Republicans, Weirdness and other topics

Here are a couple of interesting political cartoons

Awesome Snark…

(hat tip: Randazza)

Economy Here is a 7 minute clip of Paul Krugman speaking on the economy (2007); he notes that the middle class rose fairly quickly and start its decline under President Reagan:

He notes that there are peculiarities to the United States…

Interesting (to me) tidbits
3 of 10 Americans take the Bible literally; 17 percent see it as just a collection of old stories (on a level with, say, Homer).

This shows the harm that religion can cause: would 30 percent of Americans believe that a snake can talk? Well, if they accept the Bible literally, they believe just that!

From the article:

Unsurprisingly, Gallup reports,

Belief in a literal interpretation of a Bible declines as educational attainment increases. Forty-six percent of Americans with a high school education or less take the Bible literally, compared with no more than 22% of Americans with at least some college education. The majority of Americans with at least some college education believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God.

The number drops to 15 percent for college grads while a whopping 25 percent of postgraduates see the Bible as a book of fables/legends. This will confirm for liberals some of the reasons for fundamentalist hostility toward state-supported education (public schools) and academia. In my own community you can readily hear fundamentalists chatting in restaurants, complaining about academics “being the problem” because they “question” what should be believed. Education will do that. It’s no surprise fundamentalists prefer to plug their ears when confronted with the facts of the Bible, or worse, follow the path of David Barton in simply re-writing all that history.[...]

Also in the Department of No-Surprises, Gallup reports that “Conservatives, Republicans More Likely to Take Bible Literally”:

Given the strong link between religion and politics in the U.S., it is not surprising that views of the Bible vary by party identification and ideology. The poll finds 42% of Republicans, compared with 23% of independents and 27% of Democrats, saying the Bible is literally true.

Conservatives are much more likely than moderates and liberals to believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. In fact, conservatives are as likely to believe the Bible is the actual word of God as to believe it is the inspired word of God.

News of the weird
A traffic court judge (female) tried to record males while they urinated in the bathroom. Really. She HAS to have some mental problems.

Political/Social
Evidently, asking the wealthy to pay more tax is off the table in Republican world.

The White House and Republican leaders had been negotiating recently over a comprehensive deal that would have produced $4 trillion in savings, hoping to avoid any possibility of defaulting on the nation’s debt ahead of an Aug. 2 deadline to raise the debt ceiling.

On Saturday night, House Speaker John Boehner abandoned the deal, saying a mid-size package of reforms that do not include any kind of increase in taxes on anyone is the only politically viable solution, The Washington Post reports.

The White House responded by releasing a statement decrying the move, saying that “congressional leaders…must reject the politics of least resistance and take on this critical challenge.”

In a statement, Boehner said: “Despite good-faith efforts to find common ground, the White House will not pursue a bigger debt reduction agreement without tax hikes. I believe the best approach may be to focus on producing a smaller measure, based on the cuts identified in the Biden-led negotiations, that still meets our call for spending reforms and cuts greater than the amount of any debt limit increase.”

In response, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said: “We cannot ask the middle-class and seniors to bear all the burden of higher costs and budget cuts. We need a balanced approach that asks the very wealthiest and special interests to pay their fair share as well. Both parties have made real progress thus far, and to back off now will not only fail to solve our fiscal challenge, it will confirm the cynicism people have about politics in Washington.”

On the other hand, we need to focus on job creation, and no, lowering taxes on the rich does not help with that.

We are in what is known as a liquidity trap.

Science

Divers have snapped photographs of fish using tools (a rock to break a clam shell); this is the first time anyone has taken a photo of this happening.

(click the thumbnail to see the photo at the site)

Here is a nice article which links brain proteins to the ability to learn languages:

A protein in the brain that has been linked to the development of human language may push developing neurons to reach out and touch someone—or, at least, other brain cells, according to a new study. Such early links could organize the cell-to-cell connections critical for learning complex tasks later in life, including reciting Dr. Seuss, researchers say.

Researchers first identified the FOXP2 gene and its protein in 2001. The study involved a family that had difficulty pronouncing and understanding words, and since then scientists have suspected that the gene may have played a role in the evolution of human language. It even appears to be important to “speech” in other animals: zebra finches with low levels of the FOXP2 protein, for example, can’t learn the songs that other birds sing.

Most studies of FOXP2 have focused on its effects post-birth, says Simon Fisher, a neurogeneticist at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, Netherlands. So scientists have been unclear about its role in very early brain building.

click the thumbnail to see the photo at RichardDawkins.net.

Working my way back July 10 2011

Today’s training:

Swimming: 2650 yards via:
8 x (25 3g, 25 fist, 25 free)
12 x (25 kick, 25 free with fins) alternate front, side, side.
5 x (100 free, 100 pull) 19:08 total (easy effort)
5 x (25 back, 25 breast)
4 x 50 fly kick with fins.

Run outside: 81 F, 71 percent humidity; minimal interference from the red winged blackbirds:

I started where the parking lot meets the part of the trail going to the Gateway but turned and ran under the bridge; I ran to the gooseloop, once around and then ran to where the trail meets the driveway of the place next to the ball field. Then I doubled back; time was 44:50 (22:10 out).

I just about died out there; I estimated “about 4 miles at about 11 mpm”; it was 4.1 miles at 10:56 by google.

It is getting better but it is a struggle; I am coming back, fighting off a piriformis/gluteus medius niggle, and still recovering from the double red cell donation.

Here is a post on the matter with a ton of responses; this is NOT a scientific survey but many others report struggling after blood/double red cell donations.

Is President Obama losing the Support of Liberal Democrats?

Ok, I’ll say it: at times I am frustrated at how things are going and I am really frustrated at the President insisting on a so-called “balanced approach” to fixing our economy. I much prefer what Paul Krugman or Robert Reich suggest.

We are in a demand crisis and austerity is the wrong focus at this time.

Nevertheless, I think that the President has done a fine job so far, getting at least some stimulus, getting an improvement to our health care availability system. At worst, he is far superior to what we see coming from the newly elected Republican governors.

But the question I am asking here is: is he losing the support of liberal Democrats?

If one goes by Daily Kos, one would think that he has lost the liberal democratic base. But what do the figures say?

I got the following data from the Gallup Presidential Job Approval Center.

You can find all sorts of things here, including the overall approval ratings of past presidents, comparative graphs of approval ratings, etc.

So I decided to look at the available data on: Obama job approval ratings: Liberal Democrats (as opposed to just “liberals”) and I plotted the data:

Here is the link to my crude chart:

I didn’t calculate a mean, standard deviation, etc, but I can say that the data is from August 30, 2010 to July 3, 2011. The max was 91 percent and the minimum was 79 percent (once); it is fair to say that the vast majority of the points fall at 84 percent or above; only 7 of the 44 fall below 84 percent and only 1 is below 80.

So you can judge for yourself if the President is losing the support of liberal Democrats.

Again, I am not defending his policies one way or the other; I am merely talking about the support from liberal Democrats.

Update
One might wonder why the difference between Liberal Democrats (as a whole) and Daily Kos types?

My conjecture: Daily Kos types follow the “sausage making” much more closely than most and saying that it is not pretty is a huge understatement. Also, many of us also follow policy wonks like Paul Krugman and can see the huge gap between optimal policy and what we are getting.

Bill Maher on Republicans

From here.

In last night’s closing New Rule, Bill Maher went to town on people who vote Republican, comparing them to the jurors that found Casey Anthony not guilty. Now, we may agree or disagree on whether they made the right legal call, but let’s set that aside, and look at how Maher taps into the wave of anger against the jury that spread across the country when the verdict was announced this week, to land a solid blow against idiots who vote against their own economic interests because they believe in demonstrably false things.

And finally, New Rule. If you can look at a crime where everything points to one answer and not see it, you’re a dumbass. And if you can look at the deficit and not see that the problem is that the rich stopped paying taxes, you’re a Republican. And before you accuse me of equating the Casey Anthony verdict with Republican thinking, save your breath. I am. I am. I’m equating them.

I’m saying if you’re a working-class American who still votes Republican, then you don’t get to bitch about that verdict.

….

Now here’s Obama’s thinking, and it’s a little counter-intuitive, but try to follow it. When Clinton was President, the rich paid a little more taxes, and the government had money. Then Bush cut all those taxes, and now we don’t. I know it’s hard to grasp, it involves subtracting. But in suggesting that in these desperate times, we slightly raise the tax on private jets, Obama was baiting the Republicans to look like extremists by defending private jets.

But the gambit failed, because half the people are not outraged. Half of them say, I’m with the party that cuts all these programs for real people, for the 99%: Planned Parenthood, environmental protection, college, health care, infrastructure; but holds the line on private jets. Voting for them is as stupid as voting not guilty for the mom who lost her baby for a month, and went looking at a wet t-shirt contest.

(wild audience applause)

Video and full transcript below the fold.

8 July 2011 Posts: Jobs, hearts, Mitt Romney’s Lies and Thongs

Weekly address

Jobs report response

More “bipartisan” rhetoric; calls for austerity and “confidence” stuff. Again…DEMAND is where it is at, I think.

Paul Krugman goes on to point out that we are in a situation similar to where we were in 1937: the stimulus is petering out and…well..the recovery is stalling. He then attacks the notion that our current unemployment is “structural” and there isn’t much that can be done about it:

Why is unemployment remaining high? Because growth is weak — period, full stop, end of story. Historically, low or negative growth has meant rising unemployment, fast growth falling unemployment (Okun’s Law). Here’s a scatterplot of quarterly data since 1948, with pre-Great Recession observations in blue and observations since 2008 in red:

Yes, this is noisy data but what we are seeing falls within the “noise” range of the model. More growth leads to less unemployment and right now growth is stalling. And:

And if we had a structural unemployment problem, we’d be seeing labor shortages and rising wages. We aren’t: wages actually fell last month.

He goes on to say that we could fix this if we had the political will to do so (tax the wealthy, add more stimulus) and what is left unsaid (in this column) is that the President’s “balanced” approach isn’t going to work.

As far as 2012 horserace, Nate Silver compares this bad jobs report to one “at bat”; certainly a strike out (for us, the team at bat) but not the whole story.

On the other hand, we have THIS as the image of how out-of-touch the Republicans are:

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), a leading advocate of shrinking entitlement spending and the architect of the plan to privatize Medicare, spent Wednesday evening sipping $350 wine with two like-minded conservative economists at the swanky Capitol Hill eatery Bistro Bis.

It was the same night reports started trickling out about President Obama pressing Congressional leaders to consider changes to Social Security and Medicare in exchange for GOP support for targeted tax increases.

Yes, this means that rich people are rich. No surprise there, and no argument for a policy here. But when the wealthy whine about taxes….well…this is an image that we can use. Most political rhetoric (the effective rhetoric) is emotional (remember McCain’s houses?)

In all honesty, this was an effective ad, though it wasn’t effective with me; I knew that he had a rich wife and I didn’t care how many houses he had.

More politics concerning the economy

Mitt Romney pounced on a statement made by Presidential adviser David Plouffe:

Today, unemployment rose to 9.2%. Sign my petition calling on President Obama to reject White House adviser David Plouffe’s comments that ‘unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers’ do not matter to average Americans: http://mi.tt/AudacityofIndifference

So what did David Plouffe really say? In effect, he said that the average American goes more by what he/she sees in their own lives (e. g., am I employed? Can I make ends meet? Are my family, friends and loved ones able to make ends meet?) than they do by published economic indicators. Here is the transcript:

But the White House has now supplied a full transcript of the exchange in question, which it obtained from Bloomberg. Here’s the relevant part, with the controversial parts and the question he was answering in bold:

QUESTION: Axelrod likes to say that every campaign has inherited [inaudible]. You know, an environment in which unemployment is [inaudible] percent when the president runs for re-election, what’s — what’s the Obama narrative about that?

PLOUFFE: Well, listen, I don’t — you know, we’re a long way from 2012. We’re a long way from knowing what’s going on in the world and exactly what the economy is and who are opponent is.

I would make a general statement, though, because there is a lot of attention focused on the unemployment rate. The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers.

In fact, those terms very rarely pass their lips. So it’s a very one-dimensional view. They view the economy through their own personal prism. You see, people’s — people’s attitude towards their own personal financial situation has actually improved over time. You know, they’re still concerned about the long-term economic future of the country, but it’s things like “My sister was unemployed for six months and was living in my basement and now she has a job.”

There’s a — a “help wanted” sign. You know, the local diner was a little busier this week. Home Depot was a little busier. These are the ways people talk about the economy. They don’t talk about it in the terms of Washington.

And so their decision next year will be based upon two things, okay, how do I feel about things right now, and then, ultimately, campaigns are always much more about the future, and who do I think has got the best idea, the best vision for where to take the country?

I would submit to you that a healthy percentage of Americans, far more than a majority, believe the president has a very sound vision for where the country needs to go.

So, you know, people won’t vote based on the unemployment rate. They’re gonna vote based on, “How do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?”

It seems Plouffe was actually asked a question about whether and how the unemployment rate would impact the Presidential race. He replied by claiming that the number itself wouldn’t impact people’s votes. In other words, Plouffe himself didn’t initially establish the political context. Plouffe then launched into a discussion about how the anemic recovery is experienced by people on a personal level. It was in that context that Plouffe reiterated that people won’t vote based on the number alone.

But, though this is misleading, this is politics. We probably would have done the same thing to them.

What is Michelle Bachmann doing?
She is making a stance on social issues (banning porn, blasting gay marriages, signing right wing pledge sheets which include paragraphs that imply that blacks were better off, in terms of having two parent families, under slavery):

On Thursday, one of Iowa’s most influential social conservative organizations, The Family Leader, informed GOP presidential candidates that to win the group’s endorsement, they’ll have to sign a pledge. Family Leader president Bob Vander Plaats, a former Mike Huckabee ally, wants GOP contenders to commit to a list of 14 red-meat items, including opposition to gay marriage, a ban on Islamic Sharia law, a rejection of pornography, and an affirmation that married couples have better sex.

The group, which spearheaded the successful campaign to unseat state supreme court judges who had voted to legalize gay marriage, has been courted by candidates like Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty as a way of tapping into the state’s huge bloc of conservative Christian caucusgoers. What’s in the pledge? Here’s a quick rundown:

Presidential candidates who sign The Marriage Vow will sign off on support of personal fidelity to his/her spouse, appointing faithful constitutionalists as judges, opposition to any redefinition of marriage, and prompt reform of uneconomic and anti-marriage aspects of welfare policy, tax policy, and divorce law. The Marriage Vow also outlines support for the legal advocacy for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), humane efforts to protect women and children, rejection of anti-women Sharia Islam, safeguards for all married and unmarried U.S. military personnel, and commitment to downsizing government and the burden upon American families.

The document itself gets more specific. Point 5 begins with a “Recognition of the overwhelming statistical evidence that married people enjoy better health, better sex…” Point 9 rejects “forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.”

As far as the African Americans part:

Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is standing firm behind a pledge she signed Thursday that promotes marriage and social conservative values, but includes a passage that suggests black families were in better shape during slavery.

The Family Leader, an Iowa-based conservative group led by Bob Vander Plaats, issued the pledge formally called, “The Marriage Vow – A Declaration of Dependence Upon Marriage and Family.”

Elections
Bachmann Stands By Marriage Pact That Links Slavery to Black Family Values
By Stephen Clark

Presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann R-Minn., speaks at a Tea Party Rally outside the Iowa State Capitol in Des Moines Saturday afternoon.

Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is standing firm behind a pledge she signed Thursday that promotes marriage and social conservative values, but includes a passage that suggests black families were in better shape during slavery.

The Family Leader, an Iowa-based conservative group led by Bob Vander Plaats, issued the pledge formally called, “The Marriage Vow – A Declaration of Dependence Upon Marriage and Family.”

The two page document condemns gay marriage, abortion, pornography and infidelity. But perhaps the most controversial part is found in the preamble where the state of the black family in the slave era is compared to today.

“Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President,” the document reads

Surf to the Fox News link to link to the document itself.

Needless to say, defenders of the First Amendment are less than happy. (Randazza is one of my favorite ranters! He combines awesome ranting with deep knowledge and brains).

Science and Medicine…and evolution

Mano Singham writes about a new artificial heart that provides a continuous blood supply rather that “beat” (which provides pulses of blood) He notes that there are no ill effects to supplying blood in this manner which suggests that perhaps a beating heart is a case in which evolution provided a non-optimal but adequate solution to a problem.

Humor

Not that well done, but funny anyway. Yes, I know; many athletes use prayer as some sort of sports psychology (getting focused, etc.)

Humor
Someone at a department store has a sense of humor

see more funny videos, and check out our Yo Dawg lols!

9 July 2011 swim/lift/run

I am repeating my recent patterns; bad, discouraging run on one day, encouraging swim on the next.

Today: swim: 2200 yards:
500 of 25 3g, 25 swim, 25 fist, 25 swim. Time: just under 11 minutes
500 of kick/swim with fins: 2 were front/swim, 4 were side/swim, then I alternated front/swim, side/swim, side/swim to make 500.

1000: 17:21. 4:25, (4:19) 8:44, 13:02 (4:18), 17:21 (4:19).
Then I cooled down with 200 alternating back and breast.

The 1000: compare with 24 May 18:25 17 June 17:54 and 24 June 17:43.

I like the recent progress though this is a long way from 15:53 (September 14 2008); then again I was trained up for Big Shoulders at that time.

Lifting
I did rotator cuff stuff first and mixed in lunges and hip hikes.
I started with 3 sets of 10 on the adductor and abductor machines; the lunges were done with the body-pump bar. (10 each); 3 sets of 20 on the hip hikes (each side)

Incline press: 115 x 10, 135 x 6, 135 x 4, 135 x 4
curls: 3 sets of 10 x 25 lb. dumbbells
rows: 3 sets: 15 x 90 lb., 10 x 110, 10 x 110 (less leverage on this machine than on the Hammer)
pull downs: 3 sets of 12 x 137.5
sit ups: 35 (highest), 35 (second highest), 30 (3′rd highest)
military: 10 x 40 lb. dumbbell (one set)

Running: though the day was pretty I ran 2 miles on the treadmill (soft surface) to just get it over with: 10:35, 9:33 for 20:08. Ok; no piriformis pain.

Main Street Mile 2011: Ugh

Note: if you are searching for the overall and age group results:

Update: overall results here, age group results here.

Now for my personal stuff (of interest mostly to me and close friends)

The Main Street mile is a net downhill mile from the top of a bluff to near the Illinois River. I wasn’t in shape for this; 9 runs TOTAL since April 30 of this year, plus the double red cell donation less than 3 weeks ago. In fact, I was winded during warm ups.

Still, many of my friends were there and I wanted to give it a shot; I was assigned the 6-8:30 heat.
Background: PB is 5:30 in 1980, ran 5:41 (1600) in 1998, last broke 6 in 1999. Two years ago: 6:43.

How it went: I thought that I was starting slow but felt winded in the first 1/4 mile; that is NOT a good sign. I was at 1:50. The next 1/4 mile was a big drop and took 1:45; but I was toast. The next 1/4 was 2:00 and I was talking myself out of stopping. During this stage Theresa passed me…her shiny spandex shorts just glittered in the sunlight…and I could do nothing as she said “hi” to me. I trudged the last 1/4 in 2:08 and got passed all over the place; I swear that there were buzzards circling overhead.

7:45 was the final time though they screwed up the clock (showed 30 seconds faster…I wish).

Oh, the photos: they were taken by my daughter just before I drove downtown to take the bus to the start line (point to point course); one has to have a sense of humor about these things.

Dang it, I still look as if I am walking.

I was thinking: “just shoot me now”.

Update: overall results here, age group results here. Ironically my 2009 results would have placed me in the same position in my age group that this year’s results did. Go figure.

Bad Jobs Report for June 2011 and other items

Sports: I’ll be embarrassing myself at this later today:
Main Street Mile:

PEORIA —

In the first two years of the Main Street Mile, top finishing runners got nothing more than applause and a pat on the back.

This year, there will be prize money on the line when competitors line up beginning at 6 p.m. Friday for the fastest mile race in Peoria.

“We have over $2,000 in the purse altogether,” said Adam White, one of the coordinators of the race and owner of Running Central. “The winner gets $500, second place $300 and third $200 in men’s and women’s divisions.”

And that’s not all. Age group winners, and there are many, many age groups, each get a $20 gift certificate for shoes.

“We have a lot of age groups to make it fun,” said White. “And we have tight age groups to make it competitive.”

Defending men’s champion Parker Thompson — a state champion in both cross country and track at Tremont who will be a junior at Wheaton in the fall — will be in the field again this year. As will Richwoods and Butler graduate Justin Young, who finished sixth in the Steamboat four-mile race last month.
[...]

The race starts near Running Central (700 W. Main) and finishes in front of Richard’s (311 Main Street). There will be multiple heats, with the fastest runners in the final heats.

There also is team competition this year. The lowest cumulative time for a three-person team is the winner.

“Also new this year is our post-race party,” said White. “It starts at 7 p.m. inside Fulton Plaza. Food and beverages will be available at Sully’s. Runners with a race number get in free, for others we’re just asking a $3 donation.”

That donation, along with the proceeds from the race, will go to the Peoria Area Track and Field Club or the E.L.I.T.E. program.

“We’re very grateful to Legacy Investments for being our premiere sponsor,” said White. “Without them, we wouldn’t be able to underwrite the majority of this race.”

Though Running Central soon will be moving from its Main Street location to Peoria Heights, White said the race will remain downtown.

“I have no intention of moving it anywhere,” he said. “We’re very grateful to all the parties that have made this event possible the last three years. The race is not about Running Central, it’s about the kids who are benefiting from what we’re doing. That, to me, is what the focus is and as long as the organizations involved continue to value this event, I am more than happy to give my time and energy to organize and promote it.”

In 2009, when I was running a 24 minute 5K, I ran this in 6:43 (but had to work an extra month to run a 6:52 1600 meter on a flat track course) I last broke 6 minutes in 1999 and ran a 5:41 1600 in 1998; lifetime PB (as a young man) was 5:30 (back in 1980 and 5:31 in 1982).

This year: I am clueless. Perhaps 7:15 to 7:30?

Science
How does increased CO2 levels relate to surface temperatures? Scientists are teasing out the relationship from past clues:

The study, which for the first time compared multiple geochemical and temperature proxies to determine mean annual and seasonal temperatures, is published online in the journal Geology, the premier publication of the Geological Society of America, and is forthcoming in print Aug. 1.

SU Alumnus Caitlin Keating-Bitonti ’09 is the corresponding author of the study. She conducted the research as an undergraduate student under the guidance of Linda Ivany, associate professor of earth sciences, and Scott Samson, professor of earth sciences, both in Syracuse University’s College of Arts and Sciences. Early results led the team to bring in Hagit Affek, assistant professor of geology and geophysics at Yale University, and Yale Ph.D. candidate Peter Douglas for collaborative study. The National Science Foundation and the American Chemical Society funded the research.

“The early Eocene Epoch (50 million years ago) was about as warm as the Earth has been over the past 65 million years, since the extinction of the dinosaurs,” Ivany says. “There were crocodiles above the Arctic Circle and palm trees in Alaska. The questions we are trying to answer are how much warmer was it at different latitudes and how can that information be used to project future temperatures based on what we know about CO2 levels?”

Previous studies have suggested that the polar regions (high-latitude areas) during the Eocene were very hot—greater than 30 degrees centigrade (86 degrees Fahrenheit). However, because the sun’s rays are strongest at the Earth’s equator, tropical and subtropical areas (lower latitude) will always be at least as warm as polar areas, if not hotter. Until now, temperature data for subtropical regions were limited.

The SU and Yale research team found that average Eocene water temperature along the subtropical U.S. Gulf Coast hovered around 27 degrees centigrade (80 degrees Fahrenheit), slightly cooler than earlier studies predicted. Modern temperatures in the study area average 75 degrees Fahrenheit. Additionally, the scientists discovered that, during the Eocene, temperatures in the study area did not change more than 3 to 5 degrees centigrade across seasons, whereas today, the area’s seasonal temperatures fluctuate by 12 degrees centigrade. The new results indicate that the polar and sub-polar regions, while still very warm, could not have been quite as hot as previously suggested.

Surf to the article to see HOW the scientists teased out the data.

Of course, our own climate change continues to warm arctic water.

Chimps: their voice recognition abilities are such that they can recognized imperfect words:

Panzee was raised from 8 days old, by humans, and was spoken to and treated as if she were human. At the same time, she was taught to use symbols called lexigrams to communicate.

“This has resulted in Panzee showing proficiency in understanding approximately 130 English words,” researcher Lisa Heimbauer told BBC Nature.

That made her an ideal subject to test hypotheses about how well other species, rather than humans, might be able to understand speech.

“There is a view about the human ability to produce and perceive speech that is called ‘Speech is Special’,” said Ms Heimbauer, who is studying for her PhD.

“This argument proposes that, besides humans being the only species able to produce speech, due to their anatomy, they also have a specialised, cognitive module to process speech.”

Evidence for that comes from studies showing that humans can understand speech even when it is incomplete or highly distorted.

“However, an alternative view is that auditory processing is fundamentally similar across most mammals, and that animals therefore have latent abilities for speech perception,” said Ms Heimbauer.
Panzee the chimpanzee (image: L Heimbauer) Panzee uses symbols called lexigrams to communicate

So she and her colleagues Michael Beran and Michael Owren, all from Georgia State University in Atlanta, US, tested Panzee to find out if she too could recognise incomplete or distorted spoken words.

They played Panzee noise-vocoded speech, which alters the frequencies of the spoken words. This produces a sound similar to what people with cochlear implants hear.

They also played Panzee so-called sine-wave speech, which is synthesised from just three pure tones.

Both types of degraded speech have been shown to be understandable by people.

“She is only one of a few animals who could be tested in this way, to reveal what the speech perception abilities of a common chimp/human ancestor may have been,” said Ms Heimbauer.

Surf to the article to hear the distorted words and to learn more.

Politics
Vote for Michelle Bachmann: she vows to ban pornography.

Economy
This Fox News host was probably trying to get a rise out of Alan Grayson. But his rantings (staged or not) represent how many conservatives (even educated ones) view the world; to them, taxes steal from the worthy and give to the less worthy.

Look: I KNOW that safety net programs are sometimes abused and a percentage of the population has been “hooked” on them. But for the most part, liberals want stimulus to put people BACK TO WORK.

Speaking of jobs: the latest report is terrible.

The job market hit a major roadblock last month, as hiring slowed to a crawl and the unemployment rate unexpectedly rose.

The economy gained just 18,000 jobs in the month, the government reported Friday, sharply missing most expectations and coming in even weaker than the paltry 25,000 jobs added in May.

It marked the weakest month since September, when the economy was still losing jobs.

Note: the private sector added 54,000 jobs (too small) but public jobs dropped by 39,000.

The above shows our jobs recession and how it compares to other recessions. The job losses bottomed out but we are stuck in an abyss.

Note: the stimulus that was passed was half as big as many economists wanted, and the proposed size of the stimulus (by the Keynesians, aka “dirty Hippies”) was calculated from standard economic formulas.

And the report was even worse than it appears as wages have fallen slightly.

So, is there hope here? I am growing pessimistic. Here is why:
1. It appears that our President has fallen for the right wing view of the economy

Obviously, the details matter a lot, but progressives, and Democrats in general, are understandably very worried. Should they be? In a word, yes.

Now, this might just be theater: Mr. Obama may be pulling an anti-Corleone, making Republicans an offer they can’t accept. The reports say that the Obama plan also involves significant new revenues, a notion that remains anathema to the Republican base. So the goal may be to paint the G.O.P. into a corner, making Republicans look like intransigent extremists — which they are.

But let’s be frank. It’s getting harder and harder to trust Mr. Obama’s motives in the budget fight, given the way his economic rhetoric has veered to the right. In fact, if all you did was listen to his speeches, you might conclude that he basically shares the G.O.P.’s diagnosis of what ails our economy and what should be done to fix it. And maybe that’s not a false impression; maybe it’s the simple truth.

One striking example of this rightward shift came in last weekend’s presidential address, in which Mr. Obama had this to say about the economics of the budget: “Government has to start living within its means, just like families do. We have to cut the spending we can’t afford so we can put the economy on sounder footing, and give our businesses the confidence they need to grow and create jobs.”

That’s three of the right’s favorite economic fallacies in just two sentences. No, the government shouldn’t budget the way families do; on the contrary, trying to balance the budget in times of economic distress is a recipe for deepening the slump. Spending cuts right now wouldn’t “put the economy on sounder footing.” They would reduce growth and raise unemployment. And last but not least, businesses aren’t holding back because they lack confidence in government policies; they’re holding back because they don’t have enough customers — a problem that would be made worse, not better, by short-term spending cuts.

2. The deal that the Republicans will eventually agree to is more of this “make things good for rich people and all will be well” stuff:

So take a look at one of the tax loopholes that Congressional Republicans are refusing to close — even if the cost is that America’s credit rating blows up. This loophole has nothing to do with creating jobs and everything to do with protecting some of America’s wealthiest financiers.

If there were an award for Most Unconscionable Tax Loophole, this one would win grand prize.

Wait, wake up! I know that “tax policy” makes one’s eyes glaze over, but that’s how financiers have gotten away with paying a lower tax rate than their chauffeurs or personal trainers. Tycoons have bet for years that the public is too stupid or distracted to note that in many cases they’re paying just a 15 percent tax rate.

What’s at stake is the “carried interest” loophole, and President Obama is pushing to close it. The White House estimates that this would raise $20 billion over a decade. But Congressional Republicans walked out of budget talks rather than discuss raising revenues from measures such as this one.

The biggest threat to the United States this summer probably doesn’t come from Iran or Libya but from the home-grown risk that the nation will default on its debts. We don’t know the economic consequences for America or the world, and some of the hand-wringing may be overblown — or maybe not — but it’s reckless of Republicans even to toy with such a threat.

This carried interest loophole benefits managers of financial partnerships such as hedge funds, private equity funds, venture capital funds and real estate funds — who are among the highest-paid people in the world. John Paulson, a hedge fund manager in New York City, made $4.9 billion last year, top of the chart for hedge fund managers, according to AR Magazine, which follows hedge funds. That’s equivalent to the average per capita income of 184,000 Americans, according to my back-of-envelope calculations based on Census Bureau figures.

Mr. Paulson declined to comment on this tax break, but here’s how it works. These fund managers are compensated mostly with a performance bonus of 20 percent or more of the profits they make. Under this carried interest loophole, that 20 percent is eligible to be taxed at the long-term capital gains rate (if the fund’s underlying assets are held long enough) of just 15 percent rather than the regular personal income rate of 35 percent.

This tax loophole is also intellectually vacuous. The performance fee is a return on the manager’s labor, not his or her capital, so there’s no reason to give it preferential capital gains treatment.

This is what the other party is fighting for.

3. The Republicans will get away with it:

Except that conventional wisdom is, as usual, wrong. It discounts the willingness and ability of the Republican Party to use subterfuge, dealing in ill faith, and plain dishonesty in order to get what it wants while keeping its coalition together and attacking Democrats in the process. The gameplan is actually fairly simple:

1) Force the Democrats (partly with their own help) into a horrible negotiating position by threatening to take the entire country down if the Republicans don’t get what they want.

2) Get everything they want, including probable cuts to social security and medicare, disguised as slight tweaks to the COLA (cost-of-living-adjustment) calculus. Which is still a cut, and worse yet, a camel’s nose under the tent, from which more cuts to social security and medicare are probable in the future.

3) Complain that the compromise already stacked ridiculously in their favor doesn’t go far enough.

4) When the final deal comes before the Congress, vote against it en masse, but with just enough crossover to make sure it passes by a slim margin.

5) Call these votes against the deal a principled stand against raising America’s debt.

6) Force Democrats to vote en masse and alone for cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

7) Accuse Dems of cutting Social Security and Medicare because they refused to cut “wasteful spending.”

8) Spend the entirety of 2012 attacking Democrats for cutting Social Security and Medicare, while proclaiming their commitment to fiscal discipline and touting their votes against increasing the debt ceiling.

(from: thereisnospoon at Daily Kos)

So, what to do? Don’t expect Trumanesque fire and brimstone from the President; that isn’t his style. In fact, most of this article correctly describes him.

Now while this article was not meant to be flattering to the President, I am ok with it. Hey, if trickle down economics really worked for the country as a whole, I’d be ok with it. Data shows that it doesn’t and right now, we are in a demand crisis.

Update This Dkos commenter describes the President as I see him now:

People at DKos have trouble with history because they would rather see it through the lens of myths and legends grown around human beings than what people actually were like and did, including luminaries like Lincoln, Teddy, FDR, MLK, Reagan, etc. In that regard, they are like Teabaggers.

Obama is a student of history. He knows how slow institutions work. He knows not every deal, as in your example of Saving the Union, is perfect and is often filled with terrible choices. But he knows MANY, not all, must be cut to move forward. He is aware of all the criticism the men before him took. But in the end, they work because cooler heads prevailed. That’s his faith.

Obama is not an activist. He WAS. But he now has greater responsibilities. What the diarist WANTS (ie barnburning speeches while criscrossing the country) is not, in Obama’s view, what a President does.

Now, I agree with alot of what the diarist said. And I wish he would be more out front on JOBS. I wish he would push harder for the Infrastructure Bank, even if it’s for the optics. But if you actually look at what Obama has passed and pushed, he’s made enormous changes. Things that were unimaginable just 10 years ago are now law or on their way to being implemented. He IS an incrementalist by nature. But it’s not a bad thing.

And to quote someone in another diary: “Someone should ask a Japanese American how great FDR was.”

But it may be possible that he just isn’t working out, in terms of the economy, or that our economic situation is just very, very difficult at this time.

Sure, I am going to work for his reelection because the Republicans are just offering ridiculous “trickle down” solutions; this situation feels to me like two doctors offering arsenic but one wants a lethal does and the other merely wants a “keep you from getting well” dose

About those social security cuts that are on the table….

Yes, that is Olivia and Lynn, prior to our social 5.6 km (3.5 mile) hike on the East Peoria Bikepath; the pace was social (16:20 mpm) and I had to speed up; my piriformis doesn’t like too much slow walking.

Still, it is much improved.

Now about politics and those social security “cuts” that are on the table:
What is being discussed is how the COLA adjustments (cost of living adjustments) are being calculated. Basically, there is a discussion on what “inflation correction factor” to use, and we are basically talking about people’s COLA raises being lowered by a few pennies per period:

If you don’t like economics, public finance or numbers, then let me not bury the lede and explain exactly what’s on the table. If enacted, the average social security recipient would get 14 cents less of an increase per month, but only in a month in which the social security benefit actually went up by about $34. So the assertion being made in several diaries is that social security recipients will revolt because their average monthly benefit went up from $1,044 to $1,078.31 instead of $1,078.45. Of course someone would have to point out some highly technical macro economic measuring theory first, and then get them riled about about that monthly dime at a time when they are actually getting a net of more money. So yes, it does look like 11 dimension chess (offering the Republicans nothing of substance).

Note the math is a bit off; it should be something on the order of 4 dollars per month less COLA.

That’s it. I feel a bit foolish…

7 July 2011: Global Warming’s effect on the US and Obama in a Box

Workout notes Yoga with Ms. Vickie.
Then a 2200 yard swim:
500 of (25 3g, 25 swim, 25 fist, 25 swim) about 11 minutes
500 of (25 kick (front, side, side), 25 swim) with fins
5 x 200 on the 4 (third was on the 5 due to goggle fogging:
3:25, 3:22, 3:20, 3:22, 3:20, 3:21.8 average or 1:40.9 average per 100
200 different strokes cool down.

Note: the shoulder is not painful at all though I felt a weird “clicking” during down dog in yoga. The piriformis is silent during swimming which is a welcome change. The right knee was slightly warm, but it did rain today. The body is healing but I’ve got a long way to being able to train at full tilt….unless…this is the new normal for me. I hope not…but I can live with it if that is the case.

Who knows; maybe I’ll be one of those “walk a 5:30 marathon every once in a while and run a 25:30 5K when I am in shape” types of people and maybe it isn’t going to get any better than that for me?

Side note: one of the women swimming in the lane next to me was wearing a suit that exposed the cut-line between her gluteal cheek and leg.

Speaking of athletic butts: someone on flickr posted photos of a road race and there are many shots like this:

there. Here is the address of the photo set.

Posts
New climate patterns in the United States: overall, it appears as if the US has been warming up though the center portion of the country seems to be enjoying slightly cooler than average summers. Check out the maps at Mother Jones:

(Click on the thumbnails to see the maps at Mother Jones.)

Politics
It sure appears that President Obama is in a box. This New York Times article sure angered some liberal Democrats:

Mr. Obama, who is to meet at the White House with the bipartisan leadership of Congress in an effort to work out an agreement to raise the federal debt limit, wants to move well beyond the $2 trillion in savings sought in earlier negotiations and seek perhaps twice as much over the next decade, Democratic officials briefed on the negotiations said Wednesday.

The president’s renewed efforts follow what knowledgeable officials said was an overture from Mr. Boehner, who met secretly with Mr. Obama last weekend, to consider as much as $1 trillion in unspecified new revenues as part of an overhaul of tax laws in exchange for an agreement that made substantial spending cuts, including in such social programs as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security — programs that had been off the table.

The intensifying negotiations between the president and the speaker have Congressional Democrats growing anxious, worried they will be asked to accept a deal that is too heavily tilted toward Republican efforts and produces too little new revenue relative to the magnitude of the cuts.

Congressional Democrats said they were caught off guard by the weekend White House visit of Mr. Boehner — a meeting the administration still refused to acknowledge on Wednesday — and Senate Democrats raised concerns at a private party luncheon on Wednesday.

House Democrats have their own fears about the negotiations, which they expressed in an hourlong meeting Wednesday night with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner.

“Depending on what they decide to recommend, they may not have Democrats,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, said in an interview. “I think it is a risky thing for the White House to basically take the bet that we can be presented with something at the last minute and we will go for it.”

For a sample of such reaction, go here.

So what to do? It appears as if the Republicans are holding the country hostage:

Over the weekend Massachussetts Gov. Deval Patrick had a fascinating op-ed in the Washington Post, describing a 2003 Harvard reunion with GOP anti-tax fanatic Grover Norquist (they were classmates). Norquist was bragging about creating a permanent Republican majority in America, and when some dreamer suggested there might be a Democrat in the White House again someday, Norquist made this promise: “We’ll make it impossible for him to govern like a Democrat.”

Norquist and his anti-tax jihadists made good on their word. President Obama is backing a debt ceiling “compromise” that is a fundamentally Republican, proposing $6 in spending cuts for every dollar in “revenue enhancement,” and even the little bit it does in the tax code only closes loopholes; it doesn’t touch tax rates, even on top earners. (But former Joe Biden economic advisor Jared Bernstein laid out a way to raise $1 trillion in revenue without even touching tax rates, and it’s worth a look.) The GOP insists that closing tax loopholes must be paid for with a cut in tax rates, so the plan can stay “revenue neutral” – which is central to the “No Taxes Pledge” Norquist makes Republicans sign in blood. The wealthy in this country, along with corporations, now pay the lowest effective tax rates than they have for 50 years – and some still want more.

The debt-ceiling vote has been a routine Congressional process for a long time; it happened seven times under George W. Bush with little or no protest. Now the GOP has made it an occasion to take the economy hostage, knowing that the consequences of default are so high – much more interest on the debt we owe, an inability to borrow more, plus draconian government program shutdowns — the president may be unable to win their game of chicken. The way the game looks now – and it is a game to the GOP – they win, whatever happens.

If the GOP won’t agree to the fundamentally Republican deficit-reduction plan Democrats have reportedly offered, with its 6:1 cuts to “revenue enhancement” ratio, one of two things happen: Either the president caves and makes the deficit cuts entirely on the spending side – which will hurt the economy as well as devastate seniors, veterans and poor and middle class families who rely on goverment services. Or he stands up to the hostage-takers and the nation defaults. The economic chaos that follows won’t merely mean he can’t govern like a Democrat, but that he can’t govern at all.

And no, it isn’t “well, both sides do that” type of thing. At this time, there is a fundamental difference between the make up of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party:

The chart that I’m going to show you is one of the more important ones that we’ve presented at FiveThirtyEight in some time. It helps explain a lot of what’s going on in American politics today, from the negotiations over the federal debt ceiling to the Republican presidential primaries. And it’s pretty simple, really, although it took me some time to track down the data.

Here’s what the chart will show: The Republican Party is dependent, to an extent unprecedented in recent political history, on a single ideological group. That group, of course, is conservatives. It isn’t a bad thing to be in favor with conservatives: by some definitions they make up about 40 percent of voters. But the terms ‘Republican’ and ‘conservative’ are growing closer and closer to being synonyms; fewer and fewer nonconservatives vote Republican, and fewer and fewer Republican voters are not conservative.

Here are the charts from the Nate Silver article (click to see the full sized charts at Nate Silver’s blog at the New York Times)

That is why it is appearing more and more hopeless to me. Right now the Republicans have a great chance to get most of what they want and still they won’t say yes. And yes, even some Republicans are saying that the President is enabling the opposition.

I haven’t panicked yet. But it looks gloomy to me. You know the situation is bad when even Republicans are sorry that the President wasn’t tougher on Republicans!

Maybe, just maybe, President Obama is simply too nice to govern.