The Doughnuts of Doom

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

So, I'd like to take a little break from the federal budget wank and show y'all what great things state governments are doing these days, in the face of their own budget dilemmas. Back in my ancestral homeland of Kansas, the state Department of Health and Environment is tackling important issues and solving thorny problems that affect the daily lives of all Kansans. KDHE is doing great things!

Things like banning non-Kansan doughnuts from the statehouse farmer's market.

( Read more... )

Mitt Romney Makes it Official

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Former Massachusetts Governor and possessor of the Most Presidential Hair in America, Mitt Romney, has officially announced his second bid for the Republican nomination for President of the United States.

In many respect, Governor Romney looks like a brilliant candidate for the nomination. He comes from a long established political family, his father was a popular and successful governor of Michigan, he has a successful business career, he rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from financial disaster, and he made a successful bid as a Republican to govern one of the country's most liberal states.

Plus, he looks like this:



Handsome bugger, ain't he?

Thing is, Mr. Romney has always been dogged by accusations of political opportunism and changing positions to suit his audience. He ran in 2002 in Massachusetts pledging to protect a woman's right to choose, but when he sought the GOP nomination in 2008, he was "strongly prolife" and that is not the only issue where he went from the Bill Weld position to one more in tune with conservative activists. With Mitt Romney, one is always reminded of Gary Trudeau's observation of Jerry Brown in 1980 -- "The only reason he has political convictions is someone told him he needed them to run for President."

But Romney's hardest sell is the health care reform act that he proposed and passed in Massachusetts that included an individual mandate and is regarded by most political observers as a template for the core features of President Obama's health care reform.

So now imagine yourself as the modal Republican primary voter and one of Romney's many opponents in the early contests plays this ad:

Do you hate Obamacare? Mitt Romney loves it -- when he was governor of liberal Massachusetts, Romney signed into law a bill almost identical to Obamacare...

And then the ad goes on to play any one of the clips here:

I don't see how Romney survives that with a very active base that loathes the Obama health care bill with a passion bordering on religion. Does he have a strategy to survive himself and win the nomination?

(no subject)

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Given that the "War on Drugs" appears to the rest of the world to be lost:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13624303 

I wonder what would make the US finally give it up as a lost cause?

Is it that there is just too much invested in the "War" for the US powers-that-be to relinquish one of its sacred cows? Or given the CIA's historic role in Latin America, and in various "drugs for weapons" and "drugs for freedom" operations world-wide (TM Oliver North, Taliban insurgency, et al) would liberalising the drugs laws run counter to US interests?

My own opinion is that we should legalise immediately. But I may just be an old hippie.

The Fleeting Illusion of Competency

[root-fu.livejournal.com]

( Educational failure and I. And, you. )

The Latest From The Unintended Consequences Department

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I don't know how much of a discussion topic there is here, but, like numbers stations, this is another one of those quirky things I have to share.

Poking around Boing-Boing during lunch, they posted the above video and a link to the (in?)famous marshmallow test. I'll let Jonah Lehrer explain:

Carolyn was asked to sit down in the chair and pick a treat from a tray of marshmallows, cookies, and pretzel sticks. Carolyn chose the marshmallow...A researcher then made Carolyn an offer: she could either eat one marshmallow right away or, if she was willing to wait while he stepped out for a few minutes, she could have two marshmallows when he returned. He said that if she rang a bell on the desk while he was away he would come running back, and she could eat one marshmallow but would forfeit the second. Then he left the room.

...

Most of the children were like Craig. They struggled to resist the treat and held out for an average of less than three minutes. “A few kids ate the marshmallow right away,” Walter Mischel, the Stanford professor of psychology in charge of the experiment, remembers. “They didn’t even bother ringing the bell. Other kids would stare directly at the marshmallow and then ring the bell thirty seconds later.” About thirty per cent of the children, however, were like Carolyn. They successfully delayed gratification until the researcher returned, some fifteen minutes later. These kids wrestled with temptation but found a way to resist.

It turns out that this is all related. The kids who could resist the longest, who could figure out ways to cope, what have you? It turns out they did better on test scores, were more sociable, and had fewer temper issues over time. This same sort of psychological pattern held throughout the years. Seems reasonable, right?

Lehrer has followed it up this week with new data regarding the impact of lead paint on the brain. The average IQ loss for children with lead in their system was 7 points, and MRIs indicated quite a bit of outright brain volume loss in those with the most exposure. It all trended properly, too - the more exposure to lead paint in your system, the more pronounced the brain volume loss.

( So now what? )

I thought people might find this interesting, both on a scientific and sociological level as well as a policy one. While it doesn't necessarily answer or change the political realities of many policies, it definitely raises some extra ideas as to thinking more critically about how a policy may impact a society, positive or negative.

(no subject)

[blorky.livejournal.com]

Since the WoD seems to be a few Facebook "likes" away from ending (Thanks, Machine), I have some questions about how this will change things.

Unemployment - Not sure on this one. Sure, a bunch of people won't be going to jail anymore on minor drug charges, but this basically means unemployment will be going up. (Prisoner population isn't counted in unemployment stats.) Some number of people who wouldn't manage to make it to age 25 without a drug arrest on their record would have a slightly better resume, and better chances to get a job, but who's kidding whom? There aren't jobs now. Yes, I know that there is a shortage of applicants for some technical jobs, but overall, I'm struggling to believe employers are broadly unable to fill positions because of a complete refusal to hire otherwise qualified people who have arrests on their record.

I've heard the argument that legalizing drugs will lower the crime rate. I'm not sure I buy this either. If you're already mugging people for your meth or heroin money, the fact that it comes from 7-11 won't change the fact that you're broke. Again, we're back at "we need more jobs".

From a supply standpoint, I really don't believe the notion that Monsanto Franken-pot will be better or more affordable than local product. I'm guessing that Monsanto and other corporate farming conglomerates will find(purchase) enough legislators to cram through some goofy purity standards metric which precludes significant competition. Many private growers will be able to put a plant or two in their backyard for themselves and their friends without fear of an ATF surprise party, and that's cool. However, I also can't see too many communities willing to zone land for large scale heroin and meth production facilities. Also, a big boom to agri-employment causes pressure in other directions/markets. (See immigration/migrant labor concerns.)

Short version: I see the train a-comin', but I don't think there's been a lot of rigorous thinking about what it's going to look like once it gets here, and once it's passed.

[Disclosure: I'm for medicalizing most drugs, but think that a wholesale legalization of all drugs is a horrifying abdication of what government should stand for. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion, as the post presumes that the WoD and legalization is a fait accompli (That's French for "You holdin', officer?") , but I put it in here in case someone cares. I'm not interested in discussing or defending that specific point and probably won't respond to challenges to that position.]

It's Time for Change

[queen-asante.livejournal.com]

What changes do you feel still need to happen in America? How can these changes come about?


Personally, I think LGBT Rights need to be reformed or improved, especially in certain states.


What about you guys? Any thoughts?