Mick Wright.net

For those of you seeing this for the first time, this is another update in Fishkite’s ongoing public service, holding Vice President Dick Cheney accountable for something he said during the Vice Presidential Debate in 2004: “Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I’m up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they’re in session.” Cheney also pointed to Sen. Edwards’ poor attendance record: “Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you “Senator Gone.”

This time we will take a look at the year 2005 and see how Cheney’s statement looks after the first year of his second term as Vice President.

So how did he do? Not well. With a full calendar year in view, it appears Vice President Cheney only fulfilled his duty as the Senate’s presiding officer on a Tuesday… once.

Of the 34 Tuesdays the Senate was in session, Cheney acted as presiding officer just one time, on Jan. 4. Thus, he only carried out this obligation 2.94% of the time in 2005.

Liberals and conservatives alike should be appalled by the Vice President’s performance. If the White House had a more reliable and effective advocate working with members of the Senate, I feel certain that President Bush’s policies would have enjoyed a better reception on Capitol Hill, and priorities such as Social Security reform would have had a better chance breaking through the stagnation and red tape.

2005 Tuesdays / presiding officer

Dec 27 – not in session
Dec 20 – Isakson
Dec 13 – Allard
Dec 6 – not in session
Nov 29 – not in session
Nov 22 – not in session
Nov 15 – Vitter
Nov 8 – Stevens
Nov 1 – Stevens
Oct 25 – Isakson
Oct 18 – Leahy/Stevens
Oct 11 – not in session
Oct 4 – Burr
Sept 27 – Stevens
Sept 20 – Stevens
Sept 13 – Stevens
Sept 6 – Stevens
Aug 30 – not in session
Aug 23 – not in session
Aug 16 – not in session
Aug 9 – not in session
Aug 2 – not in session
July 26 – Stevens
July 19 – Sununu
July 12 – Vitter
July 5 – not in session
June 28 – Stevens
June 21 – Stevens
June 14 – Stevens
June 7 – Ensign
May 31 – not in session
May 24 – Murkowski
May 17 – Vitter
May 10 – Vitter
May 3 – not in session
Apr 26 – Talent
Apr 19 – DeMint
Apr 12 – Vitter
Apr 5 – Stevens
Mar 29 – not in session
Mar 22 – not in session
Mar 15 – Thune
Mar 8 – Murkowski
Mar 1 – Coburn
Feb 22 – not in session
Feb 15 – Vitter
Feb 8 – Stevens
Feb 1 – Murkowski
Jan 25 – Stevens
Jan 18 – not in session
Jan 11 – not in session
Jan 4 – Cheney

Back when Howard Dean called the GOP a “white, Christian party” and said “I hate Republicans,” I created an animated graphic of some of my favorite non-white or non-Christian Republicans and conservatives.

At right, I’ve edited the graphic for use in reference to the latest Washington Post story. The article reports on a study in which a few social psychologists determine that conservatives and President Bush’s supporters “had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.”

Part of the study’s claim is that “partisans” disregard unwelcome facts and then reward themselves for this “wrong-headed behavior.”

Therefore, if conservatives treat the study with serious and careful consideration, we thereby disprove it.

***

First, let’s take a look at the methodology.

For their study, Nosek, Banaji and social psychologist Erik Thompson culled self-acknowledged views about blacks from nearly 130,000 whites, who volunteered online to participate in a widely used test of racial bias that measures the speed of people’s associations between black or white faces and positive or negative words. The researchers examined correlations between explicit and implicit attitudes and voting behavior in all 435 congressional districts.

Assuming this description of the study is accurate, I have four questions:

1. The researchers offered participants pre-selected words, which they subjectively deemed “positive” and “negative.” Who’s to say the respondants attached the same positive and negative meanings to those words?

2. The researchers selected the faces and categorized them by skin color. Doesn’t that mean the study is inherently discriminatory? Also, are the faces equal in every other way: brightness, contrast, facial expression, age, attire, camera angle, etc? If not, could it be that perhaps participants reacted to “positive” and “negative” attributes of these other differences?

3. The responses are examined by congressional district, but it is not clear if the findings are further broken down by ideology within each district. Perhaps these “self-acknowledged views” are better tied to urban/suburban differences than to political alliances. For instance, are inner city liberals and conservatives more alike in their thinking than would be two partisans of whichever stripe living in different districts?

4. Are 130,000 whites taking an Internet survey representative of America? That number represents 0.04% of the total population, which seems like a pretty insignificant sample, given that it rounds to basically 0%; on the other hand, a sample that large means the margin of error is actually quite low. How reliable is this data?

***

The RNC spokesman quoted in the story lends credence to the study’s hear-and-reject theory by immediately questioning the researchers’ own political biases rather than reflecting on their results. Still, I think it is important to note the biases of any resercher studying a topic of this nature; its the same reason why one views candidate polling a little differently than research done by Gallup, or other third-party sources. Biases tend to influence behavior and outcomes, as this very study suggests.

Therefore, it is valid to bring up the political gifts: Brian Nosek donated $500 to John Kerry and Mahzarin Banaji donated $250 to Howard Dean and another $250 to the abortion activist group Emily’s List.

When faced with this information, Nosek reacts with a more subtle version of hear-and-reject:

Nosek said that though the risk of bias among researchers was “a reasonable question,” the study provided empirical results that could — and would — be tested by other groups: “All we did was compare questions that people could answer any way they wanted,” Nosek said, as he explained why he felt personal views could not have influenced the outcome. “We had no direct contact with participants.”

The very focus of the study, though, contains inherent biases that would be repeated even if the follow-up research is undertaken by social scientists who aren’t biased in favor of Democrats.

Why, for instance, does it focus only on whites, or only on racial attitudes? Why isn’t the study interested in the racial attitude of black partisans, and why doesn’t the study look at the way religious biases affect political decisions?

When you realize that the study is biased, and the researchers are biased, it’s a little easier to imagine that perhaps the study’s results aren’t 100% certain.

***

Based on only what I know now, I wouldn’t immediately reject the findings of this study. It is of course true that Republicans have work to do in order to win over black Americans. In fact, Ken Mehlman has made that his primary goal as chairman of the RNC: link, link and link. But at the time there seem to be more opportunities opening up for black politicians on the conservative side of the aisle. Black Republicans are currently running for Governor in Pennsylvania (Lynn Swann) and Maryland (Michael Steele)*. If Condoleezza Rice or Colin Powell ever decide to run for office, they would both enjoy a groundswell of support. And if we’re lucky, we may witness the swearing in of another black Supreme Court Justice before the President’s second term expires.

There may well be some lingering racism in the hearts of some conservatives, just as there may be similar biases in the hearts of liberals, but I’m not sure this study sheds much light on the subject.

UPDATE: * – and Ohio (Ken Blackwell).

UPDATE II: The story was so good, they printed it twice. Newsbusters finds that this same research was covered by the Washington Post one year ago this week. And here are some other problems with the study.

aka Nikolay Valuev – 7 feet, 323 pounds.

Jan 26, 2006:
“Kerry will try Alito filibuster”
– Headline, CNN.com

May 19, 2005:
“You want to use the power of ending a filibuster? Just have the filibuster for week after week after week and let people stand up and make their arguments, and if the arguments have no currency — believe me — between the press and public opinion and the bloggers and C-SPAN, this country will rise up, and you’ll get your 60 votes, if you deserve them. That’s an up-or-down vote of it’s own kind — you vote!”
– John F. Kerry, Congressional Record, Page S5486

According to CNN, some law students in Washington are quoting Ben Franklin (pictured above) as a rebuttal to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ defense of the anti-terror wiretapping program.

The actual quote is:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

You can argue that the students have misused the quote just as they’ve misphrased it, but my question is this:

Based on this same argument, will these students go on record in support of the privatization of Social Security?

***

See also: Michelle Malkin.

Conservatives in Canada gained control of the country yesterday, as elections handed Stephen Harper’s party a plurality of the votes, meaning Canada’s next government is set to be center-right for the first time in decades. The liberal PM has already stepped down. This is good news for the United States, because the new leader is more interested in strengthening ties between the two countries.

But you probably wouldn’t know that by looking at any of the major papers this morning. Results of Canada’s historic vote isn’t featured prominently, if at all, at CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, ABC News, Yahoo News or MSNBC. There are small “top news” links at Fox News, BBC News, Google News, CBS News and USA Today, but none of these run a sub-head or a photo on the front page.

Locally, it’s the sixth story listed in the Commercial Appeal, after stories on a drug raid in Texas, the Senate committee vote on Alito, a plane crash in Missouri, the ongoing Sen. Ford snafu and a Florida man who was freed from prison.

It’s a pattern.

I’d be happy to talk about it, but without the freedom to use player statistics, I’m afraid there’s no point. I’m afraid even mentioning their names is like blood in the water…

Da, dum.

Da, dum.

Here’s one of my least favorite songs of all time. It’s been around a few years, but it still gets significant rotation on the local radio stations. “What it’s like” is written by Erik Schrody, aka “Everlast,” the former House of Pain rapper. His other popular solo single is a song called “Ends,” which exposes the evils of capitalism in America. Everlast is also partially responsible for the most annoying song ever recorded — “Jump Around,” which can be heard in the birthday-party-chaos scene in the movie Mrs. Doubtfire. And here’s a quick fact you can use to impress your friends: Everlast is a convert to Islam.

This was part of your homework, by the way, so I expect some good comments on this one.

We’ve all seen a man at the liquor store beggin’ for your change

I have seen liquor stores, and I’ve seen men beggin’, but I don’t believe I’ve ever had the pleasure of seeing both at the same time. Of course, you always suspect that your “change” will eventually be ex-changed for alcohol, rather than for imaginary bus tickets, car repairs, telephone calls, bottles of baby formula, prescription medications, or any number of other things. But Everlast’s homeless stereotype seems to be quite a bit bolder than most of the actual people I’ve encountered in real life. In his case, you have no doubt that your money will supplement the man’s self-destructive habit and continue his downward spiral.

Chins-up, good Samaritans… you’re doing the Lord’s work if you help this guy — he’s looking for the SPIRIT to take over!

The hair on his face is dirty, dread-locked, and full of mange

His facial hair is so thick and long that he’s got it in dreads? I don’t know if I should feel pity or envy.

He asks a man for what he could spare, with shame in his eyes

Oh, shame. Right. If he’s got shame in his eyes, he doesn’t have to display any shame in his actions or actually do anything to overcome these outrageous and addictive habits .

Give the poor guy a break, will ya? He’s just trying to get hammered. Let’s take up a collection, boys, this fella needs a 40, stat.

Get a job you ****ing slob, is all he replies

Would you look at the way that jerk reacts?! Using profanity? How vulgar. How crude. How shameful. If this man had any pity, he would buy our friend a keg, or at least a six-pack. People have needs, you know.

Keep in mind the fact that we’re supposed to think poorly of this man in part because of his profanity. It’ll come up again here in a minute.

God forbid you ever had to walk a mile in his shoes
’cause then you really might know what it’s like to sing the blues

If I could walk a mile in his shoes, I’d walk to the nearest church, shelter or treatment center. I certainly wouldn’t be hanging out at the liquor store, even if I was trying to score cash for booze. That’s just a profoundly stupid idea no matter how you look at it.

And don’t tell me about singing the blues. Not everybody who’s down on his luck turns into a street drunk. What about our Bad Samaritan friend; how the hell do you know what he’s been through? What if his daddy was a boozer who used to beat up his mom every night and force his kids to stay up all night and watch it? You don’t know that. So if Everlast’s point is that we shouldn’t assume things about other people, without looking at life through their eyes, maybe he should stop his own moralizing at the expense of the strawmen he’s created.

Then you really might know what it’s like… [x4]

Yeah, why don’t you take your own advice, Everlast.

Mary got pregnant from a kid named Tom that said he was in love

Mary got pregnant, huh?

I wonder how. Did she have any say in the matter, or did it just happen? I mean, it certainly couldn’t have been partially a result of her own actions, could it?

[F]rom a kid named Tom that said he was in love…

Well, there you go. That absolves Mary’s responsiblity in the whole affair.

Clearly, Tom’s a liar. But he must have some sort of magical powers, as he can get women pregnant by merely whispering sweet nothings into their ears.

He said, don’t worry about a thing, baby doll
I’m the man you’ve been dreaming of.

Tom was “a kid” just a second ago. Now he’s a man. Kids sure do grow up fast these days.

But three months later he say he won’t date her or return her calls

Oh, the humanity.

And she swear, God damn, if I find that man I’m cuttin’ off his balls.

Some mouth on that woman, huh? Maybe that’s why Tom won’t date her anymore.

Or, you know, it could be the whole genitalia mutilation thing. That tends to turn people off pretty quick.

By the way, I think we’re supposed to feel sorry for Mary at this point, so in this case we have to excuse the profanity and threats of violence… unlike with the Bad Samaritan. We’re supposed to continue to dislike him for the same reasons we like Mary.

And then she heads for the clinic and

This is a good choice for Mary. The clinic should help her straighten things out. She’s probably going to get counseling and medical advice. She’ll need it, now that she’s going to be a mom.

She gets some static walking through the door

Static?

Static?

Lord have mercy, static?

My goodness, what for? For seeking medical advice and care?

I mean, static is listed under the Geneva conventions as one of the worst forms of torture known to man. Build up enough static electricity and you can make someone’s hair stand on end. We’re talking serious business here.

What kind of crazed fanatic would submit poor Mary to such an indignity as static? I bet it’s those Mormons. They’re always out to get people. Or maybe it’s the Bad Samaritan; we’ve heard about his antics before…

They call her a killer, and they call her a sinner

Well, there was that thing about mutilated genitals, so maybe “they” have a point. What is Mary doing at the clinic, anyway, that would prompt such a response from B.S. and the Mormons?

And they call her a whore

The profanity returns. Note: now it’s back to being a bad thing, and we’re supposed to frown upon it.

God forbid you ever had to walk a mile in her shoes
’cause then you really might know what it’s like to have to choose

See, because Mary has to choose. First she was forced to get pregnant, and now she’s forced to choose the baby out of existence. Hard life. I wouldn’t want to walk in those shoes. But if I did, I think I’d probably walk to the nearest church or woman’s shelter.

I’ve seen a rich man beg
I’ve seen a good man sin
I’ve seen a tough man cry

Does the rich man have dreadlocks in his beard? Likes to hang out at liquor stores?

I’ve seen a loser win
And a sad man grin
I heard an honest man lie

Oh, I get it… Freedom is slavery. War is peace. Ignorance is strength.

In other words, this song has now become fascist propaganda.

I’ve seen the good side of bad
And the downside of up
And everything between

Everlast, you sure have been around the block a few times. Tell us more.

I licked the silver spoon
Drank from the golden cup
And smoked the finest green

So you’re saying you’re a spoiled brat who gets high and then brags about it? Dude!

I stroked the fattest dimes at least a couple of times
Before I broke their heart
You know where it ends, yo, it usually depends on where you start

I haven’t a clue what you’re talking about anymore, Everlast, but part of that reminds me of a story I heard about this kid named Tom…

I knew this kid named Max
He used to get fat stacks out on the corner with drugs

How long have you known him, and in what capacity? As a client?

He liked to hang out late
He liked to get sh*t-faced and keep the pace with thugs

Kids these days.

Until late one night there was a big gun fight and Max lost his head
He pulled out his chrome .45, talked some sh*t, and wound up dead

Kids these days.

Now his wife and his kids are caught in the midst of all of this pain

Wow, this Max kid is just like Tom. One minute he’s a kid, and the next thing you know he’s fathering children.

You know it crumbles that way
At least that’s what they say when you play the game

Right, right. Of course.

God forbid you ever had to wake up to hear the news
’cause then you really might know what it’s like to have to lose

These things just can’t be prevented, I guess. One day you’re just a kid staying up late and selling drugs, as kids are wont to do. The next thing you know your own kids have no father. It’s the same story I hear day in and day out.

Then you really might know what it’s like… [x4]

Wait, what should I do in order to know what it’s like? Wake up to hear the news? Whatever happened to walking in the dude’s shoes? You know, I could hang out late and get sh*t-faced or something.

Then… then I would have some moral authority. Then I could get out my soap-box and preach about how these evil conservatives are ruining our country, what with their “static” and constant profanity and all.

If you are like most people who happened upon the Golden Globes on Monday night, you were probably as puzzled as I was when Felicity Huffman took the Best Actress in a Motion Picture – Drama award for her role in a movie called Transamerica.

That moment should go down in history as one of the most poignant examples of the utter hypocrisy and fraud permeating Hollywood.

First, it’s simply incredible how the film industry and its critics will fawn over such an unpopular and, to date, unsuccessful film.

Since its release on December 2, the movie has taken in roughly $500,000. Transamerica’s production budget hasn’t been made public, but since even the most austere Hollywood films have a minimum budget of several million dollars, this film is most likely still in the red. In Hollywood terms, that’s a flop of the highest order, especially when you consider that Narnia has drawn over $264 million.

In its 46-day release, Transamerica has been available in only 900 theatres. For comparison, the other film released the same week, Aeon Flux, has been shown in 2,608 theaters and has earned $25.5 million. Wait, did I say 900? I meant 90. No, better yet, make that nine. Transamerica has been released to a grand total of NINE THEATERS. And yet this is the film Hollywood chooses to celebrate.

Now why is that, do you think?

Second, consider the fact that Felicity Huffman was awarded a “Best Actress” award for her role as a transgender parent.

What kind of backwards, retrosexual, witch-burning, big-business-beholden, fundamentalist neanderthals are those puritans at the Golden Globes who dare to force thespians into rigid categories based on their sexual indentity? If the Golden Globes wasn’t such a hypocritical institution, it would have awarded Huffman as “Best Lead,” or under some other category that isn’t defined on the basis of gender.

A common refrain you’ll hear from evolution absolutists is that the theory of “intelligent design” doesn’t deserve a place alongside the theory of evolution in science class. ID opponents refuse to accept even the slightest suggestion that evolution may not be a sufficient explanation for science students studying life on earth, and recent battles have been fought over even brief introductions that would refer students to outside materials on ID theory. ID, they say, belongs in philosophy classes, or religion studies, anything but science class.

Now that argument has been exposed as the lie it is.

CNN reports:

A group of parents had sued the El Tejon school district in federal court last week, saying it violated the constitutional separation of church and state by offering “Philosophy of Design,” a course taught by a minister’s wife that advanced the notion that life is so complex it must have been created by some kind of higher intelligence.

Ayesha N. Khan, legal director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which represented the parents, said Frazier Mountain High agreed to drop the class.

“This sends a strong signal to school districts across the country that they cannot promote creationism or intelligent design as an alternative to evolution, whether they do so in a science class or a humanities class,” Khan said.

Evolutionists aren’t the great defenders of “science” they pretend to be; they are religious dictators of atheism, materialism and darwinism. The only ideas they hate and want to censor are those including the possiblity that God exists, and that He created life.

I want to be there when they meet their maker.