pretend that things are symmetric when in fact they often aren’t.

Advertisement