The A-bomb

Oregon looks to have an interesting senate primary race, with two excellent Democratic candidates, Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick, vying for the chance to give the boot to two-faced Republican Bush booster Gordon Smith. I think it’s great that more progressive candidates are being drawn into loftier tiers of the political arena, and that good wholesome sparring in the primary is going to help them both out, no matter who wins the nomination. Why, though, should this Minnesotan care? Aside from having lived in Oregon for 9 years (and loving it!), it was brought to my attention that there’s a sly tactic being carried out here. Someone dropped the A-bomb in the discussion already: they’ve asked “Is Steve Novick an atheist?“

That quickly developed into a major topic of discussion at BlueOregon. One of the major points is that while Oregon is one of the least godly states in the country, it still has a large Christian majority, and the assumption is that tagging him with areligiosity will hurt Novick’s chances.

What this kind of tactic actually does, though, is tarnish the reputation of Christians, so I’m saddened but unsurprised that more believers aren’t distressed by it. Imagine if a black candidate were running, and someone tried to argue that he was going to be beat because a large percentage of the voters were white. That’s not a commentary on the candidate, although there always is a tendency to hold the victim accountable: it’s an acknowledgment that the majority of voters are superficial bigots, an appeal to the prejudices of the lowest of the mob.

At least nowadays people wouldn’t try to publicly defend their bigotry against blacks, although I suspect many still practice it in the privacy of the voting booth (it’s also still a useful dirty campaign issue, as was used against McCain). We’ll still see people argue that atheism is a legitimate reason to vote against someone though, because he doesn’t share their “values”. That’s an admission, I think, that they want a Christian candidate who will inject religion into the secular task of running the country.

Cruise from hell

No, I don’t mean the infamous cruise of diarrhea and vomiting, I mean something far, far worse — a trip that would make a week locked in the head with fluids gushing from your orifices seem enticing. I mean…

The National Review’s Cruise.

Neo-cons. Casual racism. William F. Buckley, Dinesh D’Souza, Norman Podhoretz. Fear of Mexicans. Nuke the liberals. Bernard Lewis and Kate O’Beirne. Muslims must die. Desiccated ancient WASPs urging their kind to breed.

Steven King must ship out on one of these cruises sometime. It will spawn a horror novel so terrifying that it will need to be stored in a secret crate in a warehouse somewhere near Washington where it will be promised that Top Men will study it.

(via at-Largely)

Now I’m convinced that abortion must be bad

Did you know…

  • …that men never get abortions? If you aren’t strong enough to have that baby, you’ve got no grounds to complain about male privilege.

  • …some of the instruments used in abortions are just like the ones used in transgender surgery?

  • …that every woman who gets an abortion would rather be taking a long romantic walk on the beach than be lying there with cold steel probing about in her nethers?

Pandagon has a whole collection of great arguments against abortion. Use them, and contribute your own!

And lest you think those are just too silly, here are some slogans from real signs that I see on my drive from Morris to the Twin Cities:

  • “Fetus” is just another word for “baby”!

  • A baby’s heart starts to beat at 24 days.

  • A baby can smile in the womb!

They are all accompanied by photos of adorable happy babies, too.

Moore v. Gupta: Truth v. False Doubt

As Revere points out, Michael Moore gave Sanjay Gupta a whomping. What I missed in the Moore-Gupta match, though, was the big picture. Basically, they argued over details: Gupta put together a “fact check” that claimed Moore fudged various numbers, while Moore showed that his numbers were legitimate. What appalled me, though, was the spin put on it, the spin that Gupta did not acknowledge.

[Read more…]

The Tripoli 6 case may be resolved soon

The six health care workers in Libya who were accused of intentionally infecting children with AIDS have had their death sentence confirmed. According to Revere, this is good news. It means the case now moves to the High Judicial Council, which has the power to commute the sentence, and which is also government controlled … and the government has just accepted (or, more accurately, “extorted”) a deal for lifetime care of the affected kids. We may know as soon as next week that the falsely accused doctor and nurses will have been released to their home countries. We hope.

“Political interference with the work of the surgeon general appears to have reached a new level in this administration”

That quote from Henry Waxman can’t possibly be a surprise, can it?

Our former surgeon general, Richard Carmona, is speaking out against the anti-science policies of the Bush administration.

For example, he said he wasn’t allowed to make a speech at the Special Olympics because it was viewed as benefiting a political opponent. However, he said was asked to speak at events designed to benefit Republican lawmakers.

“The reality is that the nation’s doctor has been marginalized and relegated to a position with no independent budget, and with supervisors who are political appointees with partisan agendas,” said Carmona, who served from 2002 to 2006.

This administration wants to sign on a new surgeon general: James Holsinger, a religious homophobe who has received the endorsement of the Reverend Fred Phelps. Ironically, part of their defense against the accusations of Carmona is that the surgeon general has “the obligation to be the leading voice for the health of all Americans,” although it seems to me that they meant to say the voice for the health of wealthy heterosexual Republicans … but then, that’s a phrase I think you can substitute for “American” any time a right-winger uses the word.

It’s just another datum in the history of the politicization of science and medicine by the repugnant Bush administration.

(via Angry by Choice)

My man-crush

Phil reveals his man-crushes, and I have to respond in kind. Fortunately, it’s easy. I’ve just seen something that endears one particular gentleman to me…

Michael Moore.

He batters that smug silver-haired rodent, Wolf Blitzer. I wish he’d been given a chance to kick Lou Dobbs’ ass. He rakes the entire American news media over white-hot coals for their continued failures to investigate and report honestly on the war as well as on health care. C’est magnifique.

Bora interviews John Edwards

He doesn’t ask the obvious question — “do you believe in evolution?” — even once! I guess when you interview the serious candidates, you don’t need to ask the stupid baby questions.

It’s not a bad interview; Edwards says all the pro-science and pro-education stuff, favoring increased investment in public education, respect for the Office of Science and Technology Policy, strict standards to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, increased funding for NIH, etc., but I confess to being suspicious and not at all won over. That’s what you’d expect a candidate to say in an interview with a science blogger. I like science! I like education! We’ll do more of it if I’m president! Unfortunately, there aren’t a lot of details on how he’s going to do it, and where he does sketch out specific ideas, like his free tuition for one year to all college students, he doesn’t spell out how he’s going to pay for it, or what part of government gets cut to compensate.

I note he also doesn’t commit on certain contentious issues. He deplores the Bush treatment of stem cell research, but doesn’t come right out and say he’ll endorse the use of human embryos in research.

He also supports one major boondoggle: ethanol. It’s a farm subsidy, not an answer to our energy problems.