ps

i love how fox news unashamedly PAYS karl rove to be a news contributor, but MSNBC, who, for what its worth, has no qualms with employing neo-conservative Pat Buchanan, won't keep keith olbermann in the anchor seat. this is probably because he actually had the good sense to call out the despicably lowbrow exploitation of 9/11 by the GOP during their convention.

so, to rampant accusers of liberal media bias: the GOP machine has held the media at gunpoint with accusations of partisanship. This conveniently insulates Palin, Guliani, etc from all the bile they continuously spew, so much so that even defenders of common decency aren't allowed to sit at the table with buchanan, rove, and other republican troglodytes. So, your move.

no, this isn't my rant. that comes later. and it'll be longer. and it wont be in complete sentences. Hopefully i have enough gas in the tank to talk about some pretty cool articles in the New Yorker and the Times Magazine from this weekend.

palin generates huge shift in polls

with mccain up by 3.5 ticks as of today due to a 10 point swing generated by the RNC, we can easily conclude 2 things:

1. we certainly know what butters the bread of american voters. blatantly untruthful and occasionally racist rhetoric and keeping assault rifles on the streets.
2. you can expect a crazed, borderline nonsensical rant from me before the day is out.
3. FUCK
   

friday fun

xkcd is incredible.

the times has still got it.

3 cheers to the new york times for their 3 great editorial page articles today after the conclusion of the RNC. The most cutting is today's editorial, describing

...chilling glimpses of the new John McCain, who questioned the patriotism of his opponents as the “me first, country second” crowd and threw out a list of false claims about Barack Obama’s record, saying, for example, that Mr. Obama opposed nuclear power.

In the end, we couldn’t explain the huge difference between the John McCain of Thursday night and the one who ran such an angry and derisive campaign and convention — other than to conclude that he has decided he can have it both ways. He can talk loftily of bipartisanship and allow his team to savage his opponent. On Wednesday, the nastiest night of the week, Mr. McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, and other speakers offered punch lines, rather than solutions for this country’s many problems — ridiculing the Washington elite (of which most were solid members) and Barack Obama.

“Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights,” Ms. Palin said. Mr. Obama, in reality, wants to give basic human rights to prisoners in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, only a handful of whom are Qaeda members, and shield them from torture. So, once upon a time, did Mr. McCain, but there was no mention of that in St. Paul.

At the same time, the Republicans tried to co-opt Mr. Obama’s talk of change and paint themselves as the real Americans. It is an ill-fitting suit for the least diverse, most conservative and richest Republican delegates since The Times started tracking such data in 1996. It was, in short, a gathering devoted almost entirely to the culture war refined by Mr. Rove in Mr. Bush’s two campaigns.

Meanwhile, Paul Krugman's op-ed piece eloquently condemned the baseless, populist politics of resentment put on display over the past 4 days.

But my best recommendation of the day is from the incomparable Matt Taibbi, who attempts to understand why Barack Obama's admittedly generic Democratic platitudes seem more inspiring this time around then when delivered by his "change" predecessors Kerry, Dean, and Gore. It's an interesting read, so enjoy.

Is military force the best means to defeat terrorist groups?

hint? no. a report from the rand corporation delineates this, and it is discussed in the economist. both fascinating reads. here's kind of a key point:

These findings suggest that the U.S. approach to countering al Qa'ida has focused far too much on the use of military force. Instead, policing and intelligence should be the backbone of U.S. efforts.

wow. that sounds an awful lot like "diplomacy" rather than "warmongering." an even more relevant quote with which to conclude:

“there is no battlefield solution to terrorism.”

bingo. by the way, "rand" comes from an acronym for "research and development." its not like, "ayn rand," although given the insanely unproductive economics of the iraq war, im willing to bed that she would also hate it.

what new podcasts am i listening to?

uh, because as a scientist, i listen to a lot of podcasts. a.lot. i'm also a podcast whore, so i accept any and all recommendations.

tv shows that work as podcasts:
meet the press - getting to see tom brokaw use his political savvy and experience to disembowel everyone across party lines (most recently eviscerating nancy pelosi about offshore drilling waffling and forcing a stammering tim pawlenty to defend sarah palin) is AWESOME.

real time with bill maher - is he a liberal apologist? well, yes. but he isn't the left-wing bill o'reilly. he doesn't invent facts, he's opinionated but insightful, and he's really funny.

economic and political recaps:
the takeaway (thanks young) - can be a little boring because it repeats itself multiple times, but its a nice bipartisan look at the daily news.

random fun podcasts:
the moth - really fun personal anecdotes running much shorter than this american life. by the way, has anyone seen this live in new york? does the podcast cherry pick the one interesting one from like 12 aspiring novelists reading excerpts from their crappy books, or is it worth attending?

ask the naked scientists - because who doesn't like having fun weird science factoids that you can use to confuse people at dinner parties?

By the way, unemployment continues to rise. downer!

what the heck happened to sarah palin

that made her switch colleges 6 times in 6 years?