Note: Some of these articles/posts may be more than a week old. I'm including them here because I linked to them on Facebook this week.
Rick Perry is becoming the new Bachmann:
Texas Gvoernor Rick Perry, who officially entered the 2012 Presidential Race recently (Despite the fact that he said he would definitely not run for president in 2012), has been trash talking Obama, the Fed, and Liberalism quite a bit lately. However, he often does not get his facts straight. Michelle Bachmann has been criticized for playing fast and loose with the facts. Now it seems as though Perry wants to take her place as the Candidate divorced from reality:
Fact Checker: "Fact checking Rick Perry’s announcement speech":
Once again, more examples of Rick Perry playing fast and loose with the facts, although not quite as patently false as other times.
"On a blended basis, we would rate this as a Two Pinocchio speech, similar to many of the other announcement speeches — a mishmash of high-flying rhetoric and facts sometimes tethered uncertainly to the truth."
Fact Checker: "Rick Perry’s claim that Obama has ‘killed more jobs’ than any other president":
"We gave Romney one Pinocchio because his statement lacked context even though it was technically accurate. Judging from Perry’s statements in his first week as a candidate, he doesn’t seem to care all that much about even technical accuracy; he just shoots from the hip."
As a caveat to this, the Fact Checker was corrected for a mistake he made on a similar post regarding his definition of job creation:
"The Post Fact Checker Gless Kessler writes yesterday: “By the standard definition of job creation during a presidency, [Obama] is on track to be the first president to have negative job growth in the modern era.”
This is all arbitrary and stupid, since boom/bust periods and presidential administrations don’t magically align their cycles like Smith College roommates....
The “standard definition” cited by Kessler is a link to this WSJ 2009 analysis, showing that job creation under George W. Bush was the worst under any president since WWII.... there is so rarely any very significant change in employment from month to month, and never has there been a very large change in the month a new president was inaugurated.Fact Check: "FactChecking Perry":
Until, of course, January 2009.
In the four transitions before 2001, job growth from December-January ranged between 0.24% and 0.3%. In 2001, it was close to zero. But during January 2009, the U.S. economy shed more jobs – 820,000– than in any month since WWII, and 0.61% of all jobs....
So the “standard definition” Kessler cites is fundamentally incorrect because of the dates used...
It’s also fundamentally flawed because it doesn’t take into account population growth.... A fair assessment of job creation has to incorporate population growth. A much better assessment of job creation is the change in employment as a share of the population, the employment ratio. Using that measure, half of the previous 10 presidents saw the employment situation decline during their tenures. This should not come as a surprise; hearing that Obama would be the first president in history with bad job creation numbers should raise a red flag about the qualify of the analysis." (emphasis added)
"In his announcement speech, Perry said the U.S. cannot afford four more years of "rising energy dependence on nations that intend us harm." But U.S. reliance on foreign oil has dropped under President Barack Obama, and it is expected to decline again this year...
Perry also incorrectly claimed in his speech that Obama's economic policies "have given us record debt." U.S. public debt as a percentage of the nation's economy is at its highest level since World War II, but not at a record high...
Last November, Perry exaggerated the financial problems of the Social Security system...
Also in November, Perry exaggerated how much Texas' share of Medicaid costs would increase as a result of the new federal health care law. Perry said the new law would cost Texas "$27 billion more, over and above what we’re already paying over the next 10 years... the federal government will pay most of the extra cost... The total Medicaid cost for the state would be $4.5 billion — but that's only 5.1 percent more, or $219 million, than it would have been without the new law."
Paul Krugman: "The Texas Unmiracle":
Although this article isn't a "fact check" of Rick Perry, it does make a few good points clearing up Perry's various claims to fame about job creation in Texas:
"the Texas miracle is a myth, and more broadly that Texan experience offers no useful lessons on how to restore national full employment. It's true that Texas entered recession a bit later than the rest of America, mainly because the state's still energy-heavy economy was buoyed by high oil prices through the first half of 2008.Herb Silverman: "Science is not democratic":
So where does the notion of a Texas miracle come from? Mainly from widespread misunderstanding of the economic effects of population growth.
For this much is true about Texas: It has, for many decades, had much faster population growth than the rest of America -- about twice as fast since 1990. Several factors underlie this rapid population growth: a high birth rate, immigration from Mexico, and inward migration of Americans from other states... the high rate of population growth translates into above-average job growth through a couple of channels. Many of the people moving to Texas... bring purchasing power that leads to greater local employment...
What Texas shows is that a state offering cheap labor and, less important, weak regulation can attract jobs from other states. I believe that the appropriate response to this insight is ''Well, duh.'' The point is that arguing from this experience that depressing wages and dismantling regulation in America as a whole would create more jobs... involves a fallacy of composition: every state can't lure jobs away from every other state.
In fact, at a national level lower wages would almost certainly lead to fewer jobs -- because they would leave working Americans even less able to cope with the overhang of debt left behind by the housing bubble, an overhang that is at the heart of our economic problem."(emphasis added)
Although this article is not a "fact check" of Perry, it points out the absurdity of Rick Perry's comment, "In Texas, we teach both creationism and evolution. I figure you're smart enough to figure out which one is right."
"Apparently, Perry’s theory of science teaching is to tell children they are smart enough to figure out what is right and what is made up. Here are other scientific questions to ask small children: When you walk around, does the earth look flat or round? When you look at the sun in the morning and evening, does it look like the sun is moving around the earth or that the earth is moving around the sun at approximately 67,000 mph? Never mind the scientific consensus, you’re smart enough to just know...
We don’t take polls asking people if they “believe” in gravity, though the theory of evolution is better understood by scientists than is the theory of gravity...
...we are becoming one nation undereducated. "
Fact Checks:
This week, my favorite posts have been from the Washington Post Fact Checker, Glenn Kessler.
Fact Checker: "Obama’s denial that Biden called tea party activists ‘terrorists’":
The evidence to suggest that Biden called TEA Party-ers "terrorists" is sketchy at best.
"On balance, then, we are going to give President Obama a rare Geppetto [pass] for his denial that Biden uttered those words. There is no firm evidence to believe Biden did"Also note what George W. Bush’s former Treasury Secretary, Paul H. O’Neill said:
“The people who are threatening not to pass the debt ceiling are our version of al-Qaeda terrorists. Really. They’re really putting our whole society at risk by threatening to round up 50 percent of the members of the Congress, who are loony, who would put our credit at risk.”Seems a bit hypocritical for conservative to complain...
Fact Checker: "Michele Bachmann’s too-good-to-be-true stat on federal workers":
The major raises in federal pay came from Bush. Obama, on the oher hand has had both the smallest pay increase since 1975 and an actual freezing of government pay. This is another fail for Michelle Bachmann.
Fact Check: "Obama’s Canadian-American Bus":
Actually, the Bus was purchased from a Tennessee bus-conversion company who got the bus from Canada. The bus was thought to be the only one with the required specs. It's 1/2 to 2/3 American made, by cost. I wonder if the Republican presidential nominee will turn down his/her own Canadian-American bus? My dad also pointed out:
The only American-owned company that builds over-the-road buses is Motor Coach Industries (MCI), based in Schaumburg, Illinois, and that company was actually founded in Winnipeg, Canada. GM and Flxible used to be the two big intercity bus manufacturers, but their operations were sold and subsequently discontinued. Gillig Corporation of Hayward, California, is the only American-owned company making transit buses.
Fact Check: "Front Group Claims EPA Threatens 7 Million Jobs":
Industry studies that donb't undergo thorough peer-review should always raise red flags.
"[The group] also answered our questions about the source of the ad's claim that 7 million jobs would be "at risk" because of the EPA's proposal. The basis turns out to be an economic study produced by the Manufacturers Alliance and financed by the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute...Eric Levine: "The Weekly Standard still thinks long division is a good substitute for critical thinking [Defending the Truth-O-Meter] ":
...the industry study's projection of 7 million lost jobs is disputed. Laurie Johnson, chief economist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, calls the study "junk analysis" and states: "No serious economist would consider this study valid." She also asked Professor Richard B. Howarth of Dartmouth College to evaluate it. Howarth called the industry study "fundamentally flawed, resting on an analytical framework that is scientifically unsound." He said it would rate a grade of "incomplete" if handed in as an undergraduate honors project." (emphasis added)
In my current Edition of Defending The Truth-O-Meter, I take on a rebuttal from The Weekly Standard against a Politifact Ruling. You may have seen a few politicians claim the Stimulus cost taxpayers $278,000 per job. Politifact Texas attempted to explain why this was inaccurate, yet TWS didn't understand. So i take a shot at explaining it to them.
Rational Conservatism (Surprisingly not an Oxymoron)
Rcently I have become a fan of the FrumForum. This site gives me a chance to get a conservative perspective from a source that seems to care at least a bit about reality. David Frum is Republican of the Reagan era. He has very little patience with today's modern Tea Party movement. He is quick to criticize the movement and it's ideas. He yearns for the day that Republicans return to the days of Reagan, when they actually had a positive relationship with reality yet still held true to Conservative ideals. If you are a conservative, I highly recommend reading his posts. I also suggest Liberals read these posts as well so that they can understand that one can be conservative AND rational. I may not agree with everything he says. But we do have common ground. Anyone interested should first listen to this interview from Discover columnist Chris Mooney.
David Frum: "Can Romney Believe What He Says?"
David Frum has often appeared to support Mitt Romney. However, he spends this article criticizing Romney for pledging "himself to policies that will squeeze jobs in the near term, at least according to conventional economic theory." He looks at four possible reasons for why Romney would do this, but none seem likely. His first possible explanation is the most interesting:
"1) Romney has become a true believer in the “confidence” theory of job creation. Unemployment remains high (according to this theory) because big government and loose money detract from business confidence. By cutting spending and tightening money, we can restore confidence and inspire business to hire again. This theory has been endorsed by many Republicans including Speaker Boehner. Maybe Romney has joined the crowd?
Problem with Answer 1: Romney just seems too damn smart to believe something so at odds with reality."
David Frum: "Huntsman 2016?"
Even the most moderate candidate for the Republican Party is more concerned with cleaning up after the crisis is over than actually ending the crisis itself. ...though Jon Hunstman seems to be the only Republican with even a half-way serious plan.
David Frum bashes the Wall Street Journal:
David took note of the Wall Street Journal's recent attempts to bash the Fed. David Frum clears up the misinformation created by the Wall Street Journal in a series of posts. Here are a few I've linked from this series (don't know if that's all of them):
"Time to Downgrade the Journal’s Editorial Page": The WSJ continually has to make up pseudo-facts in order to continue promoting their idea of "sound money," despite how much it hampers near-term job creation.
"The Journal’s Memory Hole": Frum continues to point out the Wall Street Journal's pseudo-facts and revisionist history about this recession. He again points out the soulless bitching of those in favor of "tight money," as millions of Americans are currently out of work.
"Nice Central Bank You Have Here"
David Frum: "America's imagined inflation problem":
Why are Republicans still so concerned with inflation (let alone Hyper Inflation)? They are either delusional or they are trying to ensure the price of Gold continues to rise. If that is their plan, if is failing. The price of Gold finally fell this week.
Climate Change and Scientific Philosophy:
Skeptical Science: "Settled Science - Humans are Raising CO2 Levels":
This article gives a simplified rundown as to how we know increasing atmospheric CO2 levels are man-made (with links to more sophisticated detailed explanations). This article is a must-read for any layman interested in the science of climate change. I would also highly suggest this site as a standard resource when investigating the science of climate change.
The Economist: "We have a winner: British Columbia’s carbon tax woos sceptics":
From Greg Mankiw's Blog:
British Columbia has successfully instituted a Carbon Tax. The economy is still doing quite well and the public loves it. Maybe we can learn from them. For example, we could fund a cut to the payroll tax and/or corporate tax. We could also fund tax cuts for green energy in order to obtain a revenue neutral Carbon Tax.
The Intersection: "Michael Mann Cleared Again":
"Yet another organization, this time the National Science Foundation, has cleared climate scientist Michael Mann of wrongdoing (here is a pdf of the report closeout memorandum)...
The NSF also studied the university emails related to “climategate” and found “nothing contained in them evidenced research misconduct within the definition in the NSF Research Misconduct Regulation.”
Cosmic Variance: "What Can We Know About The World Without Looking At It?":
Physicist Sean M Carroll explains a common problem with Theologians think when dealing with God and Cosmology:
"Believing that something must be true about the world because you can’t imagine otherwise is, five hundred years into the Age of Science, not a recommended strategy for acquiring reliable knowledge. It goes back to the classic conflict of rationalism vs. empiricism. “Rationalism” sounds good — who doesn’t want to be rational? But the idea behind it is that we can reach true conclusions about the world by reason alone. We don’t ever have to leave the comfort of our living room; we can just sit around, sharing some single-malt Scotch and fine cigars, thinking really hard about the universe, and thereby achieve some real understanding. Empiricism, on the other hand, says that we should try to imagine all possible ways the world should be, and then actually go out and look at it to decide which way it really is...Note: A great site dealing with modern Rationality (informed by Empiricism) is the site Less Wrong.
But the intellectual history of the past five centuries has spoken loud and clear: the dream of rationalism is a false one. The right way to attain knowledge about the universe is ultimately empirical: we formulate all the hypotheses we can, and test them against data...
The temptation of rationalism can be a hard one to resist. We human beings are not blank slates; not only do we come equipped with informal heuristics for making sense of the world we see, but we have strong desires about how the world should operate. Intellectual honesty demands that we put those desires aside, and accept the world for what it actually is, whatever that may turn out to be."(emphasis added)
Common Sense Atheism: "Why I Don’t Care about Atheism vs. Theism Arguments Anymore":
This used to be one of my favorite sites dealing with the topic of Atheism/Naturalism vs Theism. Luke Muehlhauser (a.k.a Lukeprog) has created a great resource for anyone tired of the sloppy arguments from Dawkins or Comfort. He instead promoted Martin, Carrier, Loftus, Dawes, Craig, Swinburne, Plantinga, Copan and other sophisticated philosophers/historians. He provided a great reading list (as well as an easier version) for anyone seriously interested in the subject. His two podcasts were intellectually stimulating and entertaining. He didn't just merely attack theists for being irrational. Instead he actually engaged their arguments, admitting where he was wrong, and ultimately arguing his case for Metaphysical Naturalism.
However, in this recent article, Luke decides he no longer cares about these arguments anymore:
"The reason I’m an atheist isn’t because of the argument from evil or from unbelief or from inconsistent revelations or anything. No, the reason I’m an atheist is because theism drastically fails Solomonoff induction.As a result, Luke has instead dedicated his site to "math and the cognitive science of belief-formation and decision-making." His new slogan reads:
If I want to pull somebody away from magical thinking, I don’t need to mention atheism. Instead, I teach them Kolmogorov complexity and Bayesian updating. I show them the many ways our minds trick us. I show them the detailed neuroscience of human decision-making. I show them that we can see (in the brain) a behavior being selected up to 10 seconds before a person is consciously aware of ‘making’ that decision. I explain timelessness.
And if they have time to consume enough math and science, then The God Question just fades away as not even a question worth talking about."
"Atheism is just the beginning;I will have to admit I do find it ironic that, after bashing the new atheists, Luke finally succumbs to a similar line of reasoning about religion.
now it's time to solve the harder questions."
What? More Politics?
Brookings: "Will Obama Ever Say What He Should About the Jobs Crisis?":
Here, William A. Galston expresses many of the same feelings I have about what direction Washington should be going:
"we became infatuated with financial manipulation at the expense of the real economy. Not only did a rising share of profits go to the financial sector, but also many of our most talented young people were diverted from other careers in the productive sectors of the economy. We focused too much on financial innovations, some of which severely damaged our economy, and not enough on innovations in products and services...
Budget deficits this year and next are much less important than what happens over the next decade. We need a balanced, binding, and enforceable plan to stabilize our debt as a share of the economy within the next ten years, not the next two....
We need pro-savings, pro-investment, pro-growth tax reform...
To win the future, we need to make smart, targeted investments in those areas where the market won’t—in education, basic research, and infrastructure. And to do that, we’ll have to reduce spending in areas less directly related to growth and innovation...." (emphasis added)
Summer Ludwig: "10 Reasons Not To Vote For Ron Paul":
Although I posted this before last week, I thought it would be important to include. Anyone who considers themselves liberal, centrist, or anything other than a right wing nut-job, should not vote for Ron Paul. He is further to the right than any other candidate. I seriously regret ever supporting this wacko!
Many social-libertarians may be attracted to his message due to the fact that he often sounds more dedicated social-libertarian principles than liberals. However, a deeper dig should give liberals and social libertarians pause over whether or not this man supports their priorities or not.
That's It:
Well that wraps it up for my first "Weekly Roundup." However, I'm sure I will have to shrink these articles in the future, significantly. I may also add a few more things as well, such as any new podcasts I think may be worth mentioning. I also think I will wrap these up with a little bit of "brain candy:"
I, along with millions of others, have recently given up significant amounts of our lives playing a game called Minecraft. This "lego game" is amazingly fun and addictive. Right now, it is still in the Beta stage of development. However, a long anticipated "Adventure Update" is soon to appear. Needless to say, almost every player is excited. The new features will fundamentally change many of the aspects of this game, rewarding exploration and combat. So for the Minecraft fans currently reading this, i leave you with ""Revenge" - A Minecraft Parody of Usher's DJ Got Us Fallin' in Love - Crafted Using Noteblocks":
Note: I originally posted the "sped up" version of this video on accident. The original is now posted
No comments:
Post a Comment