On The Turning Away

Crossposted.

“Children who grow up in a different environment may have very different early experiences, and may process information differently than children from a different environment.”
- BBC

The “Martin Eisenstadt” show writes itself. David Shuster/MSNBC and MSM in general are the gift that keeps on giving. Gawker has the blow-by-blow account.

What does it say about the “shoddiness in the traditional news media and especially the blogosphere”? It’s “not that some in the media don’t check stuff on the web. It’s that they’re prepared to believe - and write - anything about Sarah Palin.”

Crossposted.

Well, if you paid any attention to the increasingly heated political rhetoric from both parties, you would’ve heard ad infinitum, and justifiably impressed by, Sen. Obama’s “tax cut” for “95% of Americans”. Republicans, predictably, take issues with how the Obama camp define “middle class”, be it income below 65k or 43k.

It might be futile handwringing figuring out whether you fall into the lucky 95% bracket, The Economist provides a handy fact check.

[A]ccording to [Obama’s] written plans, he really means 95% of families with children, not 95% of Americans. But his real sleight-of-hand is to count handouts administered through the tax code as “tax cuts”. You might think that a tax cut means keeping more of what you earn. The way Mr Obama uses the phrase, however, it can also mean being given a chunk of money that someone else has earned. That is how he is able to offer “tax cuts” to “95% of Americans” when about a third of American households already pay no federal income tax.

Crossposted.

We chanced upon this interesting ‘discourse’ and thought it illustrates the “sanctimonious fatigue” from the anti-hicks with what they call “reverse snobbery”, aka culture war.

Self-styled liberal blogger: “Some of us, in fact, don’t give a rat’s ass where she [Ed: Gov. Palin] comes from.”

Commenter: “Really? Did you support Obama over Clinton and Edwards because you liked where Obama wants to take us all next. or because you liked where he comes from?”

A British academic concludes from her study that men with sexist views ‘earn more’ than their modern-thinking brothers. It could be because “more traditionally-minded men are interested in power, both in terms of access to resources - money in this case - and also in terms of a woman who is submissive.”

A shot across the brow for self-proclaimed progressive men?

Crossposted.

Crossposted.