Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels was once married to a woman named Cheri. In 1994, she left him and moved to California. Three years later, she came back and they remarried. They are still together. Since Mr. Daniels is a public official, and his name was once even floated as a possible presidential candidate, there have been speculations as to his character. Does this divorce-remarriage incident tell us anything?
Some guy burned a Koran. Then there were riots. Many people (including Sean Hannity) blamed the book-burner for putting our troops in further harm by provoking Muslims. The question nobody seems to be asking is, who provoked this guy into doing the burning? Past rioters? If it makes sense to blame someone other than the rioters for rioting, doesn’t it make sense to blame someone other than the burner for burning?
Why? There are legal ways to do these kinds of sneaky political tricks. Why did they have to resort to breaking the law?
Some nut named Jared shot twelve people including congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Perhaps unsurprisingly, people went looking for someone to blame.
There has been talk of the EPA wanting to regulate CO2 emissions as an impetus to pass cap and trade as a less costly alternative. Why would the EPA want to regulate CO2? Is it poisonous?
Since long before he was even elected there have been those claiming that Barack Obama is a Muslim. Personally, I don’t think he’s a Muslim, nor do I particularly care, but I think I can understand why some do.
I recently read the article Climate Heretic by Michael D. Lemonick in the November 2010 issue of Scientific American. The author profiled Judith Curry and told of what she’s been up to lately. Judith Curry heads the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology and is known for her work on hurricanes and arctic ice. Lately, she has been engaging both skeptics and believers in the global warming debate.
I recently read this article about why simply properly informing the misinformed often backfires, leaving things in a worse state than before.
I recently came across this blog post claiming that Sarah Palin (and the right wing in general) were consistently more violent in word and deed than the left. I think that perhaps the author read a bit too much into Palin's words and assumed that she was inciting violent activity. I think maybe she was speaking metaphorically. The author also went on to claim that the right often gets a free pass in the media while the left gets called out for every little outburst.
According to some, if you oppose President Obama, or think his policies are dangerous, you're a racist.
Hi, I'm Dan. I like chocolate, hiking, and politics.