Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Krugman's horrible idea

He thinks that a Clinton/Warren ticket is a good idea, with Clinton at the President. He surmises that Warren will keep Clinton from going too far right into Wall Street's back pocket. Not likely. If anything, Warren as VP would be muzzled from her current status as the outspoken leader of the progressive movement, along with Senator Sanders. A Sanders/Warren ticket would be formidable, with either one in the lead slot. But could either beat Clinton in the primary? I think both of them could.

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Regressives aren't scientists but...

they like to spread misinformation about scientific topics. The very same regressives that deny climate change with the "I'm no scientist" line are quick to spread scientific misinformation when it comes to Ebola. Like you can catch it at a cocktail party. Or it's transmitted through the air. Or Mexican will bring it in. All are entirely made up. What is true is that there is indeed an epidemic, one of fear man-made by the regressives to scare people away from the polls.

What happens when you raise the minimum wage?

In the 13 States that have done so they've reduced unemployment and created more jobs than the States that did not. Them's the facts.

The news sources of liberals/conservatives

Interesting piece on the topic. Not surprisingly, regressives tend to get their news mostly from one source, Fox News. They like to live in a bubble with others of the same worldview. Whereas progressives use a variety of sources and rely more on NPR and the NYT. They tend to be more issue-based instead of ideologically prone like the regressives.

Sunday, October 19, 2014

The regressive agenda in a nutshell

This ad against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker sums it up pretty well:

Developmental dillwads

In ongoing IPS FB discussions on the Sam Harris-Ben Affleck argument, kennilinguists continue to peg people into developmental boxes, as if anyone ever consistently displays one particular level. So I must reiterate, apparently ad infinitum, actual research from developmental psychology.

Kennilinguists think developmental levels might be useful in this discussion, which levels are involved? From which participants? In what particular statements? In what contexts? If we accept the actual developmental research* that no one is 'at' a level all the time in all contexts, or that something like a CoG is even feasible, then go ahead and get specific in each sentence they utter, in each context, in each line, in each emotional state etc. Please.

And perhaps an even more fundamental question: Does one have to speak kennilingus to be considered 'integral'?

* Recall Fischer in the Handbook of Developmental Psychology:

Saturday, October 18, 2014