Tuesday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Wrong direction, right idea. What I want to see is Teremok coming to the US. 
  2. Shocking, although perhaps the conclusion isn’t necessary.
  3. Of monsters and … mormons (?!). 
  4. Religious freedom and Egypt.
  5. High min-wage and unemployment rates.
  6. Tar and feathers anyone?
  7. The internet and speech.
  8. Stupid money tricks.
  9. Drilling for … not exactly oil.
  10. Not road rage.
  11. Game on then (and how do you reconcile the “I welcome criticism” with his attack on Fox News?) 😀
  12. Eye on the ball.
  13. On adoption.
  14. The ring.
  15. Of market and medicine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

19 comments

  1. Boonton says:

    High min-wage and unemployment rates.

    What no logical fallacies there?

  2. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    What logical fallacy is there in thinking that supply and price-fixing practices are unrelated?

  3. Boonton says:

    Correlation != causation

    Unemployment caused by a recession is not caused by a hike in the min. wage. If you disagree then please note other recessions that seemed to have happened when nothing was done to the min. wage or the unemployment among groups that are nowhere near the min. wage payscale.

  4. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Nobody claimed it was (correlated). The point is that a lower wage minimum can allow open more job opportunities, which might be seen by some as a good thing an a time of high unemployment.

  5. Boonton says:

    Game on then (and how do you reconcile the “I welcome criticism” with his attack on Fox News?) 😀

    I’ve always wondered about right wingers who equate criticizing Fox with censorship…esp. when they criticize the media all the time.

  6. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Mr Obama didn’t “criticize” FOX, he tried to exclude them from a press conference.

    Remind me of the basis of that argument?

  7. Boonton says:

    Exclude them from a press conference? Is that what they do in China? The Great Leader defriends you if you say bad things about him?

  8. Mark says:

    Boonton,

    Exclude them from a press conference?

    I see anything short of being thrown in a labor camp is “welcoming criticism.” Is that your standard of welcoming in your liberal circles. Makes for a high bar to determine one is being racist.

  9. Boonton says:

    So being excluded from a press conference = thrown into a labor camp? I guess that must make Bush, who more or less stopped having press conferences, just a bit worse than the devil incarnate.

  10. Boonton says:

    Obama just did a one on one interview with Fox News. It’s really hard living under a modern day Nazi regime isn’t it? I’m thinking of letting my basement be used by conservatives who want to do a weekly support group.

  11. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Bush stopped having press conferences … when he was a lame duck President with a Democratic Congress. Can’t imagine why he might do that? Maybe because he was basically done.

    Obama just did a one on one interview with Fox News.

    So, he changed his mind and decided his prior tactic was in error. That means the prior remarks about FOX and his attempt to exclude them from White House press conferences never happened for you? Gotcha.

  12. Boonton says:

    No its more like there’s a big difference between censorship and failing to score an interview, press conference or whatnot. People who like to tell themselves they are standing up for freedom and against Nazism, Maoism, Stalinism etc. really should know the difference.

  13. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Why do you talk about censorship, when my remarks was to question the truthfulness of his “I welcome criticism” remark? When has he welcomed criticism? He has on more than one occasion attempted to stifle and shut it down. So, tell me when he’s sought it out?

  14. Boonton says:

    So Fox is unable to criticize Obama when it is not at a press conference? That’s strange because little, if any, criticism of elected officials that I can recall hearing happened at press conferences. Most appears to happen far away from press conferences.

  15. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    I see, so his exclusion of FOX from the WH press conferences his way of welcoming criticism? How’s that work?

    Is it easier or harder to put hard critical questions to the WH when you’re not allowed access to the press secretary? I’d think it would be harder, but hey, that’s just the naive thinking of mine.

  16. Boonton says:

    So censorship is not having access to the press secretary? Are you being censored by Obama?

  17. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Why do you equate my taking issue with Obama’s claim “I welcome criticism” with a claim that his not welcoming criticism = censorship?

    I have not claimed censorship. I have asserted his claim that he welcomes criticism is untrue.

  18. Boonton says:

    The question is whether Fox News is just criticism or just partisanship. While there are a few exceptions, I’d say its more often the latter so aside from crass political calculations, why should a White House feel obligated to invite them to press conferences? If its really about being open to some critical questions I would think a rotating blogger chair would be more productive.

    Of course the usual reply to this is “what about CNN? NPR etc.”. What about them? We have Fox News reporters caught when they though they were off camera rallying up Tea Partiers to put on a good show, we have emails from other Murdoch outlets (NY Post) saying point blank the policy of the outlet is to oppose Obama and support the GOP. If they aren’t a serious news outlet then why should they be treated as such?

  19. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    You ask:

    The question is whether Fox News is just criticism or just partisanship.

    You answer, “So Fox is unable to criticize Obama when it is not at a press conference? […] Most appears to happen far away from press conferences.” It seems they do in fact engage in criticism at least according to you.

    As to their partisanship, of what relevance is that? Mr Obama did not say, “I welcome criticism so long as it is non-partisan.” What the heck does that mean? Do you really think he meant, “I welcome criticism so long as it comes from fawning supporters.”

    I was not going to raise the CNN/NPR question, but as you well know they have been “caught” openly applauding and cheering on the Democrats during the convention.

    One might also note that when Obama tried to exclude FOX from the press conferences, the rest of the press corps (CNN/NPR … et al) boycotted unless that exclusion was rescinded … at which point it was.