I don't know who The Agitator is, but (s)he has Jon Stewart pegged perfectly, including his careful selection of when to be Mr. Kill You with a Smile with his guests, and when to fawn. This is smack on:
http://www.theagitator.com/2009/08/04/cash-for-clunkers-is-a-huge-success-pause-for-laughs-or-why-the-daily-show-just-isnt-funny-anymore/
"Stewart’s interviewing skills are suffering, too. When he interviews people he disagrees with, he can be brilliant. When he interviews Democrats, he tends to sound like he’s hosting The Chris Farley Show."
Score.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
EMBRYO a Thorough, Airtight Work
Some months ago, I finished reading Embryo: A Defense of Human Life, put out by Princeton University's Robert P. George and the University of South Carolina's Christopher Tollefsen:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385522827/ref=cm_rdp_product.
The book is thorough, airtight, and painstakingly researched in its presentation of the facts that human embryos, considered mere "balls of cells" or "potential human beings" by many people, are, in fact, "actual human beings with potential."
Those who support the destruction of human embryos -- specifically, for the purposes of stem-cell research -- have persistently argued that those who describe embryos as human beings are merely foisting their religious ideology or personal views on the rest of the populace, but George and Tollefsen make little to no reference to God or any sort of religion or religious belief throughout their work, instead presenting the facts of embryology (citing numerous embryology texts already in existence) and carefully picking apart the various arguments that have been put forth over the years by the pro-ESCR lobby. As someone who makes no claims of having inside information on what or who created us, I can tell you that the authors' arguments will convince the most confident atheist as well as the most devout believer. Further arguments are made as to what should be done with those human embryos currently trapped in a cryogenic limbo in fertility clinics.
Embryo is a good resource for those who'd like some more scientific substance in their defense of human embryos, and might give those who support embryonic research a little something to think about -- namely, that most of the people who oppose it really aren't anti-cure Luddites who wish to see more people suffering and dying from disease.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385522827/ref=cm_rdp_product.
The book is thorough, airtight, and painstakingly researched in its presentation of the facts that human embryos, considered mere "balls of cells" or "potential human beings" by many people, are, in fact, "actual human beings with potential."
Those who support the destruction of human embryos -- specifically, for the purposes of stem-cell research -- have persistently argued that those who describe embryos as human beings are merely foisting their religious ideology or personal views on the rest of the populace, but George and Tollefsen make little to no reference to God or any sort of religion or religious belief throughout their work, instead presenting the facts of embryology (citing numerous embryology texts already in existence) and carefully picking apart the various arguments that have been put forth over the years by the pro-ESCR lobby. As someone who makes no claims of having inside information on what or who created us, I can tell you that the authors' arguments will convince the most confident atheist as well as the most devout believer. Further arguments are made as to what should be done with those human embryos currently trapped in a cryogenic limbo in fertility clinics.
Embryo is a good resource for those who'd like some more scientific substance in their defense of human embryos, and might give those who support embryonic research a little something to think about -- namely, that most of the people who oppose it really aren't anti-cure Luddites who wish to see more people suffering and dying from disease.
Monday, July 20, 2009
And That's the Way It Is
The sad passing of Walter Cronkite led me to a sidebar thought on CBS News, who went from Edward R. Murrow...to Walter Cronkite...to Dan Rather...
...
...
... to Katie Couric.
FOOEEEEZH.
...
...
... to Katie Couric.
FOOEEEEZH.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Obama Gets One Right -- But Also Kills Animal :-(
Feel free to fill in your hackneyed expression about blind squirrels eventually finding a nut, but I agree with the President's decision to expand benefits for same-sex couples. People should not be denied health benefits because of their sexual orientation.
I disagree, on the other hand, with Obama's swatting of a fly during a recent interview. BeneGram is an animal-friendly place, dude. Perhaps someone should acquaint President Obama with the humane Bug Vacuum®: http://la.indymedia.org/news/2009/06/228277.php.
I've got one, though the easiest way to capture a critter and release him/her outside, unharmed, is to use a drinking cup (just not one you drink from) and a piece of paper.
1. Wait for insect to land on surface.
2. Gently entrap insect with cup.
3. Being careful to avoid harming insect's legs, slide piece of paper between cup and surface.
4. Escort insect outside.
5. EMANCIPATION.
I disagree, on the other hand, with Obama's swatting of a fly during a recent interview. BeneGram is an animal-friendly place, dude. Perhaps someone should acquaint President Obama with the humane Bug Vacuum®: http://la.indymedia.org/news/2009/06/228277.php.
I've got one, though the easiest way to capture a critter and release him/her outside, unharmed, is to use a drinking cup (just not one you drink from) and a piece of paper.
1. Wait for insect to land on surface.
2. Gently entrap insect with cup.
3. Being careful to avoid harming insect's legs, slide piece of paper between cup and surface.
4. Escort insect outside.
5. EMANCIPATION.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Janeane Garofalo Talks Like an I-D-I-O-(tea)
My unfashionably belated thoughts on the April Tea Parties and the media coverage thereof:
I reeeeeeeally used to dig Janeane Garofalo. Back during her stand-up days. I loved how she would cover red-carpet award-show previews while wearing a sweatshirt and jeans. So counter to the rest of the night she was. Very cool and unpretentious. She struck me as the college friend you could always count on to go to a Breeders concert with, and then talk about the show at 2:26 in the morning in a diner.
That was long before her highly public plunge off the deep end, of course, with the most recent exhibit for the prosecution being her appearance on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, who'd probably cordially invite the Menendez brothers on if he believed they'd spend their time ripping into Dick Cheney.
“Let’s be very honest about what this is about,” Garofalo spewed. “It’s not about bashing Democrats, it’s not about taxes -- they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about -- they don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks.”
(And this person earlier had the privilege of interviewing the late Elliott Smith, whereas I didn't. Grrr.)
Mind you, she didn't say there might be a few loop-jobs in the crowd, as there typically are in any huge gathering. She smeared every last American who was there.
Ignoring, for the time being, anyway, the 319th "tea-bagging" reference offered to America by CNN and MSDNC combined*, one watches with astonishment her allegation. I'm not sure which is worse: the idea that she'd sink this low for lack of anything else to say, or the possibility that she sincerely believes her own donkey-poo. Is this what we have to look forward to for the next three-and-a-half years? Every person who criticizes (or even questions) White House policy, or complains about rampant spending (by both parties) will be called a racist, obstructionist, bigoted playa-hatah?
Word that all tea-party attendees are nothing more than hateful racists was probably at least a mild surprise to the many African-Americans there -- not that you could fairly expect CNN to mention that they were.
* Or maybe I won't. I mean, seriously? You're doing this on your cable news channels? I'm trying to picture John Chancellor giggling like a frat-boy while making sex references in his commentaries...
I reeeeeeeally used to dig Janeane Garofalo. Back during her stand-up days. I loved how she would cover red-carpet award-show previews while wearing a sweatshirt and jeans. So counter to the rest of the night she was. Very cool and unpretentious. She struck me as the college friend you could always count on to go to a Breeders concert with, and then talk about the show at 2:26 in the morning in a diner.
That was long before her highly public plunge off the deep end, of course, with the most recent exhibit for the prosecution being her appearance on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, who'd probably cordially invite the Menendez brothers on if he believed they'd spend their time ripping into Dick Cheney.
“Let’s be very honest about what this is about,” Garofalo spewed. “It’s not about bashing Democrats, it’s not about taxes -- they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about -- they don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks.”
(And this person earlier had the privilege of interviewing the late Elliott Smith, whereas I didn't. Grrr.)
Mind you, she didn't say there might be a few loop-jobs in the crowd, as there typically are in any huge gathering. She smeared every last American who was there.
Ignoring, for the time being, anyway, the 319th "tea-bagging" reference offered to America by CNN and MSDNC combined*, one watches with astonishment her allegation. I'm not sure which is worse: the idea that she'd sink this low for lack of anything else to say, or the possibility that she sincerely believes her own donkey-poo. Is this what we have to look forward to for the next three-and-a-half years? Every person who criticizes (or even questions) White House policy, or complains about rampant spending (by both parties) will be called a racist, obstructionist, bigoted playa-hatah?
Word that all tea-party attendees are nothing more than hateful racists was probably at least a mild surprise to the many African-Americans there -- not that you could fairly expect CNN to mention that they were.
* Or maybe I won't. I mean, seriously? You're doing this on your cable news channels? I'm trying to picture John Chancellor giggling like a frat-boy while making sex references in his commentaries...
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Two Ways to Help ALL Victims of Domestic Abuse
For the past few years, I have gone to local libraries and domestic violence centers to distribute literature for two national organizations: Stop Abuse for EVERYONE (www.safe4all.org) and The Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women (www.dahmw.org). Both are fine organizations that understand that neither violence nor victimhood has a gender. The most common scenario presented with respect to DV involves a violent male battering his wife or girlfriend, but there is much evidence demonstrating that women often initiate (that's a key word) abuse against their male partners. Indeed, this study indicates that, within heterosexual relationships in which only one partner is engaging in violence, the woman is the violent party 70.7% of the time:
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a
I mention the word "heterosexual" to point out that a disturbing level of violence also occurs within the gay-and-lesbian community, another facet that is overlooked when we only consider the "man beats woman" scenario. We do female victims of abuse no favors by ignoring male victims. Some DV shelters are fair and will assist any victim who walks through the door, but far too many ignore, ridicule, and harass male victims. I ask you for your help in two ways.
First, please look at and sign a petition that was introduced by DAHMW:
"For decades domestic abuse has been looked upon as a social problem of violence against women by men. Battered women's advocates and others concerned about domestic violence have created and funded over 2000 non profit agencies across the country that help victims. For more than 20 years these agencies have specialized in offering a full spectrum of services to what has been considered the traditional victims of domestic violence, women and children. Yet society has changed a great deal since we first became aware of the violence that goes on behind close doors. Men are now stay at home dads, some do the cooking, cleaning, laundry, change diapers, give the kids their baths and food shop...all the things that were unheard for men to do back in the 1950's and 60's when we first started recognizing the social problem of domestic violence. Women have changed quite a bit also. Many work outside the home, some hold high powered jobs and others run cement mixers. Women are also doing things that were unheard of in the 50's & 60's. They also get violent with their spouses/boyfriends and children. Our current system that offers supportive services to victims of intimate partner violence, everything from obtaining a court order to keep victims safe to clothing and transitional housing, for the most part, still runs under the antiquated notion that 95 - 98% of domestic abuse victims are women abused by men. This means that services for men abused by women or other men in same sex relationships are nearly non existent in these federally funded shelter programs. If you believe that federal and state funded domestic violence victims shelter programs should be mandated to support any victim and give them them same opportunities and services regardless of their gender, age, able-ism, ethnicity, religious beliefs or race etc. please sign our petition."
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/domestic-abuse-victims
Second, you can support this organization just by surfing the Web, at no cost to you. The folks at GoodSearch will donate to DAHMW with every search you make on its site. Go to www.goodsearch.com, and enter "Helpline Men" in the "Who Do You Goodsearch For?" box, and then search away. Thank you.
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a
I mention the word "heterosexual" to point out that a disturbing level of violence also occurs within the gay-and-lesbian community, another facet that is overlooked when we only consider the "man beats woman" scenario. We do female victims of abuse no favors by ignoring male victims. Some DV shelters are fair and will assist any victim who walks through the door, but far too many ignore, ridicule, and harass male victims. I ask you for your help in two ways.
First, please look at and sign a petition that was introduced by DAHMW:
"For decades domestic abuse has been looked upon as a social problem of violence against women by men. Battered women's advocates and others concerned about domestic violence have created and funded over 2000 non profit agencies across the country that help victims. For more than 20 years these agencies have specialized in offering a full spectrum of services to what has been considered the traditional victims of domestic violence, women and children. Yet society has changed a great deal since we first became aware of the violence that goes on behind close doors. Men are now stay at home dads, some do the cooking, cleaning, laundry, change diapers, give the kids their baths and food shop...all the things that were unheard for men to do back in the 1950's and 60's when we first started recognizing the social problem of domestic violence. Women have changed quite a bit also. Many work outside the home, some hold high powered jobs and others run cement mixers. Women are also doing things that were unheard of in the 50's & 60's. They also get violent with their spouses/boyfriends and children. Our current system that offers supportive services to victims of intimate partner violence, everything from obtaining a court order to keep victims safe to clothing and transitional housing, for the most part, still runs under the antiquated notion that 95 - 98% of domestic abuse victims are women abused by men. This means that services for men abused by women or other men in same sex relationships are nearly non existent in these federally funded shelter programs. If you believe that federal and state funded domestic violence victims shelter programs should be mandated to support any victim and give them them same opportunities and services regardless of their gender, age, able-ism, ethnicity, religious beliefs or race etc. please sign our petition."
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/domestic-abuse-victims
Second, you can support this organization just by surfing the Web, at no cost to you. The folks at GoodSearch will donate to DAHMW with every search you make on its site. Go to www.goodsearch.com, and enter "Helpline Men" in the "Who Do You Goodsearch For?" box, and then search away. Thank you.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
BeneGram's 2009 Final Fourcasts
WOMEN: Connecticut, Oklahoma, Stanford and Louisville. UConn over OK in the final. (UPDATE: Yay! Another 4-for-4 prediction!)
MEN: Louisville, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Memphis. Louisville over OK in the final. (UPDATE: Pshaw! A 0-for-4 prediction.)
I should point out that I had all four teams right in the 2005 women's Final Four (except I didn't have Baylor winning it all), and I had three of four teams right in the 2003 men's Final Four (the exception being Syracuse, who took the whole thing). I point that out not because it foreshadows future success, but rather because it'll probably never happen again. For amusement purposes only. BeneGram is not responsible for any action taken after reading the predictions herein. Enjoy the Dances.
MEN: Louisville, Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Memphis. Louisville over OK in the final. (UPDATE: Pshaw! A 0-for-4 prediction.)
I should point out that I had all four teams right in the 2005 women's Final Four (except I didn't have Baylor winning it all), and I had three of four teams right in the 2003 men's Final Four (the exception being Syracuse, who took the whole thing). I point that out not because it foreshadows future success, but rather because it'll probably never happen again. For amusement purposes only. BeneGram is not responsible for any action taken after reading the predictions herein. Enjoy the Dances.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
World Turns Clocks Forward; Obama Turns Calendar Back Eight Years
Well, on Saturday night/Sunday morning, most of us moved our watches up an hour for Daylight Moving Time. (It doesn’t save anything. It’s like Fake Time. If we all want more sunlight, let’s all just get up earlier. Bah…)
Then, on Monday, Obama was partying like it’s 2001, expanding federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, all the while polishing the same tired talking points from when this issue was first hitting the fan eight years ago -- talking points that were never true to begin with. Many in our oh-so-evenhanded mainstream media got credit for the assist. I like to think that even many who support ESCR were nauseated by the hyperbolizing going on over the past few days, with comments that “we’re finally going to have science in this country” and “opening the door to hope that had been closed for so many years.” (All those thousands of people who’ve been treated successfully with adult stem cells must have thought for a split second that their improved conditions were just a really nice dream.)
Stunningly, not only did Obama expand the funding of embryo-destructive research, but he also rescinded Bush’s executive order 13435, which had mandated funding of research into “alternative” sources of stem cells. We know that we might as well remove the quotations around the word “alternative,” as advancements with induced pluripotent stem cells – meaning skin cells coaxed at reverting to an embryonic-like state – are coming just about every week, and researchers keep finding easier and more efficient ways of making it work.
Meanwhile, the success stories just keep on comin’ with adult stem cells, such as the story this week of the young man who is regaining feeling in his chest and foot after receiving an injection of umbilical-cord stem cells in Peru. A dirt-bike accident left had left him paralyzed from the neck down. Not anymore:
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/local/story/415974.html
(Thanks to Don Margolis (www.donmargolis.com) for linking to this story first.)
But remember: a patient with Parkinson’s or juvenile diabetes multiple sclerosis or a spinal-cord injury being successfully treated with anything other than embryonic stem cells simply doesn’t qualify as science, right? This kid can feel the lower half of his body again, and his blood pressure has stabilized, but if no embryonic human beings are destroyed we’re still “in the Dark Ages.” Right, mainstream media?
These exciting stories come from the kinds of promising, completely non-controversial research to which Obama gave lip service during his Monday press conference -- precisely while signing something that revoked President Bush’s executive order to study that research. Millions will support stem-cell research unless embryos are destroyed. Evidently, Obama will support stem-cell research ONLY IF embryos are destroyed. What a unifier.
Then, on Monday, Obama was partying like it’s 2001, expanding federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, all the while polishing the same tired talking points from when this issue was first hitting the fan eight years ago -- talking points that were never true to begin with. Many in our oh-so-evenhanded mainstream media got credit for the assist. I like to think that even many who support ESCR were nauseated by the hyperbolizing going on over the past few days, with comments that “we’re finally going to have science in this country” and “opening the door to hope that had been closed for so many years.” (All those thousands of people who’ve been treated successfully with adult stem cells must have thought for a split second that their improved conditions were just a really nice dream.)
Stunningly, not only did Obama expand the funding of embryo-destructive research, but he also rescinded Bush’s executive order 13435, which had mandated funding of research into “alternative” sources of stem cells. We know that we might as well remove the quotations around the word “alternative,” as advancements with induced pluripotent stem cells – meaning skin cells coaxed at reverting to an embryonic-like state – are coming just about every week, and researchers keep finding easier and more efficient ways of making it work.
Meanwhile, the success stories just keep on comin’ with adult stem cells, such as the story this week of the young man who is regaining feeling in his chest and foot after receiving an injection of umbilical-cord stem cells in Peru. A dirt-bike accident left had left him paralyzed from the neck down. Not anymore:
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/local/story/415974.html
(Thanks to Don Margolis (www.donmargolis.com) for linking to this story first.)
But remember: a patient with Parkinson’s or juvenile diabetes multiple sclerosis or a spinal-cord injury being successfully treated with anything other than embryonic stem cells simply doesn’t qualify as science, right? This kid can feel the lower half of his body again, and his blood pressure has stabilized, but if no embryonic human beings are destroyed we’re still “in the Dark Ages.” Right, mainstream media?
These exciting stories come from the kinds of promising, completely non-controversial research to which Obama gave lip service during his Monday press conference -- precisely while signing something that revoked President Bush’s executive order to study that research. Millions will support stem-cell research unless embryos are destroyed. Evidently, Obama will support stem-cell research ONLY IF embryos are destroyed. What a unifier.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The Conveniently Brand-New Call for Unity
This letter of mine appeared in The Philadelphia Daily News on Feb. 25.
I keep hearing this call for unity and bipartisanship. Oddly, the plea for us to all get along just so happened to coincide with President Obama's inauguration. Somehow I doubt that Democrats were this eager to "agree to disagree" when it was the GOP controlling the White House and Congress. No, then they were pledging to "stand up to Bush."
I'm also reminded of the classless louts who decided to "put their differences aside" and show their "unity" by shamefully booing President Bush on Inauguration Day, and making obscene gestures at his helicopter as he left.
As much as people disagreed with President Bill Clinton, I just can't seem to remember people flipping him off while Bush was being inaugurated eight years ago.
Unity and bipartisanship are great things. Less great is the Democrats' gross misunderstanding of those two words. Contrary to what they believe, "bipartisanship" doesn't mean silencing all who disagree with you.
This time, left on the cutting-room floor was my point that even "if these dolts can’t even show respect to Bush for one day – which they should – then how about showing respect to President Obama by not marring his ceremonies?" Instead, it became a pep rally.
I keep hearing this call for unity and bipartisanship. Oddly, the plea for us to all get along just so happened to coincide with President Obama's inauguration. Somehow I doubt that Democrats were this eager to "agree to disagree" when it was the GOP controlling the White House and Congress. No, then they were pledging to "stand up to Bush."
I'm also reminded of the classless louts who decided to "put their differences aside" and show their "unity" by shamefully booing President Bush on Inauguration Day, and making obscene gestures at his helicopter as he left.
As much as people disagreed with President Bill Clinton, I just can't seem to remember people flipping him off while Bush was being inaugurated eight years ago.
Unity and bipartisanship are great things. Less great is the Democrats' gross misunderstanding of those two words. Contrary to what they believe, "bipartisanship" doesn't mean silencing all who disagree with you.
This time, left on the cutting-room floor was my point that even "if these dolts can’t even show respect to Bush for one day – which they should – then how about showing respect to President Obama by not marring his ceremonies?" Instead, it became a pep rally.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
It's About TIME
Perhaps I'm on a little roll here. Over the years, I've had letters/op-eds published in The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Kansas City Star, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, (most recently) The Washington Times, and several other publications. I'm happy to say that I broke new personal ground in one of the weeklies, as Time published my response to a cover story from a fortnight ago...
"Perhaps if Alice Park had interviewed even one opponent of embryonic research, her article would not have lacked so many important facts. Adult (nonembryonic) stem cells, dismissed by Park as 'less versatile,' have already treated thousands of actual human patients in the fight against conditions like juvenile diabetes -- a disease mentioned anecdotally by Park. Different types of adult stem cells (there are several) can be used for different situations; we do not need a one-size-fits-all cell that can become anything."
Trimmed for space purposes (I presume) was this part:
"President Bush’s federal funding limits to those stem-cell lines already in existence – a policy also implemented by the European Union – emphasized less controversial methods, such as the process of inducing adult cells to revert to an embryonic-like state. His policies did not hinder science; they helped it to advance."
Let's hope a couple million pairs of eyes, at least, look at the part that DID get published...
"Perhaps if Alice Park had interviewed even one opponent of embryonic research, her article would not have lacked so many important facts. Adult (nonembryonic) stem cells, dismissed by Park as 'less versatile,' have already treated thousands of actual human patients in the fight against conditions like juvenile diabetes -- a disease mentioned anecdotally by Park. Different types of adult stem cells (there are several) can be used for different situations; we do not need a one-size-fits-all cell that can become anything."
Trimmed for space purposes (I presume) was this part:
"President Bush’s federal funding limits to those stem-cell lines already in existence – a policy also implemented by the European Union – emphasized less controversial methods, such as the process of inducing adult cells to revert to an embryonic-like state. His policies did not hinder science; they helped it to advance."
Let's hope a couple million pairs of eyes, at least, look at the part that DID get published...
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Just Another February Day
Happy Valentine's Day to those of you who have a special someone to spend it with. While you're staring at each other across the candlelit table, remember those who've spent every February 14 of their quiet lives alone. There are those who've just suffered through a divorce and those who are finding themselves without someone for the first time in a while, but there are also those for whom romance and dating and true love have always been mere widespread rumors. Some are teenagers; some are inhabiting college dorm rooms; some are in their 40s or 50s. Keep them in mind on this day, and you will treasure what you have more.
On that note, here are some nifty YouTube tracks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY7Sfavc50o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57cs8dntLyg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU6z-bKWZy0
More posts to come in the next week...
On that note, here are some nifty YouTube tracks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY7Sfavc50o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57cs8dntLyg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU6z-bKWZy0
More posts to come in the next week...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)