Tag Archives: research

The world’s most useless person of the week: Sarah Palin

In a perfect world, Palin would have taken her rightful place as a historical footnote along with all the other has beens, also-rans, and never weres after the 2008 election. Maybe she could have extended her fifteen minutes into an early elimination in season 75 of Dancing with the Stars. link: http://www.bite.ca/bitedaily/2010/06/worlds-most-useless-person-of-the-week/ added by: romanswietlik

Scientists Confirm the First Direct Photo of an Exoplanet

See that little dot in the upper left corner? It is a planet orbiting a sun-like star. We know of a few hundred planets like this, but this one is special — we now know it's the first one to have its picture properly taken from Earth. The adaptive optics system at the Gemini Observatory in Hawaii snapped this photo in the infrared part of the light spectrum. It shows a hot, large Jupiter-like planet near a smallish sun-like star. It was actually found two years ago, but astronomers couldn't be sure they were really looking at a planetary system and not some lucky alignment of objects. Now they're sure. “Our new observations rule out this chance alignment possibility, and thus confirms that the planet and the star are related to each other,” says David Lafreni

Vintage Santelli – Rips Obama’s Keynesian-ish Policies: Why Does My Share Have to Pay for California’s Teachers?

This is one of those “I told you so” moments conservatives should really be out publicizing: The $787-billion stimulus passed early 2009 – it’s not working. And on CNBC’s June 25 broadcast of “The Call,” CME Group floor reporter Rick Santelli explained that all government spending is not created equal, and President Obama’s so-called stimulus spending was for government payrolls and not the infrastructure improvement is was sold to be . “Well, you know, it’s all about, in my opinion, definition and choice,” Santelli said. “Definition, I don’t disagree with our guest, Richard [DeKaser, president of Woodley Park Research ], about stimulus, but I haven’t seen any stimulus. I’ve seen a lot of spending. And in terms of choice, austerity isn’t something people are going to volunteer for. The creditors are going to force it on them. I think these issues are much different than we’re selling them. You know, we don’t have a new Hoover Dam. We don’t have a new electric grid. We paid a bunch of salaries and benefits and extension benefits, unemployment with a lot of that money that you save jobs because you paid teachers because states couldn’t afford it I don’t think any of that really falls under a definition of stimulus.” “The Call” co-host Larry Kudlow offered a more technical analysis of this Keynesian economic policy implemented by the Obama administration. He explained an International Monetary Fund study, analyzed by the Hoover Institute’s John Taylor , shows Keynesian policy doesn’t translate into the most efficient way to jumpstart a lagging economy. “The IMF has done a study that for every dollar of government spending, you only get 70 cents more in GDP, and after year two it goes to zero,” Kudlow said. “Now, I think we’re going to zero. No wonder our borrowing ratios are so high. When are we going to learn that this kind of stimulus isn’t even what Keynes argued for many years ago?” DeKaser, one of the segment’s panelists, argued that 70 cents of GDP growth was better than nothing, which Kudlow questioned. “You borrow a dollar to get 70 cents, and you lose 30 cents?” Kudlow said. “Boy, that sounds like a bad deal, my friend. I wouldn’t want you trading my account. I mean, the whole thing could go deeper into debt.” Santelli argued that even if one subscribes to the 70 cents per dollar economic growth figure theory as a positive, this government didn’t get it right in its approach. “I mean, the notion of stimulus is you want capital in the system, but when you have artificial stimulus, you give capital to the people that aren’t really creating an expansive employment scenario or creating something that’s actually positive for a society,” Santelli said. “What you end up doing is putting capital to businesses that on their own couldn’t get capital and that’s for a reason. The market didn’t allocate it because they didn’t deserve it.” CNBC senior economics reporter Steve Liesman questioned Santelli’s wisdom – that a bailout for certain government employees was good policy. “Rick, why is it artificial to keep teachers in the classroom and cops on the beat and firemen in the firehouses?” Liesman said. “To me that’s not artificial stimulus. That’s just good policy.” But that led to a vintage Santelli rant – why should taxpayers all over the country be held responsible for the woes of a local government brought on by its own irresponsibility. “Because that’s what people pay property taxes for, and if the state of California when the bubble was going on raised boatloads of property taxes, why should the value of somebody’s house make collecting garbage more expensive, running transportation more expensive? It doesn’t. They spent all the money. So, why does my share have to pay for their teachers?”

Read more:
Vintage Santelli – Rips Obama’s Keynesian-ish Policies: Why Does My Share Have to Pay for California’s Teachers?

African Lion Burgers Served at Arizona Restaurant as Part of Its World Cup Promotion

By Annalyn Censky, staff reporterJune 23, 2010: 5:19 PM ET NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — A small Arizona restaurant found itself at the center of a nationwide backlash that included a bomb threat after it announced plans to offer lion burgers this week as part of a World Cup promotion. But following the supply chain back to the mom-and-pop butcher that processed the alleged lion meat turns up an even more bizarre tale. The story started when Cameron Selogie, owner of Il Vinaio restaurant in Mesa, Ariz., bought about 10 pounds of so-called African lion meat, planning to mix it with ground beef to make burgers honoring the FIFA World Cup's South African location. Selogie sent an e-mail newsletter to his restaurant's patrons advertising the special. That newsletter — which was the sole publicity Selogie had planned — exploded into a media blitz when one of the e-mail recipients turned out to be an animal activist. She spread word to a local TV station, and the news has since circled the globe, even garnering a brief write-up in the online version of London's Daily Telegraph. Lion burgers are an attention-grabbing idea, but it raises the question: How, exactly, does an Arizona restaurant manage to get its hands on African lion meat? Welcome to the mysterious world of back-alley exotic meat purveyance. Selogie said he bought the meat through a Phoenix distributor, Gourmet Imports-Wild Game — a one-man operation owned by Rick Worrilow. Selogie says he did his research, and was told that the meat came from a free-range farm in Illinois that is regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture. Meanwhile, Worrilow, who essentially serves as a middleman between farms, meat processors and restaurants, also said the meat came from a completely legal plant in Illinois. And even though he didn't know the name of that plant, Worrilow said he was confident that the meat was inspected by federal regulators. So where's this supposed African lion farm in Illinois? Well, here's one clue: When the meat arrived at Il Vinaio on Tuesday evening, Selogie said it came in packaging with the name “Czimer's Game & Sea Foods.” Czimer isn't a free-range farm. It's a butcher shop located just outside of Chicago in Homer Glen, Ill. Lions, ligers and bears … Czimer's website advertises standard wild game: pheasants, quail, ducks, venison, buffalo and so on. But then, sprinkled through the product list, some wilder offerings pop up. Like llama leg roasts. Or camel cutlets. And African lion meat. You can snag it in shoulder roast, steak, tenderloin or burger form — or, for a bargain, try the ribs at $10 a pound. So where does Richard Czimer, the company's owner, get these lions? The meat is the byproduct of a skinning operation owned by another man, Czimer said in an interview with CNNMoney.com. He declined to name that gentleman. “This man buys and sells animals for the skin, and when I need something and he has ability to get it, I will bargain for the meat. It's a byproduct,” he said. And where does that mystery man get the lions? “I wouldn't have any idea,” said Czimer, who operates a small retail store in addition to his wholesale business. “He has his sources, and I do not infringe on his business, just as he does not infringe on mine.” He's willing to take a hands-off approach: “Do you question where chickens come from when you go to Brown's Chicken or Boston Market?” he asked. Czimer's exotic-meat dealings have landed him in hot water before. Back in 2003, Chicago newspapers covered his conviction and six-month prison sentence for selling meat from federally protected tigers and leopards. Czimer admitted to purchasing the carcasses of 16 tigers, four lions, two mountain lions and one liger — a tiger-lion hybrid — which were skinned, butchered and sold as “lion meat,” for a profit of more than $38,000. His supply chain may be murky, but like the Arizona restaurateur and the meat salesman, he expressed total certainty that his lion meat is USDA-approved and thoroughly inspected by regulators before it reaches his processing plant. But here's a twist: The USDA says it doesn't inspect lions bred for meat. That's the job of the Food and Drug Administration. Is it legal to eat lions? Yes, according to the FDA's communications team. The African lion isn't currently a federally protected endangered species and it qualifies as a game meat, FDA spokesman Michael Herndon said in an e-mail. While the African lion is not considered endangered by U.S. regulators, it is classified as “threatened” by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, an international protection agreement. As for Czimer, his shop is officially registered with the FDA and has been inspected by state regulators, Heardon said. Meanwhile, back in Arizona, Selogie is taking the protests in stride. He plans to have bins of ice water outside for picketers who brave Arizona's 100-degree heat to protest as he serves up the burgers on Wednesday and Thursday night. “I do feel bad that people are so concerned about this. But for most people, this is the king of the jungle and that's the only reason they can give me for their concern,” he said. “We're not doing anything to endanger the species.” To top of page added by: EthicalVegan

Jesus will return by 2050, say 40% of Americans

Americans are largely optimistic about the future, according to the poll from the Pew Research Center For The People and The Press/Smithsonian Magazine. By mid century, 71 per cent believe cancer will be cured, 66 per cent say artificial limbs will work better than real ones and 81 per cent believe computers will be able to converse like humans. But Americans are also braced for a major energy crisis and a warming planet, according to the survey. More than half, or 58 per cent, fear another world war in the next 40 years and 53 per cent expect a terrorist attack against the United States using a nuclear weapon. The poll also shows a sharp dip in overall optimism from 1999, when 81 per cent said they were optimistic about life for themselves and their families. The current poll found just 64 per cent were. Sixty-one percent said they were optimistic about the future of the United States, compared to 70 percent in 1999. And 56 percent predicted the US economy would be stronger in 40 years, compared to 64 percent of those polled in 1999. The results were compiled from telephone and online interviews with 1,546 adults in April. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points, according to Pew. Here are some other findings of the poll: • 71 per cent believe cancer will be cured by 2050. • 81 per cent believe computers will be able to converse like humans. • 68 per cent of those under 30 predict a world war by 2050. • 53 per cent say ordinary people will travel in space • Nearly three-quarters, or 74 per cent, of those polled believe it likely that “most of our energy will come from sources other than coal, oil, and gas”. • Yet 72 per cent believe the world is likely to experience a major worldwide energy crisis by 2050. • 66 per cent say the Earth will definitely or probably get warmer but it breaks down strongly along political lines, with just 48 per cent of Republicans saying so and 83 per cent of Democrats. • 42 per cent say it is likely that scientists will be able to tell what people are thinking by scanning their brains but 55 say this will definitely or probably not happen. • 89 per cent believe a woman will be elected US president by 2050. • 86 per cent say it is at least probable that most Americans will have to work into their 70s before retiring. • 41 per cent say Jesus Christ will return within the next 40 years while 46 per cent say this will definitely or probably not happen. • 63 per cent anticipate the demise of paper money • 61 per cent say almost no one will send letters by 2050. • 31 per cent expect the planet will be struck by an asteroid. added by: cclark_productions

Newsweek Blogger: Tea Party Coverage Isn’t Harsh Enough

Newsweek blogger Ben Adler thinks the national media are giving the Tea Parties gentle treatment. “Unfortunately,” Adler wrote in a June 21 post , “what appear to be false notions of objectivity – or perhaps a lack of interest in policy – is preventing that coverage from illuminating what the movement actually represents and what it would do if empowered.” Adler complained that a recent Associated Press article, ” Enraged to Engaged: Tea partiers explain why ,” failed to examine the ideology of the demonstrators in the grassroots conservative movement. “The piece examines how and why a variety of individuals became involved in the Tea Party movement without once asking what precisely the platform consists of,” Adler said, leading one to wonder if he even read the article. The 2,300-word “stemwinder,” as Adler called it, written by reporter Pauline Arrillaga, presented various segments of Tea Party ideology on five separate occasions. In the third paragraph, Arrillaga notes that the purpose of the Tea Party-affiliated Lincoln Club in Yucca Valley, Calif., is “to promote educate and advance conservative principles of fiscal responsibility small limited government, free enterprise, the rule of law, private property rights, and the preservation and protection of individual liberty.” Eric Odom, widely regarded as a founder of the Tea Party movement, told Arrillaga said the group’s purpose was, “to make sure that we’re represented by people who are looking out for our rights and upholding the Constitution… And if they don’t, to make sure we have an infrastructure to really take them out rather than have these thugs that are in there for 30, 40 years.” As Adler put it, Tea Partiers are “vehemently opposed” to raising taxes. “But when it comes to specifics, suddenly every program seems worthier than when demonized in the collective abstract. Which politician wants to cut spending on Homeland Security? Education for students with special needs? (Surely not Sarah Palin!),” Adler said in a reference to Palin’s son, Trig, who was born with Down syndrome. Adler complained that the AP would dare characterized Tea Party demonstrators as “concerned Americans trying to find their voices, and a way to channel their disgust.” He suggested they aren’t motivated by love of country or concern for the future, but by ignorance. Arrillaga’s article refuted the notion that Tea Party activists are “ignorant,” however. Bill Warner, Lincoln Club member, ran his own engineering firm for three decades. Hildy Angius is currently running the Republican Woman’s Club, and is a staunch Tea Party Activist. She is an ex-PR agent with a degree from New York State Albany. Eric Odom started the Tea Party movement fresh out of college. Tea Partiers come from all walks of life and have diverse academic backgrounds. Adler also predictable recycled a tired media-drive stereotype that Tea Party members are racist. He suggested they are too dumb to realize they’re racist. “Might it be possible that the Tea Partiers who profess no racial motivation are, let’s say, not entirely aware of their own visceral motivations? I’m sure if you asked the Southern voters who switched to Republican voting habits why they did so, many would say race had nothing to do with it. But why should journalists take that at face value?” Adler said. Adler’s assertion that the media have been soft on the Tea Parties might come as a surprise to anyone who’s paid attention to media coverage of Tea Parties. From the very first demonstrations in April 2009, reporters have attacked Tea Party members . According to a Media Research Center study , the media at first tried to ignore the demonstrations, but quickly moved into attack mode, portraying Tea Party protestors as extremists. Just last week, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews aired a “documentary” about the Tea Party portraying its members as racists, terrorists and conspiracy theorists. 

View post:
Newsweek Blogger: Tea Party Coverage Isn’t Harsh Enough

WaPo Slams Rasmussen’s Professionalism, But Doesn’t Tell Readers His Critics Are Liberals

The Washington Post ran a story slamming pollster Scott Rasmussen on Thursday on the front page of the Style section. Political reporter Jason Horowitz earnestly channeled the Democratic spin from the story’s beginning: ASBURY PARK, N.J. — Here is a fun fact for those in the political polling orthodoxy who liken Scott Rasmussen to a conjurer of Republican-friendly numbers: He works above a paranormal bookstore crowded with Ouija boards and psychics on the Jersey Shore. Here’s the fact they find less amusing: From his unlikely outpost, Rasmussen has become a driving force in American politics. Democrats surely dislike how Rasmussen’s polls (like this week’s showing Harry Reid losing by 11 points) affect the optimism of their donors and activists. But are his numbers accurate? The Post wanted its readers to know this guy Rasmussen was a scary conservative: he played guitar in a band in high school in Massachusetts called “Rebel’s Confederacy” (racist?!) and he quotes the Bible: He graduated from DePauw University and moved to Charlotte. There he married, started a family and became a devout Methodist. He is given to quoting Scripture, including the principle: “Let every man be quick to listen, but slow to speak, and slow to anger.” (James 1:19.) In the mid-1990s, Rasmussen had discovered the business model of automated polling, and folks he polled heard a recording of his wife reading poll questions. In 1998, heavy traffic crashed his site when Rush Limbaugh unexpectedly told listeners to visit. Two years later, in August 2000, Bill O’Reilly invited him onto his show. He wrote columns for the conservative site WorldNetDaily in 2000. In 2001, he wrote a book advocating the privatization of Social Security. But are his numbers accurate? The pull quote in the story as it continued on page C-9 attacked his professionalism for his newer methods: “The firm manages to violate nearly everything I was taught what a good survey should do.” — Mark Blumenthal, a founder of Pollster.com, speaking about Rasmussen Reports Then there’s this hilarious attack from Daily Kos veteran Nate Silver, soon, a new hire of the New York Times: He “faults Rasmussen for polling only likely voters, which reduces the pool to ‘political junkies.'” Adds Scott Keeter of the Pew Research Center in agreement: “It paints a picture of an electorate that is potentially madder than it really is…And potentially more conservative than it really is.” Would it be wiser for a political candidate to focus on wooing unlikely voters? Jason Horowitz is dishonest for suggesting it’s Rasmussen versus the professionals — and not disclosing that Mark Blumenthal is identified correctly in others stories as a “Democratic pollster,” and not disclosing Nate Silver came from the hard-left Daily Kos, and not even hinting that the Pew Research Center is deeply invested in a series of liberal causes, and whose newest poll (also out Thursday) coos that “The president gets an enthusiastic thumbs up from the world (with the notable exception of the U.S.) for how he has handled the economic crisis.” They can even admit Rasmussen’s critics are liberals in the headline on C-9: “For some, pollster Rasmussen is a minus man.” For some? GOP pollster Ed Goeas, identified as a “Republican pollster,” defends Rasmussen but suggests he take on a Democrat to “balance his analysis” (or to please The Washington Post?) Rasmussen has a “conservative constituency” of Fox, The Washington Times, and the Drudge Report, adds pollster John Zogby insists. No one in the Post is going to suggest that perhaps a pollster for The Washington Post or The New York Times is a “liberal constituency.” How transparently odd. Just like the liberal media elite on a daily basis. For them, the playing field cannot be described as conservative professionals vs. liberal professionals — it’s upstart conservative peasants with pitchforks versus the established objective professionals who define the standards for everyone. Of course, Horowitz left out of his Rasmussen profile his latest poll showing how angry the public is with the media , that two-thirds of respondents are angry and say reporters slant the news to favor candidates they want to win. Instead, we get leftists dismissing Rasmussen numbers as “sorcery” that leads to conservative media bias:   Rasmussen said he is simply a “scorekeeper,” but his spike in clout has sharpened skepticism about how he tracks the dip in Democratic fortunes. Frustrated liberals suspect sorcery. Markos Moulitsas, the creator of the Daily Kos blog, has accused the pollster of “setting the narrative that Democrats are doomed” with numbers that fuel hours of Republican-boosting on talk radio and cable. Pardon conservatives if they might find it laughable that Markos Moulitsas as a polling professional, considering he concocts smear polls of “self-identified Republicans.” But are Rasmussen’s numbers accurate? The caption beneath Rasmussen’s picture brings the disturbing news for liberals: “Scott Rasmussen’s polling detected the groundswell for Scott Brown, who won the special election in Massachusetts for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy, earlier than most competitors.” That’s what has them worried about his ability to be a “driving force.”

Go here to see the original:
WaPo Slams Rasmussen’s Professionalism, But Doesn’t Tell Readers His Critics Are Liberals

Ladies’ Day at Ascot

Extraordinary hats abound at Ascot Ladies’ Day 2010, from Lego bricks to two plump pheasants

See more here:
Ladies’ Day at Ascot

Government cuts hit 2012 Olympic legacy as free swimming is axed

• Under-16s and over-60s no longer get free time in the pool • ‘This has become a luxury we can no longer afford’ Free swimming for children and pensioners is to be scrapped as part of cost-saving measures. The scheme for the under-16s and over-60s was launched by the Labour government two years ago amid much fanfare as a London 2012 Olympic legacy initiative. But the Sports and Olympics minister, Hugh Robertson, said that the scheme was “a luxury” that could no longer be afforded and has been axed as part of £73m savings made by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. “This is not a decision that gives me any pleasure,” Robertson said. “However, the research shows that the great majority of free swimmers were swimming already, and would have paid to swim anyway. With a crippling deficit to tackle and tough decisions to take, this has become a luxury we can no longer afford.” Labour launched the scheme in 2008 as part of a bid to get more people involved in sport by 2012 and claimed their aim was to get England’s swimming pools free to use by the time of the London 2012 Games. Robertson said new research showed the scheme has not delivered value for money nor significantly increased physical activity. He added: “Delivering a legacy from 2012 is one of my top priorities. I want people of all ages and abilities to have opportunities to take part in all kinds of sport, and under our plans to reform the Lottery shares we should see an extra £50m a year going on sports facilities by 2012. “Our plans to deliver a community sports legacy, in partnership with Sport England, are progressing well and we expect to make a full announcement in July.” Other non-sport DCMS projects being cancelled include the planned Stonehenge Visitor Centre and the British Film Institute (BFI) Film Centre. Olympic games 2012 guardian.co.uk

More:
Government cuts hit 2012 Olympic legacy as free swimming is axed

The green-eyed monster that lives in your brain

It is a vice that few can avoid but that nobody craves. Now the area of the brain which controls jealousy has been found, scientists have