Jeffrey Goldberg Names The Nut Job Du Jour

Are Birthers the New 9/11 Truthers?

Bob Cohn recently tweeted the idea (I can't believe I just wrote that) that the new hip nutjobs are the birthers, and compared them to the now-out creationists. I get the point, but the more appropriate comparison might be to the 9/11 "truth" movement. Creationists don't believe in conspiracies; they just believe that dinosaurs are 5,000 years old. Birthers and 9/11 truthers (or, alternatively, "birfers" and "troofers") both believe that the government is out to get us.

Sphere: Related Content

Impressions of News Conference IV

Did the President say "health insurance reform" and not "health care reform"? Why the change? Sphere: Related Content

Impressions of News Conference III

I find it hard to believe that there will be no sacrifice needed on behalf of the currently insured Americans if these reforms are enacted.

I think he should have given a more adequate answer to the LA Times reporter's question about transparency.

Dissociated there was no question regarding the birthers. Sphere: Related Content

Impressions of News Conference

The evening was void of anything new. But the President did offer some moral ideals for health care. At one point proclaiming that "in a country like ours that's not right." He was referring to a story about a family that was told that their health insurer would not cover their daughters leukemia treatment. I think he sounded strong but could have been stronger regarding the deadline in August. I am still unsure what happens if there is not a bill by the deadline, besides the President will look weaker. Sphere: Related Content

Conor Friedersdorf at the Daily Dish On Dr. Gates Arrest

Benefits of Doubts

by Conor Friedersdorf

On Internet discussion boards I've been following, people are debating the altercation between black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates and the Cambridge, Massachusetts police department. A point of disagreement is whether police officers should be given "the benefit of the doubt" in these situations due to the difficulty of their jobs.

Lest anyone doubt that the job is difficult, let me share a brief story. On a ride along with the NYPD in Manhattan, the squad car I inhabited got a call that sent us speeding from Union Square to a destination maybe 10 blocks away, tires screeching, sires wailing. The dispatcher said merely that someone reported a street scuffle involving a dozen men, that one wielded a baseball bat, and that a street front window had already been shattered. As we pulled onto a small street in question, under cover of darkness, view of the altercation was obscured by a large truck parked illegally on the street. The effect was that after the squad car rounded its cab, we found ourselves on the edge of the melee.

It all happened damned quickly. The two officers in the front of the car jumped out immediately, pushed through the onlookers at the edges of the commotion, grabbed a guy and pinned him against the wall. As I watched from the backseat of the squad car, I couldn't figure out why they grabbed that particular guy, but it quickly became apparent that in a split second they'd somehow identified the only man on the scene with a weapon (a knife), separated him from everyone else, and disarmed him, without ever brandishing their own guns. I was impressed, and conscious of how easy it would've been to make a mistake in that situation: a violent altercation already underway, a crowd of men, one of them armed, and darkness. It gave me a better idea of how police officers are sometimes killed, and how they sometimes injure or kill the wrong person.

Given that kind of situation, where split second decisions are forced upon officers, adrenaline is pumping, and all the rest, I understand the impulse to give them the benefit of some doubts. But why should police officers require the benefit of the doubt when they are confronted with a lone guy -- old, nonthreatening in appearance, apparently well-dressed -- who is pushing on the front door of a house in a nice neighborhood? Does that sound like a particularly dangerous situation? That isn't to make a judgment about what actually happened, or whether the officer misbehaved. It is merely to say that the matter should be decided on its merits, that it is irrational to give the officer any special "your job is hard" benefit of the doubt, especially in a circumstance significantly less difficult than many police face. Why privilege the story of the officer over a law-abiding citizen who turns out to have been outside his own house? If anyone deserves the benefit of the doubt in cases like this one, it is the citizen.

Sphere: Related Content

Quality Reporting From Ana Marie Cox via Twitter

anamariecox.@whitehouse: You are out of toilet paper in the ladies' restroom in the press area. TY, amc 20 minutes ago from TweetDeck

This is really funny.
Sphere: Related Content

‘Birther’ Boom at The New York Times Is Worth A Visit

'Birther' Boom Sphere: Related Content

Lindsay Graham That Liberal Multi-Culturalist F__K

Michelle Malkin is not surprised that Senator Graham has announced his intention to vote yes on the nomination of Judge Sotomayor. Sphere: Related Content

President Meets With Mormon Leader. Maybe They Know Where He Was Born.

President Obama sat down with Thomas S. Monson, president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They likely spoke about the posthumous baptizism of President Obama's mother. After that uncomfortable subject perhap they discuss where Barack Obama was born. Monson did present to the President "a detailed family tree in five leather-bound volumes." Can we have the birthers copied on that.


The Salt Lake Tribune

Thanks to Andy Lesage Sphere: Related Content

The Health Care Debate Made Simple

I don't know what I am taking about, therefore I can't have an opinion on the policy choices.

Michael Wolff writes,

"So how is it possible to have an opinion -- for so many people to have such heated opinions -- about something that they cannot possibly understand?

The answer is that most of us don't have opinions. The only people who really have opinions are people being paid to have opinions -- for or against. To the extent that people who are not being paid to have opinions have an opinion, these are largely opinions not about health care reform, but about other people's opinions about health care reform. We've been propagandized, in other words."

I think he may be correct. Sphere: Related Content

John McWhorter On The Arrest Of Dr. Gates

Henry Louis Gates has been getting some poor treatment from some outlets.

http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/20090722_Letters__Black_prof_pulled_rank_at_wrong_moment.html

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDg0ZDYxOGIxNGM3ZDJjZTMxZWYwZDYyNGU3Y2MwNmE=

http://www.kxmc.com/News/Nation/409289.asp

Perhaps Dr. Gates could have behaved differently if certain reports are accurate, but that misses the larger point. Luckily, John McWhorter works to bring the focus back to the broader issue that Dr. Gates' arrest displays. Sphere: Related Content

Where is the Transparency

Barack Obama needs to live up to his promise of transparency. The administration should release the White House records regarding health care meetings. The LA Times Article. Sphere: Related Content

A Birther Responds: President Obama's Family Is Unusual

Here is a reader's response (via Facebook) to the post An Answer to Crazy Birthers; Amend Article II Section I.

"Thanks for the post, but it's hardly an answer, as you don't actually address the issue at all.
You do, however, play the race card. You imply that it's simply the fact that Mr. Obama is not white that prompts us to question his place of birth. And that's a cheap shot.
Mr. Obama was born to a woman separated from her Kenyan husband, a woman who went to see him shortly before Obama was born. Obama spent his early youth abroad, thinks of himself as a citizen of the world, and wrote an autobiography strongly focused on his absent father and his supposed African roots.
That's unusual. We've never had such an exotic candidate with such a peculiar personal story. Most past presidents have had two American parents.
So it's not unreasonable to ask to see some proof of his place of birth. What is unreasonable is that he steadfastly refuses to provide it. In fact, that goes beyond unreasonable: it's bizarre."

The reader believes I am taking a cheap shot and playing the "race card". His implication is that Barack Obama's race has nothing to do with the birthers ridiculous ideas. But he goes on to tell me that the reason the birth certificate is important is because President Obama is "exotic" and his family background is "unusual". These sound like code words but perhap this reader does not even recognize his own implication. I would concede that President Obama's family is not typical of past presidents but "unusual". This debate is bizarre. Sphere: Related Content

Implicit Support For Crazy People and A Non Issue

Why can't some republican talkers follow Mike Castle's example and just speak the truth about these nutty birthers. Here are two videos where republicans are nearly implicit in support for the crazy concerns of these people. The first is Liz Cheney with Larry King. The second is Chris Matthews speaking with Rep. Bill Campbell of California. Watching this you could think that the congressman had gun to head forcing him not to say that Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States.



Sphere: Related Content

The Toke Tax

To help close a budget gap Oakland, CA will tax medical marijuana. At $18 per $1,000 in sales or 1.8 percent will generate $300,000 for the city estimates the city adminsitrator. Sphere: Related Content

Adding Historical Context To The Birthers

John Avlon at The Daily Beast puts the birther craziness in some historical context.
Sphere: Related Content

The Economy May Be Deader Than We Thought

According to the Los Angeles Times more bodies are going unclaimed at the coroners office because families can't afford funeral services. Perhaps these families should read yesterdays New York Times. Sphere: Related Content

The Cost of Marriage Laws

Time and the pecuniary cost of marriage laws has effect on the rate of marriage finds new NBER study
Sphere: Related Content

Klein on The Difficulties of Health IT.

Ezra Klein nails The Difficulties of Health IT. Sphere: Related Content

An Answer to the Crazy Birthers; Amend Article II Section I

The video of Rep. Mike Castle's recent town hall meeting in Delaware is scary. Scary because Castle did not know what to do and the woman ranting was not only crazy, but intensely passionate. Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic asks, "should The GOP Take The Birther Threat Seriously?" It is obvious from this video that Mike Castle might want to take it seriously but does he have to? Castle won the seat in 2008 by 23 percentage points. Barack Obama won Delaware by 25 points. Up until a few days ago he must have thought he was safe in 2010. This seems to point that Castle could ignore these crazy folks but as Ambinder points out:

Republicans have to be extra careful. If they give credence to the birthers, they're (not only advancing ignorance but also) betraying the narrowness of their base. If they dismiss this growing movement, they might drive birthers to find more extreme candidates, which will fragment a Republican political coalition ignorance but also) betraying the narrowness of their base. If they dismiss this growing movement, they might drive birthers to find more extreme candidates, which will fragment a Republican political coalition.

This crazy issue has raised a few questions about past presidential campaigns. In the past how have presidential candidates formally expressed their natural born citizenship? Did they at all? I think that it is important. What did they do beyond the prima facie evidence that they are white. It is troubling if being white is a sign of natural citizenship.

Also, if there are going to be efforts wasted to argue both sides of HR 1503 why not shift those efforts to change Article II Section I of the constitution to allow naturalized citizen eligibility for president. Does this restriction have any meaningful purpose today?

You can look at the bill specifics here http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1503

Here is the list of cosponsor:

Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R-TN7]

Rep. Dan Burton [R-IN5]

Rep. John Campbell [R-CA48]

Rep. John Carter [R-TX31]

Rep. John Culberson [R-TX7]

Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R-VA6]

Rep. Kenny Marchant [R-TX24]

Rep. Randy Neugebauer [R-TX19]

Rep. Ted Poe [R-TX2]

Sphere: Related Content

Want To Be A Model -- FACEBOOK Can Help!

Facebook is now using the photos of "friends" in ads. After the blow back from user over the ownership of content you would think that Facebook would be more careful.

Facebook now lets advertisers use your picture.


Thanks to Shawn.
Sphere: Related Content

Terrible TARP

When I invest my money understanding where it is is vital to understand risk. If a broker doesn't answer my questions I sell and move my funds elsewhere. I wish we could do that with the TARP funds.

Wall Street Journal article this afternoon states:

While Mr. Barofsky [TARP Special Inspector General] said the Treasury has generally been cooperative, one issue could be communication between Mr. Barofsky and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Asked Tuesday when he last spoke to Mr. Geithner, Mr. Barofsky acknowledged that their last conversation occurred in January, just a "couple of minutes before a larger meeting."

This is a bad way to invest. The administration that campaigned on transparency needs to fix this problem. Sphere: Related Content

Rick Astley & Nirvana

Found at Daily Dish Sphere: Related Content

I coined a word

Check it out on Urban Dictionary Sphere: Related Content

Do The Right Thing? Delaware Edition

I love when politicians have to confront crazy people. I love it even more when they do the right thing.

Sphere: Related Content

Has Barack Obama had a lasting effect on our election participation?

Has Barack Obama had a lasting effect on our election participation?

The Census Bureau has released data that shows the turnout in the 2008 election was up by about five million voters over 2004. That increases include an increase of 2 million black and Hispanic voters along with 600,000 Asians voters. The number of white voters remained nearly even with 2004. Voter turnout between 18 and 24 increased by two percent. The turn our among young black increased by about eight percent.

The data from the Census can be found here.

This increase in turnout is a great shift for American elections. This change will broaden our discussion to policy and make marginal voice louder in the ears of politicians.

It is proper to assume that Barack Obama was the catalyst of the increase in turnout. But will this Obama Effect be long lasting? Will the new voters which Mr. Obama brought into the voting booth stay in the voting booth?

I hope the Obama Effect is permanent and growing. The first indication of the power of this effect will be the congressional elections of 2010. The turnout for the 2008 presidential election was nearly 62% nationwide and the 2004 turnout was about 60%. While turnout in past seven midterm elections was only 38 percent and 42 percent the 2004 midterm was only 40 percent. If that spread between president election and midterm narrows in 2010 we could have an indication of Barack Obama's impact on our elections.

Sphere: Related Content

I'm Rick James, bi...

Police in New Rochelle don't think Dave Chappelle is funny.

Here is a story of teen apparently mocking police by performing some Dave Chappelle. Not surprisingly he was arrested.

Here is some Chappelle.
Sphere: Related Content

Herculean Editors Tackle Sarah Palin's Resignation Speech

Editors at Vanity Fair take the red pencil to the Governor's speech and turn it into poetry, well at least English. Sphere: Related Content

Does Apple Have a Monopoly With the iPhone and iTunes?

A writer at PCWorld thinks that Apple's iPhone content market should be broken up to allow competition. Unfortunately David Coursey’s economic reasoning is all wrong. His ideas rest on his assumption that the Apple iTunes store is a monopoly.

The Apple iTunes store is not a monopoly. As Coursey writes in his article music can be purchased from many other firms, virtual and brick and mortar, then loaded onto a handheld devices. A monopoly is a market that has only one seller. In the area of applications for the iPhone and other Apple devices there also does not exist a monopoly. Apple is not the only seller. There are thousands of sellers. The iTunes app store is essentially a virtual mall where each developer sells his or her apps. Apple is, for the sake of this metaphor, the owner of the mall.

A deeper analysis of the argument would lead us to conclusion that the iPhone, iTunes and the iTunes store are bundled products. Bundling is way for firms to move multiple products together. You get iTunes for free because you bought the expensive iPhone. If Apple were to unbundle these products iTunes would no longer be free. It is likely that the price for products on the store would rise from their current “prices low” enough that the remorse of a bad purchase is negligible.

There may also be added costs to consumers if the package is unbundled. The time or search costs associated with finding the right application would increase.

You want to tackle a problem get Apple to distribute the phone to other carriers.

Sphere: Related Content

I think Sarah Palin is twourettic!!

I looks like Sarah Palin is giving a speech in 140 character nuggets. You can read the thread here. I don't think she is done yet. Remember to read the thread in the reverse order.

Are people tired of Sarah Palin? Her nuttiness fascinates me. Perhaps I will do a poll on Facebook.

The highlights are that she doesn't want to sue the people she calls "serial complainers" (ethics complainer) but she thinks a veteran should sue them. As she says, "someone who's put their life on the line protecting even opponents' right to speak & protest, was willing to die for freedom of press."

Her argument is disgusting. Hidden behind her false patriotism is the implication that there are bad people exercising that freedom that soldiers fight to protect. Perhaps someone is abusing the AK Ethics Act but to try to guilt people with the cliche "someone who's put their life on the line protecting even opponents' right to speak" tremendously insulting to the soldier.

1. AKGovSarahPalinHopefully these political critics filing this stuff (& some in press perpetuating it) appreciate the freedom to do so, protected by our vetshalf a minute ago from TwitterBerry
2. 
   AKGovSarahPalinknows it's shameful 4 valuable time& public resources to be diverted frm needed causes to deal w/this abuse of govt accountability system...3 minutes ago from TwitterBerry
   
   
3. 
   AKGovSarahPalinsomeone who's put their life on the line protecting even opponents' right to speak & protest, was willing to die for freedom of press but...22 minutes ago from TwitterBerry
4. 
   AKGovSarahPalinBUT if there was a suit to end public waste of time/funds to constantly address false allegations I could see perhaps a veteran filing it...30 minutes ago from TwitterBerry
5. 
   AKGovSarahPalinit costs political critics NOTHING to file/play their wasteful game;They should debate policy in political arena,not hide w/process abuse...34 minutes ago from TwitterBerry
   
   
6. 
   AKGovSarahPalinSome ask why not sue abusers of Ethics Act bc state wastes 1000's hrs/millions of tax dollars to fight (and win!) frivolous charges, tho....41 minutes ago from TwitterBerry

Sphere: Related Content

Fast Food Made Pretty

Ask for this meal at Wendy's

I found the Fancy Fast Food site at Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish.


'Adventures In Niche Blogging' Sphere: Related Content

Follow up on Should Supreme Court nominees be questioned by the Senate?

Here is a link to Stephen Carter's essay advocating the end of judicial nominees appearing before the Senate.

Here is my previous post:
Should Supreme Court nominees be questioned by the Senate? Sphere: Related Content

Is The Majority "Minority" The Finish Line?

Is a demographic majority enough to end racial affirmative action? Ross Douthat thinks so. I am not sure that he is correct.

Douthat argues in his NY Times column that a “minority” majority populous can’t rightfully sustain an affirmative action policy because it will become a “spoils system for the already successful.”

I agree with the broad idea of Douthat’s column that a system of racial affimative action is unsustainable. But as a society we need to discuss when race based affirmative action should end. But I don’t think a simple racial headcount is enough. When there is one more “minority” person than there is white people is that enough? That seems entirely too shallow and without any real assessment of the issue.

We need to determine how to measure equal opportunity for all people. Along with when the power used to distribute that opportunity is broadly dispersed to all types of people. It seems indefensible to claim that the white New Haven firefighters were denied a promotion because of the power of an “African American ‘kingmaker’” while the history of insularity of the profession assigned points for a lineage “including nepotism or political patronage.”

Will that de facto affirmative be completely erased from our society before the "minority" majority?

These are tough questions to answer and I hope we can answer them and reach a goal before 2028.

Sphere: Related Content

A Penny for Your...Floor

This is awesome. The floor of the Standard Grill in Manhattan. Is it economically efficient? How much does it cost per square foot to lay pennies like tile?

Thanks NOTCOT.com & Planet Money
Sphere: Related Content

Count the Invisible Residents of The "Chocolate City"?

New Orleans mayor, Ray Nagin, wants the census to allow displaced New Orleans residents to report their address as New Orleans. The goals of this plan is to have a larger share of federal money come to New Orleans and to hold on to the congressional seats. A spokesman for the mayor wants to only count the people "who are really close to coming back."

This is a wrong headed idea, but I understand why Nagin wants to do it.

The real problem is that the Federal Government has not done enough over the past five four years to rebuild New Orleans. But Nagin's hope is to steal from other municipalities twice. First by securing federal dollars apportioned from the census results. Second those municipalities still have to pay for services for the people who plan to move to New Orleans until they move to New Orleans.

What do you think? Sphere: Related Content

“OKLAHOMA WHERE THE HYPOCRISY COMES SWEEPING DOWN THE PLAINS.”

David Boies’s essay in Wall Street Journal today lead my mind to think about how the courts are going to approach arguments on gay marriage. It seems appropriate to question this through what I heard all week during the hearing on the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.

After the grandstanding this past week about the role of judges applying the law not their personal bias I hope judges in courts soon to hear gay marriage cases follow this senatorial dictum.

I agree with the intent of Judge Sotomayor’s statements that our experiences are integral to how we interpret and understand. Experience by definition is “the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation.” It is a filter through which we process all stimuli. No one can escape this pure human function.

Some Senators disagree.

Unfortunately, after purporting that judges leave aside bias, prejudice and personal feelings some senators are hoping to overturn gay marriage rulings in Iowa, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont. They also want to stop California’s Prop 8 from being reversed. Ultimately as U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker predicted, "I am reasonably sure that, given the personalities in this courtroom, this case is only touching down in this court and it will have a life after this court," Walker said. "What happens here is in many ways a prelude to what happens later." Supreme Court here we come.

It certainly seems that those hoping to protect “traditional marriage” are dependent upon relying on bias, prejudice and personal feelings of Christian judges. Religion is probably the most fundamental form of bias, prejudice or personal feelings. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) wants “to be absolutely certain that [judges] will faithfully interpret the law and the Constitution without bias or prejudice.” Is it hypocritical to demand fairness in the abstract but hope for bias in the specific of gay marriage? Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) pronounced, I don’t think he was being ironic, “that's why Lady Justice is always depicted blind and why Aristotle defined law as ‘reason free from passion.’”

Other countries are better at separating religiosity from deciding of legal rights. David Boies writes today in the Wall Street Journal,

"Countries as Catholic as Spain, as different as Sweden and South Africa, and as near as Canada have embraced gay and lesbian marriage without any noticeable effect -- except the increase in human happiness and social stability that comes from permitting people to marry for love."

In the hearings for John Roberts nomination to the high court Sen Coburn said, “"If you have somebody first of all who has that connection with their personal faith and their allegiance to the law, you don't get into the Roe v. Wade situation," Coburn said, according to the Associated Press. "I am looking for somebody who is not going to make that mistake again in any other area of life." Let sing a song for Senator Coburn, “OKLAHOMA WHERE THE HYPOCRISY COMES SWEEPING DOWN THE PLAINS.”

Boies also writes,

"There are those who sincerely believe that homosexuality is inconsistent with their religion -- and the First Amendment guarantees their freedom of belief. However, the same First Amendment, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses, preclude the enshrinement of their religious-based disapproval in state law."

Why can’t we agree that religious dogma has no place in our courts and the discussion of our rights. And neither does hypocrisy.

Sphere: Related Content

David Boies On Gay Marriage

David Boies on Gay Marriage in Monday's Wall Street Journal.

"Countries as Catholic as Spain, as different as Sweden and South Africa, and as near as Canada have embraced gay and lesbian marriage without any noticeable effect -- except the increase in human happiness and social stability that comes from permitting people to marry for love."


"There are those who sincerely believe that homosexuality is inconsistent with their religion -- and the First Amendment guarantees their freedom of belief. However, the same First Amendment, as well as the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses, preclude the enshrinement of their religious-based disapproval in state law."

Sphere: Related Content

Goodbye Frank McCourt

Sphere: Related Content

I Am Beginning to Love Sarah Palin...

Neil Patrick Harris at Sarah Palin's hairdresser. Not relevant but funny.









I am now following Sarah Palin's hairdresser on Twitter. I love that the hairdresser is fighting with NYTimes. Here is a thread of tweets from the hairdresser. I think #10 is my favorite. What is your favorite?

1. @JessicaBeehive Who from the NYT talked to you? Was it Kim Severson, Serge Kovaleski, or William Yardley? (via @C4P)half a minute ago from Tweetie
2. @JessicaBeehive can we not hold NYT accountable for printing lies (via @WomanPatriot)less than a minute ago from Tweetie
3. @JessicaBeehive U GO GIRL! Thanks for combating the lies that try to masquerade themselves as "journalism"... (via @standinthegap)2 minutes ago from Tweetie
4. @JessicaBeehive - contact Clark Hoyt at the NYT to complain about their Palin lies - http://tinyurl.com/qutay (via @C4P)3 minutes ago from Tweetie
5. @JessicaBeehive REALLY TORQUED at the NYT - http://tinyurl.com/kkklx8 #palin (via @C4P) (via @JessicaBeehive)3 minutes ago from Tweetie
6. @JessicaBeehive REALLY TORQUED at the NYT - http://tinyurl.com/kkklx8 #palin (via @C4P)about 3 hours ago from Tweetie
7. Hey @JessicaBeehive Best rebuttal is at http://bit.ly/DGqIA - great work on THAT MANE of a LIBERTARIAN LIONESS in Sarah Palin #spwbt #palinabout 5 hours ago from Tweetie
8. Inside Edition contacted me about an interview,I said no because the whole "story" was a lie! Sarah Palin's hair is not thinning!about 5 hours ago from Tweetie
9. I will continue 2 tell people: I never said Sarah Palin's hair is thinning! The Left is desperate to attack Sarah Palin with stupid lies!!!about 5 hours ago from Tweetie
10. U don't mess with a hairdresser and her client! It's a precious relationship! Don't mess with my girl Sarah Palin!about 5 hours ago from Tweetie
11. if the worst thing they can come up with is a lie about Sarah Palin's hair it's pretty pathetic and bottom feeder journalism!!about 5 hours ago from Tweetie
12. @Adrienne2012 if the worst thing they can come up with is a lie about Sarah Palin's hair it's pretty pathetic and bottom feeder journalism!!about 12 hours ago from Tweetie in reply to Adrienne2012
13. Inside Edition does the worst job of telling the news. (via @documentdiva)about 12 hours ago from Tweetie
14. Goodnight all! Thanks for knowing that it didn't sound right about the lies from the NYT's &inside Edition i will contine 2 correct the liesabout 12 hours ago from Tweetie
15. @LoLornaMarie I'm trying! U don't mess with a hairdresser and her client! It's a precious relationship! Don't mess with my girl Sarah Palin!about 12 hours ago from Tweetie in reply to LoLornaMarie
16. All uhave 2 do is look at Sarah Palin's hair 2 see that it's not thinning it's gorgeous I work with it all the time she's fabulous! Luv SPabout 12 hours ago from Tweetie
17. If u think about it saying Sarah's Palins hair is thinning is the dumbest lie the New York Times and inside Edition can come up with yet!about 13 hours ago from Tweetie
18. I've got to say Sarah Palin is very strong! I'm pissed off about these stupid lies about her hair, can't image dealing wth this stuff daily!about 13 hours ago from Tweetie
19. @jojobonkers thank u so much! I don't know how Sarah handles it day after day!about 13 hours ago from Tweetie in reply to jojobonkers
20. @aktiff08 at this point I am realizing that the truth doesn't matter, only the perception of the truth is real any more it's makes me so madabout 13 hours ago from Tweetie in reply to aktiff08

Sphere: Related Content

Sarah Palin Twitter Wisdom

Three tweets from the soon to be former Governor of AK. Gov. thinks she is Ben Franklin. Is she really telling me not to whine?

U.S. outsources jobs, industry; this must be turned around for nation's survival by: Buy American/produce domestically/encourage competition

No time to waste: teach US youth to avoid idleness;they can lead new American Industrial Revolution w/WORK & embrace "Buy American" mission

Time DOES fly! Work hard so u can genuinely enjoy every recreation minute! Avoid time spent tearing down, whining, complaining;WORK & ENJOY

Sphere: Related Content

I Can't Believe It Is Not Michael Jackson

Michael Jackson won't be remembered in butter form at Iowa Fair. Excellent. Perhaps Parkay? Sphere: Related Content

R. Allen Stanford - Fantastically Creepy Man

Bryan Burrough's article 'Pirate of the Caribbean" in Vanity Fair shows an outstanding view of man, R. Allen Stanford, that stole much less money than Bernard Madoff but is much much creepier. Sphere: Related Content

Google Trends as Economic Indicator?

Lawrence Summers, a top economic adviser to President Obama, used Google search trend data for the search term "economic depression" as an economic indicator. Summers claims that "confidence and hope are returning" to the American economy because "hits [on google] for economic depression have returned to baseline levels." Summer is not very clear about when the baseline was established. By looking at the Google trend graph I will assume that the baseline to which he refers was established in mid-2008 when searches for the term "economic depression" "were up fourfold from their pre-crisis levels."

Summer's correct that searches for "economic depression" have dramatically declined since January 2009 but does that mean that confidence has made a comeback? I could easily come up with other plausible reason for this trend change.

Here is a list:
1. We now know what economic depression is we no longer need to Google it.
2. The weather is nicer and therefore we spend less time online and more time outside.
3. Too busy searching for jobs.
4. Too busy watching Michael Jackson videos.
5. Swine flu searches.
6. Iran blew up.
7. Pirates

My list is really a partly a joke but feel free to add to the list. I am curious what you think could have distracted us from "economic depression."

Summers could make the same claim about the Google News Reference Volume (the bottom graph). Were there less news stories in Google News because the economy was improving therefore journalists wrote less? Did we search less because we saw fewer stories about economic depression?

If we are going to use weak evidence, look at the number of articles from between 1920 and 1938 according to Google that use the phrase "economic depression." From 1932 to 1933 the number dropped by half then continued to decline for the decade. Does that mean the depression ended in 1932?

Should one of the top economic policy advisers to the President be using such weak evidence? I don't think so.

What do you think? Sphere: Related Content