I wonder how many hours of planning and tinkering it took to get this amazing result. The song, in case you don't recognize it, is Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring:
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Criminal Justice Reforms Advocated by Grover Norquist
I have to say that nothing I have ever heard before about Norquist has changed my contempt for him. This does, as these are rational and highly-needed reforms for a criminal justice system that is badly broken.
Best Word Play of the Day
There's a documentary showing on PBS about Elizabeth Arden and Helena Rubinstein and how they transformed the cosmetics industry. The title? Wait for it...
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Founding Fathers and Freedom of Religion
Some Christians are arguing that the founding fathers meant religious freedom to apply only to Christianity. This post demolishes that argument.
Good News for Religious Freedom
The UN has endorsed freedom of religion and rejected defamation of religion language it has used for years. The latter supports things like laws against blasphemy, which destroys individual religious freedom.
Artificial Leaf Promises Affordable Power for Developing Countries
Sounds really terrific. Getting power that doesn't require a massive centralized power infrastructure sounds good to me.
Brain Reacts Similarly to Physical and Emotional Pain
I find this fascinating, because in my worst breakup I know I felt for months like very nerve in my body was on fire. This shows there really is something to that. Wow, who knew?
Monday, March 28, 2011
NY Times: The Future of Mnaufacturing is Local
Seems manufacturing in the United States is not dead. ABC News also did a series called, I think, Made in America, about buying goods made in teh U.S.
Why Do People Suffer
I really like Catherine Breyter who does the About.com page on Alternative Religions. Here she has a short article on "Why do people suffer?", and names it as one of the religious questions that is hardest to deal with. I think she is so right about that, I think it turns a lot of people away from religion.
I'm very fond of the writings of the Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman, and he wrote a book on this topic - God's Problem - How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question - Why We Suffer. He does his best to answer the question, and in the end finds it unanswerable, and leaves Christianity to become an agnostic over it. But he does, in my mind, a very thorough job of investigating the question.
ion0: Fastest Spacecraft
Article discusses our fastest spacecraft, but mentions too how long it would take to get to other star systems.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Rep. Anthony Weiner: Kudos to GOP for Getting Rid of the Car Talk Guys
A lovely sarcastic speech from Weiner. Weiner and Jon Stewart have been friends for many years, it seems they have a great sense of satire in common.
Mother Jones: Libya Explained
Mother Jones has this article explaining the situation in Libya. It is constantly updated as the situation develops.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
ACLU: Evolution Two-Step
We're beginning to see some of the nastier consequences of the 2010 election favoring Republicans. One is an increased assault on women's reporductive rights, including lessening access to birth control - which to me seems the only likely way to reduce the number of abortions. There is also, once again, an increased number of bills trying to get creationism, or its more stealthy cousin, intelligent design, back into schools. On this topic I recommend Lauri Lebo's The Devil in Dover: An Insider's Story of Dogma v. Darwin in Small-Town America.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Obama on Presidential War Powers : Dispatches from the Culture Wars
« Special Pleading Quote of the Day | Main
Obama on Presidential War Powers
Posted on: March 21, 2011 11:34 AM, by Ed Brayton
The indispensable Glenn Greenwald digs up this quote from an interview with Obama during the 2008 campaign:
Q. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)OBAMA: The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent.
No one could possibly suggest that the bombing of Libya is in response to any kind of imminent threat to the United States or is in self-defense. Muammar Ghadafi did not attack us, nor does he pose even the most remote threat to us. Oh, and Hillary Clinton was on board with this too:
The President has the solemn duty to defend our Nation. If the country is under truly imminent threat of attack, of course the President must take appropriate action to defend us. At the same time, the Constitution requires Congress to authorize war. I do not believe that the President can take military action -- including any kind of strategic bombing -- against Iran without congressional authorization. That is why I have supported legislation [GG: also supported by Obama] to bar President Bush from doing so and that is also why I think it is irresponsible to suggest, as some have recently, that anything Congress already has enacted provides that authority.Isn't that convenient? When Bush was in office, both Obama and Clinton were totally opposed to the president initiating military actions without the authorization of Congress except in self-defense. Now that they are in power, that no longer applies. Greenwald points out how both parties play this dishonest game:
Leading Democrats constantly argued the same thing during the Bush years: that Presidents lack the power to order military actions in non-emergency, non-self-defense situations without Congressional approval; indeed, they insisted that even the attack on Iraq, which (unlike Libya) was justified as necessary for self-defense, required Congressional approval [and, needless to say, the always-principled Republicans routinely argue that Presidents do possess unilateral war-making power whenever there is a GOP President, but argue the exact opposite when there is a Democratic President].As the song goes: My country tis of thee, sweet land of irony.
And setting aside this question, for Obama to have so suddenly changed his position on the intervention of Libya is disturbing. We're now engaged in bombing a country with no planning at all, no clear understanding or statement of our objectives, and with the president overruling his own defense secretary -- and himself from, quite literally, just hours before the decision to start bombing. That can't be a good thing.
Find more posts in:Politics
Comments
1United Nations "lead" this invasion... loophole...
Posted by: Smackydoodle | March 21, 2011 11:45 AM
2Smackydoodle (@1) How does the UN offer a loophole at all? The question was whether the president could order a military strike without congressional approval. The UN does not have the ability to override congress's constitutional war declaration authority.
Posted by: penn | March 21, 2011 11:54 AM
3Oh, but the president is operating in defense of the US. He's trying to remove Qaddafi from power as a part of stabilizing the worlds' oil production, as the mad man currently running Libya is a loose cannon. Any loss in production over an extended period of time would jeopardize the economic recovery and hence President Obamas' reelection chances. End snark.
Posted by: SLC | March 21, 2011 11:54 AM
4I won't defend Obama's hypocrisy or anything, but if Congress has a problem with what he's doing, they're free to hold a vote and bar him from doing it. Obviously, they prefer not to vote one way or the other, because it lets them duck responsibility for however things turn out. So in the end, the President has broad war-making authority precisely because Congress prefers it that way.
Posted by: Steve Reuland | March 21, 2011 11:55 AM
5I think by "loophole," Smackydoodle meant "convenient opportunity to weasel out of responsibility using obfuscating rhetoric."
Posted by: lofgren | March 21, 2011 11:57 AM
6Having power changes everything for most politicians. The amusing thing is that if he had asked Congress for approval they probably would have given it to him.
Posted by: Tom | March 21, 2011 11:58 AM
7Also, Steve Reuland is 100% correct, and the implications extend far beyond warmongering. The last thing anybody in congress wants is to take a stand on something as unpredictable as a war. Hell, part of the reason Obama won the election was because he was able to take a rhetorical stand against the war in Iraq, but never had to actually vote on it.
Posted by: lofgren | March 21, 2011 12:01 PM
8"We're now engaged in bombing a country with no planning at all, no clear understanding or statement of our objectives, and with the president overruling his own defense secretary"
I was researching the plinking tanks controversy recently (did it work/not work in Kosovo) when I found this interview, which sadly seems quite applicable to today:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/kosovo/interviews/krulak.html
Posted by: plutosdad | March 21, 2011 12:02 PM
9I once heard Gerald Ford give a talk. (He actually turned out to be a much better speaker than I'd expected.) He was asked about the War Powers Act, which he had supported when he was in Congress, but ignored once he was in the White House. I was surprised he didn't try and weasel his way out of it at all, but said basically: The War Powers Act sounded like a really good idea on paper, but is completely impractical for the modern era, Congress takes months to decide anything and is incapable of keeping anything secret for 5 minutes. I thought it was an interesting perspective.
Posted by: WScott | March 21, 2011 12:04 PM
10Shorter Gerald Ford: Congress might have stopped me from doing what I wanted.
Posted by: Tom | March 21, 2011 12:06 PM
11I feel Obama is doing the right thing. It's bad that he's reversed his position on warfare, but I'd rather see a breach of principle than a massacre of civilians and rebel fighters. Massimo Pigliucci sums up the justification for intervention much better than I can:
http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2011/03/bombing-libya.html
Posted by: Roy | March 21, 2011 12:07 PM
12It seems to me there's lingering guilt over the UN/"civilized world"s inaction in Rwanda (and there ought to be) so there's this sort of silly "next time one of those comes along, we're going to DO SOMETHING" -- this has all the hallmarks of a "DO SOMETHING" operation: they are doing something but they have no idea what that something is.
If the "civilized world"s political leaders wanted to actually make the world a better place, they'd start trying to crack the problem of how to prevent multi-generational dictatorships from surviving (e.g.: N Korea) and prevent new dictatorships from forming. Of course that's a ridiculously hard problem (though there are actually a few possible suggestions...) instead we get trading one war crime for another. Let me see if I have this right: the reason "we"'re bombing Quaddafi is because he was bombing his people. Is the idea that two bombs make a right?
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | March 21, 2011 12:07 PM
13It seems to me there's lingering guilt over the UN/"civilized world"s inaction in Rwanda (and there ought to be) so there's this sort of silly "next time one of those comes along, we're going to DO SOMETHING" -- this has all the hallmarks of a "DO SOMETHING" operation: they are doing something but they have no idea what that something is.
If the "civilized world"s political leaders wanted to actually make the world a better place, they'd start trying to crack the problem of how to prevent multi-generational dictatorships from surviving (e.g.: N Korea) and prevent new dictatorships from forming. Of course that's a ridiculously hard problem (though there are actually a few possible suggestions...) instead we get trading one war crime for another. Let me see if I have this right: the reason "we"'re bombing Quaddafi is because he was bombing his people. Is the idea that two bombs make a right?
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | March 21, 2011 12:10 PM
14Steve Reuland is absolutely right. Every president is going to be aggressive about executive branch power. Its up to Congress first an the courts second to rein him in. Obama may be being a hypocrite, but Congress is standing by and pointedly NOT defending their constitutional obligations or rights.
When it comes to war, they love the ability to ride on his coattails when it goes right and point fingers when it goes wrong.
Posted by: eric | March 21, 2011 12:11 PM
15Ed stated:
No one could possibly suggest that the bombing of Libya is in response to any kind of imminent threat to the United States or is in self-defense. Muammar Ghadafi did not attack us, nor does he pose even the most remote threat to us.An argument I've encountered is that the revolt in Libya creates a couple of different scenarios which present an opportunity for al Qaeda to gain control of Gaddafi's WMDs. That in turn would create a new threat against American interests. If true, this could justify quick action on our part though I think it's important enough to over-communicate this justification rather than trot off on a family trip to Brazil.
I'm currently very skeptical of the wisdom of our engaging Libya militarily, primarily because my skepticism doesn't include the above threat which I just encountered yesterday and have seen little evidence supporting it as valid. I do think our arguments should subsequently consider the validity of this threat, and hopefully compellingly discard it as highly unlikely. The President should be in D.C. over-communicating on his actions, instead we encounter justifications like this with no follow-through by the President.
In fact the President's own rhetoric about the U.N. resolution has us seeking to take out Gaddafi's regime when the resolution itself and Obama's own spokespeople like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs claim far more modest objectives, i.e., stop the onslaught of violence against Libyan insurgents and innocents. So right now it's hard to discern why we're even taking actions against Libya.
Posted by: Michael Heath | March 21, 2011 12:12 PM
16Tom @ 10:
Shorter Gerald Ford: Congress might have stopped me from doing what I wanted.I disagree. President Ford's observation that Congress generally can't make timely decisions even on matters of urgency has history on his side.
Posted by: Michael Heath | March 21, 2011 12:16 PM
17I disagree. President Ford's observation that Congress generally can't make timely decisions even on matters of urgency has history on his side.Congress managed to declare war on the Japanese fairly quickly in 1941. I think a justified claim from the president of the need for a quick response will get back a quick response. Requesting the bombing of a country because the president likes the idea without any real justification might take a little longer.
Posted by: Tom | March 21, 2011 12:28 PM
19I'm kinda surprised he didn't take it to Congress. I've yet to see them fail to quickly rubberstamp any military action.
Posted by: Nemo | March 21, 2011 12:52 PM
via scienceblogs.com
I realized this morning that I was against this when Bush did it in Iraq, so how can I be for it in Libya? I do want Gaddafi gone, but seems like it should be with an international effort and UN sanction.
Mashable: 16 Rad Retro Gaming Accessories...
Lots of cool toys, especially if you are into gaming (which I'm not, but the toys are fun).
Minature Lasers Could Speed Data Transmission
Sounds like some way cool research going on at the University of Central Florida.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Book Review: Love Bites
| Title | Love Bites (Vampyres of Hollywood) |
| Author | Adrienne Barbeau |
| Rating |   |
| Tags | fiction, series, paranormal, vampires, werewolves, movies |
| Adrienne Barbeau's Vampyres of Hollywood series is a great guilty pleasure. The main character is Ovsanna More, a 400 year-old vampire who has been part of Hollywood since its beginning. In the first book in the series, Vampyres of Hollywood, someone was killing those who worked for her film production company, and detective Peter King was assigned to the case and found out what she was. The two ot them, with other vampyres of Hollywood including Orson Wells, Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, and others, take down an ancient evil. In this book, Ovsanna is attacked by a werewolf, and later by a pack of them. A badly torn body is found in the pool of a famous hotel. Ovsanna and Peter must once again discover the paranormal truth and overcome the danger without being able to tell Peter's boss what's really going on. They must also figure out how to deal with their attraction to each other when vampyre/human relationships rarely turn out well. Barbeau is a terrific writer. The plots are well done, and told with great humor and zest. There's a lot of gore in her books, but she is a queen of the horror world. She also knows her Hollywood history and drops tidbits of it in a way that seems natural to the story. Great fun.
| |
| Publication | Thomas Dunne Books (2010), Hardcover, 336 pages |
| Publication date | 2010 |
| ISBN | 0312367287 / 9780312367282 |
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Another Five Books: Clarence B. Jones on Best Speeches of History
Jones wrote some of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, and there are some fascinating details in this interview on that speech.
Five Books: Richard Freeman on Labour Unions
I really really like Five Books. They interview experts about five books they recommend on a topic. This one has Richard Freeman discussing books on labor and labor unions. The essay isn't that long, but one really feels reading it puts an interersting topic into context, and given how much collective bargaining rights are in the news right now it is really useful.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Seven Things You Didn't Know about Albert Einstein
Interesting and fun article from PCMag. They still don't explain the hair. ;-).
The Year 2000 as it looked from 1900
Fascinating series of French postcards (no, not THAT kind of French postcard) from 1900 depicting life in the year 2000. Oddly, the thing they came closest on was robot arms.
Japan's Rice Crop Art
We are hearing so much right now about the Japanese spirit of community that is helping them survive and help each other. This post shows how some Japanese cooperate to create art from crops.
Unshelved Comic Strip on E-books
Unshelved is that rare thing - a comic strip set in a library. I really liked this one on ebooks.
Reagan on Unions and Collective Bargaining
See this very union-supportive speech excerpt provided by Ed Brayton. Of course, it mostly shows Reagan to be a hypocrite... unions were great for Poland, not so great for U.S. air traffic controllers, whose union Reagan busted.
House Republicans Refuse to Admit Climate Change is Real
Given that we are already seeing effects of global warming on weather, this is insane. Republicans keep talking about not passing debt onto their children... what about not passing on a world where climate change causes massive disruptions?
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Monday, March 14, 2011
Precedents for Attorney General's Office Not Defending a Federal Law
This post points out that the Obama administration's recent decision to not defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in one federal court is NOT unprecedented, as some claim.
U.S. Defense Spending
There's a lot of argument on this topic, so people should have the facts. According to IISS, a highly regarded think tank on military and strategic issues, the U.S. accounts for 60% of the world's spending on defense. That's 60% U.S., 40% the rest of the world combined.
Microsoft Indexes CT Scans
Fascinating! Microsoft is creating software that will load CT scans and index the organs of the body as hyperlinks.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Google Books: 5 Trailblazing Women Authors You Haven't Heard Of
I had, actually, heard of the first one on the list, Enheduanna. Nice post.
Infographic History of Science Fiction
You have to really enlarge it to read it, but great graphic overall.
Mother Earth News: Why Electric Cars are Cleaner
Mother Earth News does an in-depth review of the environmental impact of electric cars, considering all the dimensions of environmental impact.
Mother Jones: Why Electric Cars are Cleaner
Mother Earth News does an in-depth review of the environmental impact of electric cars, considering all the dimensions of environmental impact.
Hollywood Once Again Proves Itself Home of the Surreal
There is a movie coming out called "The Beaver". "The film tells the offbeat story of a troubled toy executive who reclaims his life with the help of a beaver hand puppet." Even more surreal, it stars Mel Gibson, who is dealing with a charge of misdemeanor battery against his former girlfriend. Sounds to me like the whole thing is the plot of a bad art film about relationships between men and women...and the most egregious use of beavers since Beaver Cleaver.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Whose Line Pop Quiz - Sheen or Gaddafi?
Take the quiz, see how well you know your mentally-challenged celebraties.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Public vs. Private Sector Wages and Benefits
This page from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, shows that state and local employees earn less than their counterparts in the private sector, even including benefits. The main reason public sector wages seem larger than private is that a higher percentage of them require a higher degree. This bears out my own experience as a state of Georgia employee. My job requires a Master's degree, and many of us librarians have two master's degrees, one in a subject discipline and one in library science. I have a bachelors in history, a masters in history, and a masters in library science, for example. All the time I've been working, the "common knowledge" was that private sector jobs in my field pay better, but the job security and benefits aren't as good. This has been particularly true in librarianship... a lot of companies laid off their librarians as technology changed and the demands for profits increased.
Atlanta Magazine Profile of Georgia Tech
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
50 Greatest Opening Title Sequences Ever
Haven't had time to look all the way through it, but this looks like a fun list.
Book Review: A Discovery of Witches
| Title | A Discovery of Witches: A Novel |
| Author | Deborah E. Harkness |
| Rating | |
| Tags | fantasy, books, reading, magic, witches, vampires, daemons, history |
| There's one really serious flaw in this book... it ends with an obvious sequel in the works - I'd guess at at least a trilogy - AND I WANT MORE NOW. A stranger reaction I have to the book is a disinclination to want to share details of the plot. I want the plot to unfold for each reader as beautifully as it did for me. It is paranormal fiction with witches, vampires, and demons, involves academics, and has a superb plot and wonderful characters. That's all I'm going to tell you. NOW GO READ IT. Please. You'll thank me later. | |
| Publication | Viking Adult (2011), Hardcover, 592 pages |
| Publication date | 2011 |
| ISBN | 0670022411 / 9780670022410 |
Shades of Greatness Negro Baseball Leagues Traveling Exhibit
...is on display at the Georgia Tech Library now through March 20th.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)