Monday’s Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Monday, March 11, 2024
·
94 comments
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter
Trump blathered on “Truth” Social about Jimmy Kimmel being a bad host and implied the Oscars are rigged. Kimmel read it out and said “I’m surprised you’re still up. Isn’t it past your jail time?”
Hello from Valencia. Or as the locals say it, Balenthia, a pronunciation I shall henceforth employ so as to make people hate me. Sitting on my balcony, looking out at the beach and the Med, drinking meh coffee and working. What was that about life/work balance? I’m an American, dammit, there is no such thing as balance.
Hoping @Eddie comes by as I want to ask him how IATSE feels about the Oscar shout-out last night. (Or, early this morning in YouTube clips).
The Misery GOP should be charged with manslaughter too. This was the all too predictable result of SYG laws.
@OzarkHillbilly: Inexplicably, people still keep loaded guns in their homes for protection, despite the overwhelming odds that said guns will, at some point, be pointed at them instead of a stranger, when fired.
The poorly educated are great customers.
@Michael Reynolds: I was really surprised how much I liked V(B)alencia, which I thought would be a factory town. Very cool architecture. Very cool place. And they don’t speak Catalan!
I @hope Eddie gets here soon, too so I can find out what IATSE stands for.
@Joe: “I @hope Eddie gets here soon, too so I can find out what IATSE stands for.”
Since Eddie is — I think — on the West Coast and might not yet be awake, I can tell you that it’s the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees.
@Tony W:
And voters.
I’ve been thinking about good governance and how it might be measured in a way that is divorced from politics or governing philosophy. It seems that it would be difficult, but not impossible. First, you need to identify the things the government entity is responsible for, whether it be local, State or Federal. There are some things that can be simply measured: for example, what is the bond rating? Then there are things that are more easily measured by comparison: how are your students doing? Some organizations are already evaluating difficult to measure things. For instance, I know there’s an organization that measures how long it takes to register and start businesses, and I believe there is one that looks at the level of corruption. There are a host of other things I think should be factored in: how often does the entity encounter preventable crises? How well does it respond to unpreventable ones? What is the state of the infrastructure they are responsible for? One that’s a bit more esoteric but still measurable: do they have a long term plan and is it used and updated?
@Tony W:
Citation Needed.
More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record
@Paul L.:
Here is the problem with arguing by headline… from a summary of the firewalled Nature article:
This is also the system working as it’s supposed to–which admittedly can be frustrating:
tl;dr: It’s nihilistic to say “since some articles are retracted, we cannot believe any research therefore QED your argument based on a given paper has to be wrong.” It’s even more nihilistic to do that when asking the person to cite a study–basically, you are signaling that there is nothing you will believe other that what you already believe.
@Michael Reynolds:
Love Valencia.
This might surprise you, but I don’t watch the Oscars, Emmy’s, Tony’s, or Grammy’s. Well, sometimes the Grammy’s for the performances. So I don’t know what was said about IATSE.
Two points.
1. At the risk of being ruthlessly mocked, I don’t believe in awards for art, and I consider film and television art. I believe picking one film over another as “best” film, is moronic, as it’s 100% completely subjective by a hive mind (The Academy). Oppenheimer was a great film, but was it “better” than Barbie? Not to me. Barbie was the most creative film I’ve seen by a major studio in a long time. But that’s just me, which is exactly my point. There is no objective way of saying one film is better than another. I feel the same way about gymnastics, diving, synchronized swimming, and anything else judged by humans. In a competition, I want objective standards which lead to a winner without question. But, again, that’s just me.
2. The industry contraction is real. A lot of IATSE members have lost their homes, and have had to leave Los Angeles. There are 10’s of thousands less IATSE jobs now then there were a year ago. There are probably 50K less acting jobs than at this time last year. There are probably 5K less writing jobs than last year. I haven’t worked in 14 months. My golf game is getting really good, and I have a few prospects, but this time last year, I’d be picking and choosing which would be my next job. The strikes last year did a great job of accelerating the massive move of production overseas. I was up for a new incarnation of the series “The Librarians”, which is set in a US city. They’re shooting this new season in Serbia. Yep. Serbia will double for the US. Pre-strike, the show was going to shoot in Portland, like the original series.
If people at the Oscar’s gave shout outs to the IA, I hope it was to tell them to get the best deal they can without striking, because another strike would just further kick an industry that is already way down in terms of providing good middle class jobs in the US.
I didn’t watch the Oscars last night, but apparently Donny Dementia did. Jimmy Kimmel flayed him on live TV and the audience roared. “Isn’t it past your jail time”.
@Matt Bernius:
But headlines are good and easy to read!
@Matt Bernius:
What an Audacious [Sokal] Hoax Reveals About Academia
A quote about your great heroic buddies Prosecutors like Fani Willis.
Same goes for their fanbois.
@EddieInCA:
At the end of the monolog Kimmel brought out about a dozen assorted Teamsters and thanked them for their solidarity, and IIRC said everyone there needed to stand behind them in their negotiations. Black tie Norma Rae.
I agree regarding awards, though I’m frankly living it up eating anchovies and olives thanks to my wife’s Newbery. Even to talk about objectivity in art is nonsense. It’s not a fucking True/False test, it is meant to hit different people differently, it’s meant to be subjective both for artist and audience. It’s almost like that’s the point of art. Ars gratia artis.*
Of course that’s imagining that the purpose is really to recognize art and not a blend of promotion, both corporate and personal, advertising, marketing, ego-boosting, pecking order enforcement and self-congratulation. Because it’s pretty good at all that. Also, panem et circenses.**
All playing aside, it’s shocking that the town has been hit this hard. You saw Tyler Perry supposedly canceled a studio he was going to build? I wonder if Wahlberg is doubting his plan to make a new Hollywood in Vegas.
*Literally: Ass for artists. One of the classically educated here might want to check me on that.
** I couldn’t find the actual interpretation, but it obviously involves pain and circumcision, and I don’t ever want to Google those two words together.
@wr:
@Joe:
As wr states, it’s the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees. It’s the organization that oversees almost all of the major entertainment unions. Under the umbrella of IATSE are all the individual unions – Camera, Grips, Electricians, Makeup and Hair, Costumes, Props, Special Effects, Office workers, Sound, Projectionsists, Video Playback. The Directors Guild (DGA), the Writers Guild (WGA), actors (SAG), and Teamsters make up the other four unions for the industry. Additionally, IATSE has satellite unions in each state that covers that jurisdiction of local workers (those not based in LA or NYC or another production center). Georgia has IA Local 479, Lousiana has IA Local 478, Florida has IA Local 477. These IA locals handle the entire state under a different contract than the national unions. There are also a few national unions within the IA. For example, Camera Local 600 is a national union, in that they have virtually the same contract in every jurisdiction, unlike many of the other unions, which have contracts that can be locations specific.
Whataboutism
From Trump’s SCOTUS Win Shows Why We Need Federally Run Elections
Government collecting Lists are bad.
Judge blocks Texas attorney general’s demands for LGBT group’s records.
Unless
Prop 8 Donors: Find Out Who Backed California’s Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment
Gawd… I wish this site had a block button.
Some days I wish trolls would go back where they came from, and come back only when they learn to speak English.
On other things, the Cuisinart ice cream maker does work, but I managed to ruin my first batch. For one thing the recipe was all wrong (long story). For another, I either used too much liquid, or didn’t let the machine run long enough. I think I know enough to make it right next time.
I had better luck with the slow cooked white bean chicken stew, despite once again starting late. Chicken does cook faster than beef, so 4 hours did it. The beans could have used another hour, but they’re fine (just a little more al dente than expected*). If I do it again, I’d let the beans cook first for two hours, then add the chicken and potatoes and cook another three hours.
*This is something I’ve noted in other recipes, and in things cooked by others. You can get white beans as soft as brown or black beans, but they take longer.
@Paul L.:
You are right Paul, that’s more nihilistic whataboutism as usual. Something you engage in all the time here.
This is really sad because it shows you really don’t believe in anything except apparently the 2nd amendment and that climate change isn’t real. I think those are the only two issues you are consistent with or, at the very least, won’t contradict yourself to own the libs. Everything else, including the police, you are prepared to blow in the wind if you think it will help you show how everyone else is a hypocrite.
As usual, that just fills me with pity for you, and I hope that one day you get the help you need.
Media is so damn sloppy these days. The issue of poorly edited copy gets raised in comments from time to time. I am more concerned about something I happened across today.
This Axios article, “See the cities with the highest — and lowest — cost of living,” includes a nicely designed map showing cost of living of urban areas with a population over 100k across the country. It’s followed by:
Looking at the map, this holds true for those shown on the West Coast. The cities in the East are a much different story. The same holds true for the Northeast and South Florida, as well as Southwest Florida, but not Tampa. But in between, the metros along the coast are all below average in cost of living.
In the interest of fairness, the authors include this:
It’s not like they are excluding two or three urban areas, either. Using the US Census definition, they are found all the way down the coast. See the wiki map.
Then, if you look at the interior West along the Rockies, the only urban areas with lower than average cost of living are the two in New Mexico and Las Vegas. Every other metro is above average. This is hardly indicative of something called a coastal tax.
The text appears directly below the map, and it takes all of two seconds to see how weird that wording is. So I’m supposed ot behold this concept by looking at a map that shows the concept is flawed. Is that why it is in quotes? And why the exclusion of, as an example, the urban area of Wilmington, NC, with a population of ~250k?
It also has a headline that is misleading. That’s nothing new. But unless you read the caption below the map (in smaller font) or further into the piece, you won’t know that it only applies to the top 20% in household earnings. It doesn’t apply to [grabs scratch paper and pen] 80% of the households.
It’s not a big deal, I guess. We expect some, maybe even most, headlines to be at leady a little misleading. But why does this stupid “coastal tax” thing? Especially if you’re going to put a visualization directly above the text that shows the idea doesn’t make sense. On top of that, a pretty important caveat–that 80% of households are excluded–is buried.
@Paul L.:
Paul, don’t lie about me and the positions I take. Ever.
I have never in my public writings here at OTB ever suggested that I see Fani Willis as a hero. In fact, across multiple media, I’ve been critical of her judgment. If you can find proof of me treating her any other way, bring it. Otherwise, don’t pull that bullshit again.
Especially given my long history of taking a pragmatic and nuanced position on prosecutors. I account for all of my positions, unlike you.
Beyond that, I like Clark Neely a lot. And I follow him on twitter and have even had exchanges with him. So I know that he applies that quote not just to prosecutors but to Donald Trump’s immunity arguement as well. And Trump’s ongoing calls for increasing police immunity.
Which I am sure you know but you never seem to bring up in all your QI bad and Police cannot be trusted virtue signaling postings. Perhaps it’s because you know that Trump’s position is antithetical to the one you have so loudly proclaimed… but in the end that doesn’t matter to you. Or you don’t want to call attention to it.
Which BTW, gets us to your apparent position that “no academic papers can be trusted.” It would be in keeping with your “Police can’t be trusted” maximalist position that you always virtue signal. Of course, we both know that is largely virtue signaling and you will break it the moment it suits your purpose. I know that because you showed that you are more than happy to post police PR statements… I mean releases, when they suit your argument. See a few weeks ago when you posted a police statement on Nex Benedict’s death to prove someone wrong. So apparently, don’t trust the police… unless they allow you to attack the libs and queer people, then take them at face value.
I have to say, I really was shocked when you did that. I honestly had thought you really believed the “don’t trust the police thing”–then I realized you don’t believe much of anything… not really. I mean you say you do. But your actions always demonstrate that you don’t.
Anyway, I opted not to point out that hypocrisy the day you did that. But this is what happens when you lie about the positions I take–I bring the receipts.
Or perhaps you’re just as big a hypocrite as you think the rest of us are. Which again, is a deep form a nihilism and a shitty way to live.
There was an online article about Trump making fun of Biden’s stuttering, apparently twice. One of the comments said that if it were any normal politician it would be the sort of thing that would be a major story, the type of thing that they might even bring in a damage control expert to try to “put in context”. It would be a real setback in any politican’s career. With Trump it’s just another day at the office (it actually brought big laughs at his rallies). My wife taught elementary school for almost 30 years, the last 12 at the kindergarten level. I asked her what they did when a child made fun of the other kids. She said they had an established protocol, they would call the parents in and explain why that behavior was inappropriate and would not be tolerated. Basically, it was an intervention. In all the years she taught kindergarten it happened twice. Because EVEN 6 year-olds know better.
@Matt Bernius:
There was a dude at my last job who believed that everyone cheated at everything, and that if you didn’t cheat you were just a sucker. Big Trump fan, “men’s rights anctivist” type stuff too. Across the board one of the most unpleasant people I have ever encountered, and his way of life didn’t even make himself happy.
I hope someone slaps him upside the head with a clue-by-four.
@Matt Bernius:
You said the prosecutors you know are good people who I bet would tell you “they need absolute immunity from civil liability—even for intentional civil rights violations.”
There is a difference between police covering up, defending and protecting their misconduct) (with passive language like the officer’s firearm discharged) and police reporting that they do not have evidence to charge people of a crime or they were wrong.
See these examples of police PR statements… I mean releases
Police investigation of the UVA/Rolling Stone Jackie Coakley rape.
Salt Lake City Police Department apologizes, punishes officers and settles for the arrest of a nurse doing her job.
Two deputies from the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office were suspended for arrest of a legally blind man.
Or do you believe those cases covered up too? That I can’t cite them as examples as the information came from the police?
I would be overjoyed if Donald Trump’s losing Presidential immunity took Judicial, Prosecutorial and Qualified immunity with it. Odds of that happening?
Along with Obama charged with the extrajudicial murder of a US citizen.
As a companion to my somewhat frivolous rant about media sloppiness. I would like to call attention to this tweet from an Associate Professor of Applied Physics at Stanford.
It says, “:) discuss” referring to the pic of a graph purporting to show some sort of narcissism index by field. The axes are labeled, something that isn’t always the case with graphs shared on social media. So there’s that.
That’s about all I can give you. Why? Because this academic at one of the most prestigious institutions in the world doesn’t link to the source paper. He doesn’t even give a title, publication, or even the lead author. He gives no way to find it.
Apparently, this chart depicts “brilliance rating of own field vs. brilliance rating almond doctorate holders.”
Uh, okay. Maybe the labels on each axis clarify something about this.
y-axis: brilliance rating from field outsiders (PhD holders)
x-axis: self-rated brilliance
Oh, well, that certainly clarifies things.
I’ve pointed out this sort of behavior in the past, but I usually notice it from political operatives like Rufo or nutjobs posting a page from an unnamed book about FDR along with a comment that the late President was a communist agent.
But this is a fucking academic. The replies, many of whom appear to be academics in various fields, are split between people taking the chart seriously and others questioning aspects of it.
There is some hope, though. Multiple tweets call out the low n (26). (???) really? 26? A few ask for the source, but have received no response. (I hope OP does a better job leading discussions in the classroom.)
One, from a neuroscientist in Bangalore, says to refer to the source of the graph (though, doesn’t provide any means to do so) because “its extremely dubious stuff with racist and misogynistic claims.”
A med school professor says:
That was in reply to the guy in Bangalore. That’s unfortunate, because maybe that jab would have drawn a reply from the OP.
Anyway, it’s pretty hard to tell exactly what the Stanford professor’s intent is here. I can be charitable and think that he was being tongue in cheek. Maybe the textmoji smiley face is meant to demonstrate that. But I can’t tell.
Regardless of his intent, posting in this manner is irresponsible. It’s a chart with unclear labels, a low n-value, no link to the paper, and thus no context. People will see this. It has just under 250k views as of 2pm today. To be sure, not viral status. But this crap will reinforce pre-existing beliefs in some of them.
Ironically, some of the replies from some in the (according to the chart) less narcissistic fields arrogantly criticize allegedly narcissistic fields in a way that reveals their own narcissism.
It ain’t just the media outlets that are sloppy these days.
Now, I must excuse myself to go bang my head against a concrete wall.
Good day, all.
@Paul L.:
First, nice goal post moving. You first said Fani Willis was my hero. Then when pressed for citations you shift to making up positions about prosecutors I have worked with.
Do you see how dishonest this is? Because if you don’t then I can’t help you.
And where have I argueed that they should get that immunity? In fact, the prosecutors I know actual do things like setting up conviction integrity units to check past cases and have done exonerations.
So you are continuing to lie about what I have said and make up scenarios to stay right. Real courage of your convictions there. Or cite something I actually wrote versus what the voices in your head are telling you.
Anyway that’s it Paul, I’m done engaging with an unprincipled liar like you. If all you are going to do is lie, you are not worth my time.
Just one point:
Oh, so initial police reports have never been wrong in reporting of facts?
Police officers are trained to frame their police reports to deceive, former cop turned academic says
I can cite a lot of those in many of the high profile cases you usual cite to prove police are not to be trusted. For example, see the initial releases on George Floyd’s death as a low hanging fruit. Of course, you will hand wave those inaccurate reports away because the police lying there is a great demonstration of why we should trust them in this case. Or something like that. So let’s do Ahmaud Arbery. Or all of Radley Balko’s reporting about the manipulation of coroners reports.
That said, I know you have read enough Radley Balko to know his stand on what you just claimed as well. But despite your constant maximalist positions, you apparently choose to ignore that counter evidence.
Then again, I guess attacking queer people is more important to you than your stance on police. If you were honest, you’d acknowledge that. But your main form of argumentation, as you demonstrated above is lying. So like I said, nothing actually matters to you–despite all your maximalist positions. Or more simply, if the police reach what you believed to be the right decision, then you believe them.
Either way, you are exactly the type of hypocrite that you seem to think everyone else is. And you keep showing it off. And the sad part is you don’t have enough self reflective capabilities to learn that.
Which frankly shows how you are not worth the time. So that’s it Paul. I hope someday you get the help you clearly need.
@SenyorDave:
Children know better than to do it in front of the teacher, or other adults.
@Matt Bernius:
I don’t know if you saw it the other day, but someone called out Paul with a definition of whataboutism. Paul countered with a link to a different definition of whataboutism.
The link went to a poorly written blog post that cited the definition given in an op-ed published by, IIRC, USA Today.
The kicker? Both the blog and op-ed were critical of accusations of “whataboutism.” Well, at least when those on the left do it.
Bonus for the blog post drawing an equivalence between the actions of Roy Moore and Al Franken. I don’t think I need unpack the differences between how their respective co-partisans responded to their behavior.
@Kurtz:
He’s posted that link numerous times. And it demonstrates again Paul’s dishonesty or due to whatever untreated issues he has, his lack of reading comprehension because he continues to think it says the exact opposite of what it says.
Which is why I am done with him. I can’t invest any more time in someone who simply cannot or will not understand and will lie about other people’s clearly and publicly articulated positions.
That has to be a crushing level of intellectual insecurity to live with. I don’t need to add to all the problems he clearly has. And I shouldn’t be spending more time on him when I can be doing things that actually help address the problems he says he cares about.
@Matt Bernius:
Paul probably automatically assumed you worship Fani Willis because you’re known to dislike Trump. QED, in his mind.
@CSK:
Mike N., Fani Willis, Glenn Kirschner, Tristan Snell, Preet Bharara, Niketh Velamoor(Reason magazine gag order), Nancy Grace, etc. are/were hall of fame prosecutors who need absolute immunity from civil liability—even for intentional civil rights violations.
All prosecutors are heroes.
Therefore all prosecutors must be worshiped.
@Kurtz: .
Whataboutism is most used as dodge for someone pointing out a double standard, naked partisanship and hypocrisy.
Rick Wilson: Trump is not a Republican as he increased the National debt.
MAGA: So did G.W. Bush who you supported and believe is a true Republican.
Rick Wilson: Whataboutism.
@Paul L.:
I’m sorry, Paul, but I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.
@Paul L.: Rick Wilson is a Republican, he supported GWB because GWB had pretty typical Republican positions. And he wasn’t a racist, corrupt, amoral pig, who openly supported enemies of the US, a serial sexual assaulter who openly bragged about, an open bigot who has no problem breaking bread with Nick Fuentes and his lot. I was no fan of GWB but he seemed like a decent man, not someone who would make fun someone’s stuttering.
@SenyorDave:
My problem was Rick Wilson argument was Trump was not acting like a Republican when he was President.
I would guess his new paymasters and dark money donors believe that Republicans are racist, corrupt, amoral, bigoted, serial sexual assaulter, rape apologist pigs who openly support enemies of the US, who openly brag about it.
@Matt Bernius:
A while back, there was an exchange wherein everyone misinterpreted something Paul said.
The thing is, I didn’t really blame anyone, because his posts usually fall into one or more of a few categories:
-unclear in rhetoric and/or intent.
-non-responsive but tangential to the topic sometimes, entirely unrelated other times.
-half thoughts that may or may not fit the other two categories. The best description: the paragraph version of a sentence fragment.
I almost e-mailed you about it, actually. Mainly because I suspect that Paul thinks the reaction to his posts aren’t due to their style or content, but because everyone here can’t break out of their bubble. I figured that’s not a good idea to feed, so if he does actually post a complete argument or thought, it’s probably a good idea to show it was comprehended as intended.
Then again, I don’t think anyone here can help. For a long time, I thought his posts were some sort of elaborate game he was playing. But I don’t think that anymore.
@Matt Bernius:
Actually, you know what it reminds me of? The scene in Seinfeld when Kramer gets fired from the office he doesn’t actually work at. The boss says of Kramer’s reports, “I don’t know what this is supposed to be.”
That’s what I think after reading many of his comments.
@CSK: The extended exchange with PaulL today is one of those “why we shouldn’t feed the trolls” things. I’m even of a mind to avoid trolling the trolls (although I occasionally do) because most of them–as this exchange shows–lack the self-awareness to realize they are being trolled–which I don’t think anyone is doing in this particular exchange, though the lack of self-awareness holds firm.
In any event, make peace with yourselves and your desires, whatever they may be.
ETA: @Kurtz: In my experience teaching persuasive/argumentative writing, I found that some number of my students could never get far enough away from their own ideas that they could effectively assess whether what they were attempting to say and what the audience was reading were the same message/close enough. And very few are natural at it.
@Paul L.:
So you’re admitting that a significant number of your replies are dodges?
Why would you justify your use of it by linking to pieces that are critical of it?
You say it sometimes when it doesn’t even apply to the post you tag. And in the unlikely event it could somehow apply, no one knows how it does, because you just reply with that word. You don’t explain the point of hypocrisy.
I don’t like being mean, but you regularly engage in a bad habit that can’t execute properly. It’s like you try to smoke a cigaretee from the lit end and wonder why you are suffering from nicotine withdrawal and your tongue is burnt.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
Everyone know not to feed the trolls, and everyone eventually does anyway.
On other things, Kirk Cousins is heading to Atlanta, and Russel Wilson is off to Pittsburgh.
The latter move reminds me of the time the Steelers got Michael Vick, minus the extracurricular controversy. That didn’t go down particularly well. At least they’re getting Wilson cheap:
The AP source said Wilson will receive the veteran’s minimum of $1.21m while the Denver Broncos pay the remainder of his $39m salary.
Off-Hollywood creative accounting for all to see.
@EddieInCA:
I generally agree with your take onthis stuff, except that I thought Oppenheimer was a kind of bloated star vehicle which they pulled off nicely. However, it had the built-in advantage of being about a ‘serious’ topic. I thought it was a good movie.
I thought Barbie was a risky untertaking, however Greta, Margot, et al, completely nailed it.
Had I a vote, I would have voted for Barbie over Oppenheimer.
@Kurtz:
FWIW, I did my best to try and explain that to him multiple times. Admittedly, I didn’t always maintain a level of patience or kindness in that attempt. And that’s on me.
However, I’ve seen multiple people try to do that–including Steven, who is much more patient that I am–and it’s never worked. Which probably should have been when I opted to disengage.
The unfortunate part is that Paul and I agree on several positions, including the need for prosecutorial oversight and the problem with issues like QI. Working in the reform space, you have to work across many different groups–including those you don’t always agree with. I’ve done that a bit in the past. I had hoped to do that here.
I also don’t like seeing people attacked because their points are getting misinterpreted. That’s why I’ve tried in the past to unpack what I think that he was trying to communicate (at least in terms of criminal legal system reform).
It’s just unfortunate that I care more about what he’s saying than apparently he does. Or that I thought the issue was just his being difficult to understand.
Ah. This thread is dead for the day, I see
@Kurtz: The hypocrisy is supposed to be self-evident; which circles back to my observation above about not being able to get far enough away from
yourone’s own ideas.@MarkedMan: If you, or anyone else for that matter, has another topic to bring up, the community could make another thread here. Kathy has started a potential one with Wilson and Cousins, but I don’t follow football enough to pick it up.
@MarkedMan:
We can always try some tangents. For instance, I knew blending whole limes renders lemonade somewhat bitter. I did not realize that wouldn’t mesh well with coconut water.
So here’s the revised recipe:
750 ml coconut water
333 ml coconut milk*
the juice of two limes
Sweetener as needed.
Pretty much mix all together in a bowl or measuring cup you can pour from, and place it in the ice cream maker after turning it on (that’s what the instructions say). I’ll try it sometime next week.
* I can get coconut milk in 1 liter cartons, but the one I use is marked as being for use in cooking, and only comes in 333 ml cartons. I find it has a stronger coconut flavor, and it’s creamier than the other kind. I use it mostly for making coconut rice.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
100% this.
Self-reflection and critique is a craft and a practice. And, like most crafts, the skills necessary to deliver it must be learned and maintained. Like most things, some people take to it quicker than others. But it regardless of where you start, you need to be able to cultivate it.
And if you’re not willing to do that–including being curious about your own biases and what you don’t know–then no amount of reading or research is going to help you.
Dunning-Kruger is a really seductive drug.
@Kurtz:
I use Whataboutism when pointing out partisan hypocrisy.
I am expecting Whataboutism as a response to handwave it away.
Meidas Touch screams and whines when Judges rule against Trump that criticizing a Judge’s decisions undermines Democracy, the rule of law and the US judicial system.
Meidas Touch screams and whines when Judges rule for Trump that the Judge is a idiot or a traitor undermining Democracy and the rule of law.
I don’t know why Fani Willis is not beloved here. I suspect that a number of people here agree with this.
@Matt Bernius:
In the past you likely had the advantage of working with people who actually wanted to work with you, rather than just take cheap shots for whatever lame jollies they can think they get.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
I haven’t had or run across a big idea lately. This hampers my postings here.
I’ve thought about rehashing the pandemic, as it’s been a topic in some books I’ve read lately. But I have nothing really new to say about it.
I haven’t even seen anything interesting on streaming.
I did come across an interesting factoid. The salient achievement of airline deregulation, we get told constantly, is that it lowered fares, so now everyone can afford to fly (or close enough). Turns out, and I haven’t fact-checked this, that fares had been coming down prior to deregulation, and they kept falling at about the same rate afterwards.
Given all the myriad things that haven’t gone right after deregulation, namely the advent of cattle class and loss of air service in many places*, if it wasn’t even responsible for lowering fares, then what good has it been?
*And bailouts and stock buybacks.
The focus on Barbie and Oppenheimer is curious to me, because I suspect Anatomy of a Fall, American Fiction, and The Zone of Interest will stand as all-time classics 40, 60, 80 years hence in a way Barbenheimer will not.
Was pleased to see AOAF and AF unexpectedly pickup the original and adapted screenplay awards, continuing the Oscars long history of giving its top awards to glossy zeitgeist movies whose appeal often fades over time, while relegating the year's actual best to wins for being fantastically-penned (which should have made them frontrunners for the more visible awards). Good writing tends to stand the test of time.
The Zone of Interest's two wins — foreign film, and sound design — were richly deserved forgone conclusions.
@Matt Bernius, @Kurtz: Are you two having fun? There’s nothing particularly productive about engaging Señor L, but if you’re having fun, I say rock on, go for it, etc.
Conventional wisdom says “don’t feed the trolls”, but I say make them jump for treats if it amuses you.
@Kathy:
Increasing shareholder value, of course.
I expect the increase in door plugs popping out in flight and wheels falling off is a prelude to the type of public relations incident that will harm shareholder value though.
@Kurtz:
Pride goeth before the fall. Republicans are on an electoral losing streak as Trump and his far right acolytes alienate allies and enemies alike. Yet Trumpers swear everyone but them is in a bubble.
Here, you will find leftists, centrists, independents, partisans, libs, cons, and contrarians. The unifier is horror at Trump’s perversions, bigotry, extremism, and amorality. Trumpers have exasperated conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike — perhaps fatally, pending 2024 results. If Republicans cannot get all of the Haley, McCain, Romney, Bush types to stay in Trump fold at the same clip they did in 2020, the party may be staring into the Whig abyss.
If people who frequently disagree all agree that they can’t stand you, who is in the bubble?
@EddieInCA:
There’s a certain type of movie that is clearly Oscar-bait, and by all accounts, Oppenheimer fits the bill (I’ll watch it when it gets to streaming, but it certainly looks like fancy biopic with a message). I think that simply having the Oscars creates an incentive to make movies like that, and that it’s a nice counterweight to the incentive to make big expensive blockbusters and cheap rom-coms.
It’s 100% groupthink and basically the NPR awards, but I kind of like NPR.
@Gustopher:
I enjoy meta-discussions. So I’m enjoying chatting with Kurtz and building off of others points. As far as the other interaction, no I wasn’t enjoying it. Hence why I said I’m no longer directly engaging with that individual–and I ask everyone hold me to it.
I’m asking for that accountability because I know that “someone being wrong on the internet” is something that pushes my buttons–in particular if it’s a topic that I disagree with or if it feels like its deeply in conflict with the positions they loudly articulate.
@DK:
Could not agree with you more. I’ve said in the past that if we want to truly judge films, we should wait 30 years to see how they hold up. In 1981, the best picture was “Chariots of Fire”, a fine film. But in retrospect, I think the Academy would vote for “Raiders of the Lost Ark”. In 1983, Ghandi was the winner. Another fine film, but in retrospect, I think the Academy would vote for “Tootsie” or “ET” rather than Ghandi.
Years from now are people going to still be watching “Nomadland”? No. But they will be watching “Judas and the Black Messiah” and “Mank”. Years from now, will anyone be watching “Coda”? Hell no. But they will be watching “Licorice Pizza” and “Belfast” and “Power of the Dog”, and most of all, “Dune Pt 1:”.
History shows us which films stand the test of time and which don’t. Just like music, paintings, sculptures, and photos, and television.
The films I enjoyed the most this year weren’t Barbenheimer. It was American Fiction and The Holdovers”. I thought that “Killers of the Flower Moon” was awful, and only got nominated due to it’s pedigree, not it’s actual film making or story. But, again, that’s just me. And my opinions are worth no more or no less than anyone elses, including Academy members, of which I’m not one.
I am a member of the DGA, PGA, and was a WGA member in the 90’s. I can vote on DGA awards, but I refrain from doing so every year for the reasons previously articulated.
@Kathy: The bailouts and stock buybacks help the owners of capital; doesn’t that count for something?
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
From this post about the ballot decision:
This is an example of what I posted about. Paul needs more than just saying whataboutism here. In order for the hypocrisy to be self evident, there has to be two items to make a comparison.
@gVOR10 was making a point about dysfunction in Congress. There are myriad examples of Dems doing similar things that he could use. Instead, he just throws out the term “whataboutism.”
The substance of what you wrote above is correct. If one cannot understand the opposing view, they probably cannot truly make the case for their view either. They definitely cannot do it effectively. And will not be persuasive, even if their view was 100% sound.
Interestingly enough, I pointedly gave Paul a template for this purpose in a recent thread.
@Paul L.:
Dude, I am trying to help you.
You have responded to various poster’s comments here with a single word, “whataboutism.”
If I claim x behavior by a politician is bad, and you respond with that single word, that doesn’t work.
I have seen you do this multiple times.
—
And by the way individuals, commentators, and media outlets criticizing a court decision is wholly different from a President doing it. So your comparisons are facile.
Even worse, when the (former) President paints judges who rule against him as traitors, that isn’t the same as criticizing the reasoning behind the decision. See: Obama SOTU claim that Citizen’s United would allow unlimited spending. He didn’t call the conservatives on the court traitors. The latter approach doesn’t merely lack decorum, but can incite violent action.
Your writing shows little understanding of what you talk about most of the time. Though, like Bernius, I also agree with a lot of what you say about police. I have also pointed out to you a few times that you will probably find broad agreement on those issues around here beyond just Matt and me.
There is one difference, I don’t take a blanket approach to anything, including law enforcement. I usually don’t automatically assume they are lying or telling the truth.
Your Fani Willis comment indicates that you don’t seem to understand the way most people around this site engage with ideas and how they respond to politicians. A significant percentage of Trump supporters display behavior associated with a parasocial relationship. You won’t find that here.
@Gustopher:
The shareholder value supremacy is, like Lardass, both a symptom and a cause.
@DK:
We’re all in a bubble to some extent. I don’t go looking for contrary positions or opinions much. partly because I’ve held contrary opinions myself, and know the arguments and evidence for them. Partly because for some things, they are unnecessary (like, say, arguments against vaccination).
I find it more useful to question my own assumptions. I do that a lot.
@EddieInCA:
The films I enjoyed most in 2023 where Oppenheimer and Across the Spider-Verse, because these were the only films I saw last year.
@Kurtz:
Really? One Lazy Google search later.
LOSER Trump THREATENS More Judges who Call him a TRAITOR.
Government can’t squelch free speech
@Kathy:
Another pet peeve of mine is the lack of respect animated films get with the Academy. The year “Up” came out, it thought it was the best film produced that year, despite it being an animated film.
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018), was one of the better films of that year as well, and deserved a best picture nod in addition to it’s win for best animated film.
Keep talking Donald. Just keep talking…
Donald Trump Floats ‘Cutting’ Medicare And Medicaid—And Joe Biden Just Pounced
Trump Tells CNBC He’s Open to ‘Cutting’ Entitlements Like Social Security — Biden Campaign Quickly Pounces
Biden’s answer was simple… ‘Not on my watch.”
So far, I’m impressed with the White House rapid response team.
@EddieInCA:
And comedies. This has been a complain for a long time. There have been suggestions to do as the Golden Globes do, and award Oscars for best comedy picture and best drama picture, rather than just best picture.
I don’t know, the show is long enough as it is.
@Paul L.: An honest statement that is intended as constructive criticism: your comments honestly make no sense. Readers have to guess as to what you are trying to say.
If you are truly interested in trying to engage and persuade (or if you simply want to be understood) I would highly recommend you talk to someone you trust who has rhetorical skills to help you out.
This has nothing to do with your views (most of which I can only partially decipher).
I say this as a professional educator and, perhaps more significantly, someone who has been reading blog comments for 21+ years now.
If you want to be heard and understood, what you are doing isn’t working.
@Kathy:
Lemme tell ya, lol. As a Saints fan, I am THRILLED about Cousins in ATL. Wooo!
He’s a perfectly fine quarterback. But that’s it. He’s a loon and will inevitably get hurt or win juuuuuust enough to keep him around. Hopefully losing to the Saints twice in spectacular fashion*. Apologies to DK.
*this being the Saints they are just as likely to snatch spectacular defeat from the jaws of victory.
@Kathy:
Lemme tell ya, lol. As a Saints fan, I am THRILLED about Cousins in ATL. Wooo!
He’s a perfectly fine quarterback. But that’s it. He’s a loon and will inevitably get hurt or win juuuuuust enough to keep him around. Hopefully losing to the Saints twice in spectacular fashion*. Apologies to DK.
*this being the Saints they are just as likely to snatch spectacular defeat from the jaws of victory.
@EddieInCA:
I saw that thing about cutting SS and Medicare/aid and thought to myself “is he trying to lose?” Like, it’s just that stupid.
@Beth:
As wr, Reynolds, and others have stated here, Trump can’t help himself. He thinks of only the next five minutes. He has zero ability to think strategically, He’s all id all the time. And it’s going to bite him in the ass. Literally every day for the past two weeks, he’s been saying stupid shit EVERY DAY that is only going to drive away the voters he needs to win in swing states. I’m looking forward to the polls over the next few weeks.
@Matt Bernius:
As do I. I’ve had discussions with educated, intelligent people who do not like those sorts of conversations. Not liking them or finding them tedious is one thing, but dismissing them as unnecessary is quite another. That happens too often.
Speaking from experience, I get the impression that university-level natural science programs don’t require nearly enough rigorous work in the philosophy of science. I think the same is true of applied sciences as well.
Too many people, including those with STEM degrees, seem to think numbers=objective. Even if they claim to know that’s not the case, they struggle to apply that knowledge in their evaluation of phenomena.
The social sciences may have similar issues, but the concept of meta is embedded into those fields in such a way that it’s second nature to graduates. Economics is the exception, but that is to be expected, considering how the practice and verbiage hews so closely to the natural sciences that it’s easy for students to absorb it as studying natural phenomena.
I think it’s worth noting that philosophy has a bit of this as well, at least in the animosity some analytic philosophers view continental theorists. But it’s not nearly as problematic as it is in some schools of economics.
In the interest of clarity, I’m not claiming that any of this is universal or even held by the majority. But it seems common enough to be worrisome and frustrating.
@EddieInCA:
Yes. And he’s been remarkably good at staying on a couple of messages. Or in this case, not jumping on that bandwagon. That bandwagon is full of losers like Paul Ryan. He knows in his bones that cutting social security and the meds is a death sentence. That’s what made it shocking to me.
Like, he can hold about 2 long term plans/ideas in his head at a time. Something displaced one of them. Bad time for that.
@Beth:
He’s instantly the best and most accomplished qb in the division. And he probably has the best collection of weapons and best o-line as well.
And where is my apology? Also, don’t talk to Falcons fans about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It may have happened more often to the Browns and Saints, but, ya know, 28-3. And the NFCG against the Niners a few years earlier.
@Kurtz:
Agreed on all accounts… Including the critique of social sciences (though I would argue they have the equal but opposite tendency… Which I suspect is what you meant).
@Kurtz:
If I had to take a quarterback in that division, I’d pick Baker Mayfield over Kirk Cousins any day.
1. Better culture at Tampa Bay, with their recent Super Bowl, and their upset last season of the Eagles.
2. Better playmaker than Cousins. Mayfield can hurt you with the run.
3. Less of a douche than Cousins, who is an anti-vax whack job whose own teammates can barely tolerate.
@Paul L.:
Wow, you managed to miss the point. In most situations, I would put the blame on myself for not communicating clearly. But because you don’t seem to comprehend what you read, I’m not taking the blame on this one.
But yes, thank you for pointing out that Trump has a habit of inciting threats to judges and other officials. Dude posts their addresses.
@Kurtz:
Lol, my apologies! My brain doesn’t remember too well. I just knew that there were at least 2 Dirty Birds people here.
Re: Cousins. I agree that he might be instantly the best in the division. But that’s because that division is Satan’s Anus*. Usually is a place where dreams go to fester and die. The stench of failure and misery is palpable. Every once in a while though, Satan gets some Taco Bell or something and the division gets all wild and shit. Gets really roiling. Then whatever comes out, for good or ill, will be spectacular. And then it goes back to being terrible, instantly.
Also, because of where I physically am and who I am married to, I’ve had to watch way to many Vikings games the last couple of years. Not a good preview for you. Especially when I saw this:
*See, AL, Central.
@EddieInCA:
If there’s video of it, it should play in every political ad from now until November.
@Kathy:
No video, but audio from CNBC. The funny thing is that Trump-fan. Joe Kernan was trying hard to reign Trump in, as Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson and others have tried to do in the past. Didn’t work. Trump just kept on going.
Keep talking, Donald.
@Kathy:
No video, but audio from CNBC. The funny thing is that Trump-fan. Joe Kernan was trying hard to reign Trump in, as Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson and others have tried to do in the past. Didn’t work. Trump just kept on going.
Keep talking, Donald.
@EddieInCA:
I love Baker. I love the way he plays. I love his leadership style. He definitely has Cousins beat in the charisma department. I would love to have him in ATL.
But he isn’t as consistent as Cousins. I’m just now digging into the stats on PFR, but by quick look of the advanced and adjusted stats, Cousins is significantly better.
-adjusted net yards per attempt (index), which takes yardage lost on sacks into account, Cousins has had exactly one below average season–his rookie year. And four of the last five years, he was toward the top of the league. Baker has been up and down.
-Cousins has a much lower bad throw % and a higher on target %.
-somewhat surprisingly, Cousins has a much higher yards per scramble than Baker. Baker scrambles for rushing yards a bit more, but not that much more.
-I think Cousins is better at navigating the pocket. Stats wise, he seems to be a little more patient. But it can be difficult to interpret that stat because the differences are measure in tenths of seconds.
On the other side, Cousins costs a lot more than Mayfield. But the cap isn’t a big concern in Atlanta, at least for next couple years.
It’s just really tough to deny that Cousins has been productive for a long time. And the last few years, he has been excellent.
Yes, Cousins is a loon. But he certainly isn’t the only one, nor is he a disruptive presence like Rodgers. Plus, if I was too concerned with the personal views of football players, I wouldn’t consume it at all. I do have a limit though, I wasn’t happy when Atlanta considered trading for Watson.
Not sure whether his teammates hate him, but you may be plugged in and I certainly am not. Though, I’m positive it’s not a Russ situation–pretty sure he rubbed everyone the wrong way from day one.
I don’t want to convince anyone. I want to see how people will go to defend what I see as indefensible.
Will they go to full press secretary/spokesperson level hackery?
DNC stuttering talking point embraced here.
@Kurtz:
Due to my last job, I spent some time with NFL players – current and former. DeSean Jackson, Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, Spencer Paysinger, Cooper Kupp, Tutu Atwell, were just some of the more famous ones I interacted with over the last year. I’ve gotten quite a bit of NFL insight from those guys.
Yes. Cousins definitely has better stats, but I’ll take Baker’s style over Cousin’s any day of the week. I want a QB that the rest of the team will go to war with, not one whom they barely tolerate. It’s not a secret Cousin’s isn’t liked by many of his teammates. Just google it. Mayfield was only with the Rams a few weeks, but the Rams, to a man, said they’d go to war for Baker*.
*I got to spend alot of time on the Rams sidelines last season – mostly during practices. The Rams were bummed they couldn’t keep Mayfield, but they couldn’t afford the deal Tampa offered last season. And it was a brilliant move for Mayfield. He went from being on waivers almost out of football in mid 2022 to a thrww year $100M contract with Tampa Bay.
@EddieInCA:
No it isn’t. I’m the guy who thinks that we should purge the Olympic Games of all events that require subjective judging. I love figure skating, but I also love ballroom dancing, and don’t think that either should be an Olympic sport, for the same reasons. No more diving, no more dressage, no more rhythmic f@cking gymnastics. Synchronized swimmers will be permitted to leave peacefully if they do it immediately. Ski jumping will be judged by who jumped the farthest, period.
Citius, altius, fortius. All others need not apply.
@Michael Reynolds:
Actually, it’s “ass is free for artists”. Sort of a brothel arts encouragement program.
@Kathy:
So very much this. Even the ancient Greeks understood that comedy was also important. I would rather watch any of three dozen never-honored comedies than almost any best picture winner.
@Kathy: In case you need some fodder for a conspiracy theory. Not that you do conspiracy theories, but maybe you want to give it a try.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68534703
@DrDaveT:
Animal House.
Life of Brian
Airplane.
@EddieInCA:
Hell of a season to be on the Rams sideline. That team was fun. McVay seemed reinvigorated. Puka was a monster. They seemed like they were having a ton of fun.
As far as Cousins goes, I take a lot of what gets reported about hated teammates with a grain of salt. Same as when players defend a teammate as Jefferson did with Cousins. And the player’s reactions to Kirk’s achilles tear. In particular, that last one…teammates usually react that way to major injuries to the starting qb. It’s hard to tell how much of the emotion is knowing that the season is likely lost.
I’m comfortable with the Wilson assessment is that it was such a longstanding narrative–consistent over almost his entire career–and came from so many different places that it seems like a safe bet.
We will see how it goes for the Falcons. But who am I to doubt the man who called his shot on the Chiefs right after they looked terrible in December? IIRC, it was right after the Raiders loss. Hope you put some money down after you posted here.
@Paul L.:
Good to know. Enjoy yourself.
@Paul L.:
That much is more or less clear.
But nothing else about your comments has any clarity.
Again, I can guess what you are trying to say, but I really can’t say for certain.
No. Clarity.
None.
@EddieinCA:
Spinal Tap.
@EddieinCA:
What’s Up Doc?
Hopscotch
Ghostbusters
Real Genius
A New Leaf
The Great Race