Gene Frenkle

Nothing to get upset about. You don't see Boehner crying like a little girl over every little thing...

Don't worry, those people will be swimming in altruistic charitable table scraps if we make the Bush tax cuts permanent for all.

Why choose this to take a stand on if you have nothing to gain or lose personally? Aren't there like 1000 other things to worry about that do actually affect you and your family?

You're not usually very diplomatic about things.

It's a simple question, meatball, no need for spin. And nobody's asking for a W2, just above or below $250K. It cracks me up that not one of you yet even claims to make $250K/year, yet all of you conservative honks cry about the higher tax for people making more. You must all be very principled people when because I doubt you care so much about somebody else's problems when it comes to just about anything else.

I've go a solution for you

Not yet, because the science isn't complete enough.

This is not about religion...it's about conspiracy theorists - anti-vaccination people who are bringing back nearly-defeated diseases based on non-scientific bull ****. And this IS an example of what's great about the scientific method. It corrected itself even though some jackass abused it severely. This is the only way the truth is virtually guaranteed to win out, because as soon as an existing theory is disproven, science automatically accommodates that disproof by changing itself. Which, like I said, has nothing to do with religion.

I'm not trying to start anything with this - unless someone wants to defend the Vaccine/Autism "link". I look at this as an obvious example of the scientific method winning out. Science is better at self-correction than the free market.

Hey, what are you gonna do - it's been boring around here lately. I'm just wondering how many conservatives are only against this tax on "principle" and how many are actually looking out for #1.

http://news.yahoo.co..._20110106104725 Not that I've ever seen any of you promoting this crap...still interesting example of science disproving dogma. However, if you read some comments on this at various spots on the web, you'll see that good science is never enough to convert some from their dogma...

Out of curiosity, who here is pulling in $250K? I'll start: not me.

That's a bit better, though part of the story in this case is still more accurate than none of the story. The challenge now is to show how the release of this cable is skewing what actually happened in the same way.

In defense of the AP, while the article may not be groundbreaking, I don't see a major political bias. Are all fluffy articles part of the Liberal Media agenda?

No crap, I don't think it's a big deal and is probably a good thing. I think it's funny that as soon as Wikileaks is mentioned people start getting all upset.

In that case, only one of your statements is true. Either I broke in or I didn't. If we agree that Wikileaks is providing truthful information, you'll need a better analogy to make your point.

So Yahoo is part of the Liberal Media, but not the AP?

That makes no sense, even granting you the "one ten thousandth" part. How is a larger quantity of truthful information as good as a lie?

Whatever you may think about Wikileaks, it doesn't seem that they're putting out false information.

That's because they're only out to get YOU.

Your link is bad or the AP article got changed.

I'll skip to the chase and say all of the above, though not equally of course. This isn't a political discussion. Many people seem to confuse politics and religion, so your error is understandable. What's it like to run out of New Year's resolutions?

We're starting the new year off with a very nice illustration of why anecdotes aren't worth a crap when it comes to making meaningful statements about what is and isn't. I'd say it's more likely that some people are happy and nice while others are sad, angry and mean and it doesn't much have to do with what they believe, provided they're not currently struggling with what to believe. It would be nice to have a double-blind study for confirmation however. Happy New Year!

Try guns and religion.

Yes, you know exactly what I'm talking about then. With the link, you have to let it buffer to the fast forward point before you fast forward. I've noticed that it kind of screws up if you don't wait. It shouldn't take long. On the plus side, there's a really nice explanation of Relativity in the first part of that episode. Radiolab itself is an amazing podcast and there are lots of past episodes to listen to if you happen to like it.