Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Update

I did a quick scan of the news and between the economy (it was announced today that the recession actually started in Dec 07), the stock market (7th largest loss in market history), fiscal emergency in California, the continued terrorist attacks in India (a bomb exploded on a train today), and even the flooding of historic Venice, there is just not much in the way of uplifting stories to discuss.

I'm going to be away at a conference and interviews for the rest of the week, so blog updates, if any will be sparce. For those of you that haven't checked out the comments sections, there are some real fireworks and good discussions here (blog record 38 comments in regards to a single post).

Hold down the fort while I'm gone. Start a new string of discussion on a topic in the comments section for this link if something strikes a nerve!

31 comments:

kath said...

Unfortunately still no optimistic stories I've come across but did you all see this article about doctors behaving badly? I wished there was a blog/response area for the story to address a few things including how disrespectful nurses can be to physicians in training, perhaps disproportionately women. Am I along with this? I also think part of the problem is that lesser candidates are entering medical school as business was attracting the creme de la creme. Finally, the 80-hour work week has made it pretty difficult to defend bad behaviour and highlights that fact that plenty of assholes end up being doctors. Good luck on your interviews and travels, Coca!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/02/health/02rage.html?nl=8hlth&emc=hltha1

kath said...

Oh, you silly vatican...so condoning or actually stoning same sex couples is what Jesus would do? I just can't help myself with these stories (and I am avoiding my grant as much as possible, obviously) from NPR:

"Vatican Opposes U.N. Gay Rights Declaration

The Vatican has taken a stand against a proposed United Nations declaration for universal decriminalization of homosexuality, claiming it would put pressure on countries that outlaw same-sex unions.

Archbishop Celestino Migliore said that the Catholic Church opposes all forms of discrimination against homsexuals, but the Vatican opposes the U.N. declaration.

Under the chairmanship of French President Nicholas Sarkozy, the European Union will submit a formal proposal on Dec. 10 -- the 60th anniversary of the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights.

Migliore said a political declaration signed by a group of countries would create new forms of discrimination - for example, countries that do not recognize gay marriage would be singled out and pressured to do so.

There are currently about 90 countries in the world where homosexuality is a crime with punishments ranging from imprisonment to stoning."

Don said...

I don't think the Vatican was condoning the stoning of homosexuals. While I don't agree with their position on homosexuality, I disagree equally with the unsurprisingly gross exaggeration by NPR. I am equally unsurprised that NPR is a primary news source for the visitors to this blog. Opposing worldwide pressures for same-sex marriage is not the same as stoning homosexuals.

And which religion ACTUALLY DOES condone stoning homosexuals? The last one any liberal would criticize. You never see a nun with a suicide vest, but you will see her catch the ire of a liberal long before those who do.

Like PS3 commercials, Catholics are not the world's biggest problem.

It sickens me that hundreds of people died because of religion in India this week, and the left is more outraged by opposition to UN mandates. If you want to criticize a religion, I suggest you start with one that is costing lives.

kath said...

I wouldn't say I am more outraged over this Vatican story than the unfortunate and terrible events in Mumbai last week. What are the proposed mechanisms? Invade Pakistan? And I do realize there are more important issues going on in our world right now...I just didn't realize that was the point of the blog.

In an equally unimportant light, I was wondering what people's dishwasher etiquette is. Utensils facing down (fork prongs, spoon bowls in the basket or out) or up? And do you segregate the utensils with only like utensils? Are there down sides to these different approaches?

Don said...

I am just waiting for a liberal to criticize any religion other than Christianity. The point of this thread is to discuss whatever you want. I just find it interesting that no one but me ever wants to decry the Islamic terrorism. Liberals love their "coexist" bumper stickers, but they never mention the fact that if you just take out the "C" everyone else seems to "oexist" just fine. I don't think Hindu on Buddhist violence is a pressing issue.

I put prongs up, so I can see what I am taking (because I usually am too lazy to transfer them all to the drawer).

julie said...

Fork prongs get stuck in the dishwasher basket when they are facing down, obviously. Also, you can fit more silverware in when the prongs and spoon ladles are up since the handles are smaller. Doesn't everyone think alike on this matter?

Will said...

Kath -- please -- segregate the spoons and allow for nestling?
(http://www.cookthink.com/blog/?p=68)

Uh - I don't think so. When spoons get together, they want to spoon. That's what spoons do: Spoon.

kath said...

Oh, Will, as always such a wealth of information. I had traditionally kept my silverware facing up but my brother informed me about concerns over the clean silverware being touched for removal; I think this would be particularly problematic if you lived with someone like Will or any 8 year old, for that matter.

As for the segregation issue, this is not my practice, either, but the husband often clusters the silverware together using each bin to pack as much like-shaped silver ware into each compartment. I have observed that things don't get very clean but he doesn't seem to get it. I tell him the obvious solution is to tell me to always load the dishwasher myself to make it easier on everyone...I have to be my own obnoxious husband!

Reading your link has really challenged me, though. I mean, they are really advocating for chaos in that dishwasher...I don't know if I can change my ways to have it all asymmetric and haphazard appearing. Why would I want the Manhattan skyline in my dishwasher.

Jeanette said...

Well I do really think that there are major differences in thinking on the dishwasher subject. The spooning is definately an issue and leaves icky things if not properly segregated. I personally put forks and spoons "up" and knives "down." I am mostly forced to do this based on the little hole sizes for the silverware to go into in the dishwasher basket (my basket is designed with its own segregaters). I agree with what your brother says, however, and grab the knives by the handle when I take them out and grab spoons and forks by the "necks" so that I don't contaminate the bowls or prongs of the silverware pieces.
I used to try and keep forks relatively together, spoons relatively together, and so on. However, I faced the same trouble you did...when I told my fiancee that this made the most sense, he would tell me to load the damn dishwasher by myself.
My uncle had and my father had a year long debate on whether or not to put cheese on the salted side of the cracker or on the non-salted side of the cracker when eating cheese and crackers. This debate was very heated, lasted years and even had periods where they would not speak to each other. To end the debate, they contacted Emily Post. Maybe we should do the same?
Any thoughts on which side to put the cheese?

Don said...

There are too many women on this blog -- including Will.

kath said...

I think the cheese would probably go on the salted side although had never paid specific attention to this detail. But if forced to think about about, I guess I'm a top.

I feel like there something kookie about your basket, JT.

Don, I don't know if this offsets the estrogen on the blog but we haven't talked about Plaxico! What a numnut! How about that? Great story to get the testosterone going...you have sports, guns, too-loose sweat pants...I feel like scratching my balls already!

Bob said...

I am a Steelers fan and was happy to see them let Plaxico walk. I told all my Giant fan friends that he was a complete headache, didn't work hard and took plays off. One of the more frustrating guys to root for because he has all the tools to be a dominant WR. He just doesn't have the head. I guess the fact that he came up big down the stretch in last year's Super Bowl would be worth it to most fans.

It will be interesting to see how his case goes.

Anonymous said...

censorship truly doesn't work if you are liberal, mr. hot chocolate????? you removed my debate reort to kath. sad. very disappointing. i thought you were better than AS$croft.

kath said...

Sorry to miss your debate points, anon...I was looking forward to further debate over the dishwasher.

Did you guys hear about this? I learned if from John Stewart but hoped they were making it up...IL and IN Planned Parenthood selling gift cards?! Absurd!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,462127,00.html

Will said...

Steve, I thought you'd like this one from The Sports Guy :

"No classic game has taken a bigger historical fall for reasons that had nothing to do with the game itself than the 2006 Rose Bowl following the pro careers (so far) of Vince Young, Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush. It's like if "The Godfather" won five Oscars in 1972, and within three years, Pacino was the fourth lead on "Sanford and Son," Brando was the sergeant on "The Streets of San Francisco," and Jimmy Caan was doing soft-core porn."

Jeanette said...

Heard this story on NPR last night and thought it might be an interesting blog debate because I don't think it follows any specific political boundaries. And, would love to get the opinion of those who live in the legal world.
It is about the woman who posed as a 16 year old teen on myspace and tormented a 13 year old girl who eventually comitted suicide. The woman was charged with violating the terms and use statements of the social profiling site and there was some interesting thought into how this all played out. I don't think any of us would disagree that what she did was immoral, weird, and wrong...but it brings up this issue of freedom of speech and how the case was tried. Don, I am interested in your thoughts.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/talk/2008/12/internet_use_internet_misuse.html

Jeanette said...

Sorry. Don't know why links don't come out and don't know how to hyperlink.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/talk/2008/12/internet_use_internet_
misuse.html

Anonymous said...

u most be bored jeanette. you need to get out more. yawn of a story.

Don said...

Between the continues cites to NPR and Jon Stewart, I don't know if there is any realy hope for open minded discussion on this board. Branch out, people! There are at least 3 unbiased news sources out there.

Also, anonymous is just an ass.

As for the myspace case - I really think the Los Angeles Federal Court overstepped its boundaries here. I don't believe the United States government should have a role in this case.

Our traditional common law tort principles have a remedy here. The victim's family can sue for intentional infliction of emotional distress. This federal jury did not even find evidence of IIED. Instead, they used a federal law barring the use of a computer site against the policy of that site.

So, if she had written love letters on paper rather than on myspace, she would have been convicted of nothing.

I don't know all of the facts, but I do know that if you can't prove IIED against her -- she should not be going to jail.

Jeanette said...

Come on Don, I am reaching out to you here---reaching across the aisle to actually speak on a subject...who cares where I heard it? It could have just of easily been from your beloved Fox News. In addition to NPR and Jon Stewart, I also watch the Colbert Report--does that count as balancing out my news sources?
But thanks for your input. I totally agree with you here. I also agree with you that anonymous is an ass. With all this agreement, I really feel like a centrist!
And Kath, you don't know the half of it with how kookie my basket is!

Don said...

I reach out every day by participating in a blog in which everyone disagrees with me. If I can't at least comment on the endless references to liberal news sources, I will go insane!

Plus, FoxNews is the weakest of the conservative news sources. Wall Street Journal is definitely the best followed by .... uh ..... I am sure there are others.....the L.A. Times? Oh, the Economist is definitely up there. There may be 2 or 3 more that I am forgetting.

Anyway, I am glad there can be some common ground between us. Liberals are all about freedom when it comes to crime, porn, and drugs, so I bet there are even more topics upon which we agree.

Anonymous said...

very sad to be called names. sadder that you intellectuals are not capable of more. not surprised. pathetic.

Don said...

When you say something intelligent, you will get an intelligent response. When you reply with "yawn of a story" or "A$$croft," you get the reply that is appropriate. Perhaps Rawls or J.S. Mill have a more complex and verbose explanation of your mindless insults, but you are not worth the time or breath.....because you're just an ass.

Anonymous said...

i assume that you think every post but ANON is intelligent. i would expect nothing less from a self-serving individual such as yourself. i enjoy posting here. will continue to do so. sadly, part of my joy is laughing in your faces because i have never seen a group so overrate their own intellect. it's funny, really. thanks for entertaining me, and for free nonetheless. keep the comedic intellectualism coming.

Don said...

Thank you for enlightening input. It was quite typical in that you can't discuss the merits of anything. If we're so stupid, why can't you show us why? You ar every good with insults. Do you have any logic or reason?

You're simply a coward hiding behind a computer screen hurling mindless attacks at people. You don't know me. You have no reason to call me self-centered.

And the administrator of this blog has no need to allow such posts by you to continue. Not that our thoughts can't withstand the annoyance of a verbal gnat ... but you are annoying, nonetheless.

Anonymous said...

calling for ban? where is the free speech? you certainly can hurl insults. you seem frustrated.

Anonymous said...

cocoa will NOT have to ban me. if he asks me to stop posting, i will do so. i don't want to be a source of unrest and frustration. i stumbled on this blog and have found the chatter intriguing. most importantly, i have found cocoa to be very though provoking. cocoa it's your call. should don get his wish?

Cocameister said...

Anon,

This program does not allow me to block you, especially because you post under the name "anon".

I think if you can rebut people's comments with facts rather than personal insults then you should continue to post. If not, then I think it would be best you found another blog.

Anonymous said...

thanks cocoa. i will post and not get personal. i think others should be reprimanded for the fould language insults directed at me. i have never cursed at someone. i have feelings too.

Anonymous said...

is there a double standard?

Don said...

There is no double standard. You get the kind of response your posts deserve. I am surprised the word "ass" offend you so strongly.

I also think Coca can do whatever he wants with his blog. He is not obligated in anyway to provide you with a platform to insult others. Start your own blog if you want to do that. That being said, I never called for a ban of you. I simply support Coca whenever he decides that your insults offer nothing for his blog. Otherwise, I will fight speech with speech. As I am doing now. I appreciate the fact that you seem to be contributing as opposed to name calling now.