Datasets:
redmoddata
/
lines_train_2M

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
1
330k
"He betrayed this country! He played on our fears!" (Fox News Channel's "Hannity and Colmes," 2/9/04; CNBC's "The News On CNBC," 2/9/04([absolutely])
Video Clip of Kerry:
"Today, today, George Bush will lay off your camel, tax your shovel, kick your (bleep) and tell you there is no Promise Land." (Harkin Steak Fry, Indianola, IA, 9/13/03)
([it probably doesn't make a difference, but if you keep up with adds like this Kerry is gonna kick your ASS])
[Drain the color of John Kerry video and freeze it]
This is not a time for pessimism and rage…
[Shot of President Bush in color]
([an illustration of pessimism and rage])
President Bush: It's a time for optimism, steady leadership and progress
([I guess that's why he is trying to convince us to vote for Kerry])
Paid For By Bush-Cheney '04 INC.
Oh man they paid for this. Hey guys I got rent to pay. It would be a much better use of your money.
keep up the good work.
Correctino: "Farenheit 9/11" did not require all of 2 days to break the documentary gross sales record set by "Bowling for Columbine." Saturday and part of Sunday was enough.
Tuesday, June 29, 2004
Ok so who is an embarassment to whom ?
Brad Delong writes
Ramesh Ponnuru's and David Frum's credibility depreciates when their writings appear under the same masthead as those of Luskin or Nugent. It is a mystery why they don't take a stand--there are, after all, lots of bright conservative straight-shooting economists who would love to write for National Review.
In another post he quotes
David Frum: Between 1993 and 2003, Canada’s total gross domestic product – the value of all Canadian-made goods and Canadian-provided services – rose by two-thirds. [...] Where did that extra production go? That’s the question answered by the second number, 45%. The lion’s share of Canadian economic growth in the 1990s was pocketed by government, especially the federal government. Between 1993 and 2003, federal revenues rose by 45%, or almost $60 billion....
I'd say it is a case of birds of a feather flock together.
I don't often agree with Richard Cheney but if I could tell
10_1480_sPxLpCKYrUKGI2vJVfXwSQ to fuck himself, I should would feel better.
Are we in Iraq because we tortured Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi ?
Michael Isikoff (who has received a couple of knocks from the guys recently) explains.
al-Libi was the first high ranking al Qaeda leader to be captured after 9/11.
Continuing to rely on al-Libi's version, Powell then told how a bin Laden operative seeking help in acquiring poisons and gases had forged a "successful" relationship with Iraqi officials in the late 1990s and that, as recently as December 2000, Iraq had offered "chemical or biological weapons training for two Al Qaeda associates."
However, this rather serious intelligence error seems to have been the result of uhm "aggressive interrogation."
Al-Libi "subsequently recounted a different story," said one U.S. official. "It's not clear which version is correct. We are still sorting this out." Some officials now suspect that al-Libi, facing aggressive interrogation techniques, had previously said what U.S. officials wanted to hear.
So the question is, are we in Iraq because of "aggressive interrogation" of al-Libi. More experienced practitioners could have told us produce massive but unreliable information, which is only useful if it can be confirmed or rejected before you spend your second hundred billion. But of course, the Bush administration wanted to keep what it was doing secret.
One might argue that evidence of links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda was irrelevant, since it had nothing to do with Bush's decision to invade Iraq. However, I don't think that one would like to do that, if one were George Bush.
So which is it ? Did we get in a quagmire because we chose to use "aggressive interrogation techniques" or because the President chose to invade for reasons he didn't want to share with the people ?
Monday, June 28, 2004
In an excellent article in the New York Times PHILIP SHENON asserts that the claims of fact in "Fahrenheit 9/11" were very thoroughly checked and that, as far as he could tell from viewing the film, largely accurate. I wouldn't know. I haven't seen the film. I live in Italy and they are still trying to convert 9/11 into centigrade.
However Shenon does repeat an obviously false argument conflating international flights and airplane flights in general (he must not be a foreign affairs correspondent)
Mr. Moore may also be criticized for the way he portrays the evacuation of the extended bin Laden family from the United States after Sept. 11.
while the film clearly suggests that the flights occurred at a time when all air traffic was grounded immediately after the attacks ("Even Ricky Martin couldn't fly," Mr. Moore says over video of the singer wandering in an airport lobby), the Sept. 11 commission said in a report this April that there was "no credible evidence that any chartered flights of Saudi Arabian nationals departed the United States before the reopening of national airspace"
The first chartered flights carrying Saudi's after 9/11 definitely did not depart the United States. The first such flights gathered well connected Saudis. As I said I didn't see the film, but Mr Shenon doesn't even assert that Mr Moore claimed that the flights which departed the United states took place at a time when "Even Ricky Martin couldn't fly." I'd say it is clear that Mr Shenon doesn't read blogs (or refuses to quote them) as this distinction has been stressed at length in the blogosphere. It is odd that Mr Moore doesn't note the distinction in his quoted response to Mr Shenon.
I would say a correction is in order the
The article"Michael Moore Is Ready for His Close-Up" By PHILIP SHENON Published: June 20, 2004 incorrectly characterised the fraction of airplane flights originating in the USA which depart the United States. Over the past two decades it has been 12 %"
The number is made up the the NY Times should be able to get some intern to find it. Or maybe
he article"Michael Moore Is Ready for His Close-Up" By PHILIP SHENON Published: June 20, 2004 incorrectly characterised the fraction of charter airplane flights originating in the USA in the two weeks following 9/11/01 which departed the United States. It was less than 40%"
By the way regular readers of this blog (if any) have noticed that, when it comes to spellling i dont do to gud. I just learned that "Fahrenheit" breaks the i before e except after c and when it says ay as in neghbor and weigh rule (unless it is pronounced "fair in hate" which seems appropriate for the film). Previously I had known only of words which appear in one of the two following sentences "neither leisured foreigner seized the weird heights" and "The sheik traded his caffeine for counterfeit protein" Clearly farenheit belongs in the second sentence as in "The sheik who was lampooned in 'Farenheit 9/11' traded his caffeine for counterfeit protein"
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Matther Yglesias is under attack from the forces of
This means that I will post my comments on his site here, since one of them seems
to have fallen into a black hole.
I quote
"The New York Times describes the wide variety of inconveniences that New Yorkers will face during the Republican convention. Then we hear Mayor Bloomber for the defense:
After describing the security measures, the mayor told radio listeners that the Republican convention would benefit the city as a whole, saying that it would generate an estimated $250 million for the local economy and create thousands of jobs. "So this is a good economic deal for the city," the mayor said. "The disruptions will be a little bit annoying, but minimal. There's no reason for businesses to close down."
Now $250 million over a four day period comes out to $62.5 million per day, which averaged out across 8 million people turns out to be less than $7 per person per day. And that's the gross haul. The city will, I assume, be spending a lot of money on police overtime, barricade construction, etc., which will probably bring the average net economic gain down even further. ...
It doesn't look like a very good deal to me."
Also the costs are not just police ovrertime and inconvenience. The conventioneers will demand goods and services in exchange for their $250 Million. People who work in hotels and restaurants will have to work more. $1 in sales is good for sellers but it is not as good as $1 for nothing.
However the point that got my interest is $62.5 M divided by $7 > 8.92 Million > 8 million. Looks like Matt made a boo boo while fighting innumeracy.
Did he do that on purpose just to get this link ?
"Samuel Huntington has gotten tons of play from both The Clash of Civilizations and Who Are We specifically because his theses are wrongheaded, somewhat offensive, and argued for in a rather sloppy manner."
Elisabetta Addis and I call the deliberate attempt to get attention by being outrageously wrong Fukayaming after Francis Fukayama author of "The End of History". It's like the guy had registered history TM. For a year, every time any TNR type journalist commentator wrote about anything happening anywhere s/he would add a comment like "people in slavogria haven't yet read Fukayama so history hasn't ended here just yet."
Now it's hard to top that. In fact, this means that writing is obsolete. No one will be able to write anything useful or interesting again. Try to prove me wrong (and cite me when you do).
The One True Faith -- Voodoo
Voodoo economics that is. Among the rules that Bremer wants to democratically impose on Iraq is one " that cap tax rates at 15 percent". Gerner has a theory that Bremer decided democracy had to wait for the supply side miracle, hence well the mess.
The strength of faith in the miraculous benefits of low marginal tax rates in the absence of evidence is well like the idea that invading Iraq is part of the war on terror.
My Dad Tom Waldmann takes beautiful photographs.
Some are here
For two examples
Who is Luigi Goffredo Verzella ?
Someone (Luigi Goffredo Verzella in person ?) using the usually useful google just came here after searching for Luigi AND Goffredo AND Verzella. This site came out first in the google search. It seems that, according to google, I am the worlds leading expert on Luigi Goffredo Verzella, which is odd, since I don't have the faintest idea who he is.
I understand that semantic searches will replace keyword searches in a decade or three, so I guess Luig Goffredo's fan and I will just have to make due with google.
Saturday, June 26, 2004
Why is Jose Padilla so dangerous
That he was denied a trial ?
It has long been clear that he was not such a threat to US national security that the constitution had to be sacrificed to stop him. He is no Jefferson Davis, of course Ashcroft wouldn't consider Jefferson Davis an enemy combatant in spite of the fact that he technically lead a war against the USA.
The problem seems to be that once one decides to ignore the law, it is very hard to stop. This is revealed by the New York Times today
"In the end, administration officials considered Mr. Zubaydah's interrogation an example of the successful use of harsh interrogation techniques.
... he ... was the source of information about Jose Padilla,"
This would tend to make it a bit difficult to put Padilla on trial. First because evidence obtained by torture would be inadmissable, and second, because Padilla's defence team could have learned that the US government was using torture.
Ashcroft et al, with their contempt for the wall between national security and criminal investigations, must have refused absolutely to consider how illegal techniches inevitably propagate when one has to cover up one breach of the law with another.
In this case, the fruit of the poisoned tree was a direct assault on the US constitution.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Why do chickens lay eggs ?
The amateur evolutionary biologist tries to answer.
Asked Kathy age 6. Because they are birds replied Robert. Why don't birds give birth live like humans ? Hmmm good question.
I tried to answer. It has to have something to do with flying. Can you imagine flying when pregnant (especially hard for men to imagine but I doubt many women can imagine it either).
But wait, the egg is as heavy (a little heavier) than the chick which hatches. hmmmm.
Mammals typically give birth to many offspring at once. Lucky ducks lay one egg at a time. I think the advantage of eggs is that they can be phased. Birds have one fully developed egg, another semi developed, a third real small and one about the size of a human egg. That means that they are not weighed down by several fully developed eggs (or fetuses) all in there together. my guess is that no mutant mammal has ever managed to reliably give birth to a mature offspring while not mis-carrying an immature fetus. Bats typically have one or two offspring a season. This is a major evolutionary handicap which they have someohow managed to overcome by developing sonar.
Now even with sonar I couldn't handle one or two kids a year. Oops one or two a year is, by normal animal standards, hardly any.
I use google as a spell checker.
For example I just decided that the game theory solution concept was
Stackelberg equilibrium (9,290 hits) not stackleberg equilibrium (341 hits all from people who don't use Google as a spell checker).
Brad Delong is a big fan of google, but I suspect that this is one use he does not make of it. I recall that back when he had a 5 Mb hard disk, he deleted the spell checker to save space.
Why Hate Clinton ?
First I should say that I can understand Clinton hatred. Hell I've even hated him myself occasionally as when he signed the welfare reform bill or declared he was in favor of 3 strikes and you're out. It's simple, he seemed to have no principles; he was willing to do anything (except keep his pants on) to win elections. Since leaving office, he has worked hard to e.g. convince Thabo Mbeki that HIV causes AIDS and I have the creeping suspicion that he is a basically good person who made moral compromises not a basically empty shell.
The puzzle of the Clinton haters is that they don't hate more presidents.
Kevin Drum notes that Bush did more draft dodging and used more drugs than Clinton, so why don't the Clinton haters mind ? Actually, in the case of W, culture warriors can reasonably be forgiving, since that was before he was born again. Most Clinton haters were too young to have been politically active at the time, but I don't recall conservatives caring much about character when Nixon was president. Finally Carter was and is insuferably good and that didn't stop people from hating him.
My view is that some right wingers can't stand losing. I would say that there is a tendency for righties divide humanity into winners, who are not just successful but praiseworthy, and losers, who are worthless. It is easier for lefties to believe in honorable failure.
I think Clinton haters, hate Clinton for winning. Now I got mad at Bush Bush, Reagan and Nixon for winning. However I think the Clinton haters found him a threat to their sence of worth, because they can't stand to see themselves as losers.
well that's progress. The NYT reports that the Bush administration just offered aid to North Korea provided they phase out their nuclear program. This after 3 years and 5 months of constructively sneering at the Clinton administration for weakly, appeasingly offering aid to North Korea provided they phase out their nuclear program.
Monday, June 21, 2004
Still in the same article I am reminded of my one blogging hit.
"Several detainees who have been released said coercive interrogation methods used at Guantánamo had constituted abuse, charges American officials have denied. Among the allegations are complaints of druggings, invasive body searches, sleep deprivation and other mistreatment."
Does tend to contradict the claim by DOUGLAS JEHL and ANDREA ELLIOTT that "To date, there have been no accusations of serious prisoner abuse in connection with interrogations at Guantánamo.