lostfan

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:41 PM) I'm not so sure about terrorism or war. Sure you have people who are or just were in the military used as experts a lot, but I'm not sure if that's for political or strategic purposes. Generally speaking you have people that know nothing about foreign policy or international politics chiming in and people take them seriously. Even though they have no credibility whatsoever and have been manifestly wrong multiple times. One thing that can be said for them is that they're consistent.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:34 PM) I also have a History degree (with a focus on Medieval Europe) so if I ever decide I want to become a teacher later on in life I can just go and do 1 year in a master's certification program. I was gonna get another Bachelor's but I figured what's the point in that, if I can just get another M.A. after I get the first one, whenever that is.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:30 PM) Often though people will appeal to a different expert geoglist or climatologist who coincides with their opinion. This isn't really an exciting debate to watch or be a part of, but its a fairly effective strategy. Of course the issue of global warming is as much political as it is geologic the way people argue it. You can apply the same to any political argument, except maybe abortion and gay marriage since those are opinion-based. Stem cell research Terrorism War Any high-profile legal case etc.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:18 PM) Well yes Poly Sci is an important field of study, but I still think it needs to be distinguished from the natural "sciences". One of my degrees is in Statistics & Actuarial Science, and we use lots of different tests and hypotheses with variables and constants etc...I still think it needs to be put into a different "field" however. How many degrees do you have?

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 04:18 PM) I have a view on this that's pretty unsubstantiated, but its the internet so whatever. Democracies lend everyone an equal say in policy regardless of education, socio-economic class etc. This equal say kind of gives people a sense of ownership of their views on issues. Let's say you were having a discussion on medicine with a group of people and one person was a doctor. The doctor's views naturally hold more water because compared to him everyone else is merely laymen. Even religion appeals to expertise, people listen to and respect a priest's analysis of the bible. Politics operates differently though, people have a stance and they are convinced they are right. If a political scientist walks into a discussion on terrorism and disagrees with somebody they'll be a lot more combative than they would if a doctor disagreed with them regarding medicine. I dont know if this is emotional or what, but politics is one of those fields where people are always agitated when someone contradicts them. I think you started going where I normally go with this but didn't go as far as I usually do. In America today, if enough people believe something and/or move enough units, any opinion is valid enough to be put up against another opinion. Expertise really isn't valued and some people openly mock it. So you could have, say, Balta, who I'd say qualify as an expert geologist, arguing with a random conservative economist who wrote a book saying climate change is bulls***. And their opinions are given equal relevance. So it doesn't matter if it's a political scientist or not. People are just combative about whatever they believe/were sold.

Yeah, I'd have to say it's pretty important. Hell, even mentioning that the media does a good job at it (which is a hilarious thing to say) concedes that point. How many of the analysts they bring in on the news have political science degrees?

Both of OK's senators are kinda embarrassing. Anyway, that being said, political science is a legit academic discipline, not necessarily "science" per se but there's something to be said for it.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/area_...ate_defender_of

There's much more to WR than just being athletic.

I love the Bears (not the 2009 team, which I hate but the concept of the franchise in general) but I would have to agree that Bears fans are pretty dumb.

Al Franken's books are hilarious.

That's a pretty odd question to ask. Considering he's never played any kind of meaningful football to my knowledge...

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 19, 2009 -> 11:21 AM) Falafel sandwich at Sultan's Market. I haven't had a falafel in a long time. The best ones I've had were in Iraq though.

You have to be kind of stupid to actually not recognize that immediately. Then again...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 03:50 PM) To be fair, he ought to know better, even if it was a spur of the moment thing while on TV, but I'm sure I've screwed up units that badly at some point before as well.

I think he used to want to send troops to Afghanistan, but he's changed his mind over the summer and now his gut tells him it's a waste of time, but he can't figure out how to detach himself from the tar baby.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 06:18 PM) there has been a lot of idol speculation about the angles and it makes me yearn for the days of Greg MaddOx He is a beats

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 10:58 AM) Depends on how you define "popular". I think she's wildly popular with a certain segment of the GOP, but the rest just see her as noise at this point. That's what I have seen. Ann Coulter anyone? In fairness to Palin she is NOWHERE NEAR as maliciously ignorant as Coulter, the comparison is just for the extent of her influence.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) She's really not. Simple as that. I hear probably 10 times more about her in this thread than I do in every day news. An interview her comes on, I change the channel; I see an article on msn.com, I don't click it; I see an article in the newspaper, I don't read it. You greatly underestimate how many Republicans simple couldn't care less about her anymore. I wish she would just go away, and i'm fairly confident that's the majority opinion of people with half a brain now. I've kind of resigned myself to the fact that she isn't going away. She unfortunately has more influence on the direction of national political topics than I'd care for her to have but I can't control that. I don't really take her seriously, she's just something for me to occasionally laugh at and mock. On Republicans who say substantive things on a regular basis, I'm all ears. I like the debate.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 08:19 AM) And this new consensus that our justice system is completely rigged for the defense is so hilariously false. Yeah I don't really get that. If anything, the deck is stacked AGAINST people being charged with terrorism.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Nov 18, 2009 -> 01:24 AM) The military tribunals could and should keep "jurisdiction" over this. It's precedence, SCOTUS decisions be damned - rewrite the law and get it set up the right way. Although, I can't remember exactly how all that went down right now and frankly I'm too lazy to look at it at 12:30 at night. There's still some people (i.e. Nashiri) that are going to be getting tribunals.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 09:30 PM) Well, to be fair, greenwald went on a rampage because only a certain number of suspects were chosen for public trial. Many others are still kind of in limbo. So I'm thinking he has a pretty tight seal on these cases. These men are being tried because their verdict is certain. It's not exactly a true symbol of our legal system, but, whatever, I just want them convicted and GITMO's jail shut down. One thing I have to say about Greenwald is that he's consistent. He saves his worst venom for Republicans but he's been pretty livid at Obama and the Dems lately.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 08:33 PM) Well, I'll try to address this with some substance rather then the Kaperbolic ™ bulls***. The trials of the original World Trade Center bombings was an epic clusterf***. Osama bin Laden obtained the names that was on the witness list, how the names were obtained, the intelligence used, etc. and used that as a part of the planning for the 9-11 attacks. The problem with making these trials civilian trials in our country, as you partially alluded to, is that they aren't citizens, yet now, they're covered as citizens under our trial system. They can simply let him off because he didn't get his rights read (aka, technicality). That's horrible decision making on Eric Holder's part. I understand that he's seen all the evidence and made the decision based on it, but it's a poor decision, especially when earlier in the week he wanted others put in the military tribunal system. If KSM wants to act as his own attorney, he can and will be given all the evidence he wants or needs to defend himself. That would be opening up the entire playbook on everything we have on Al Queda, potentially. And that will go right back over to Pakistan. I know that Al Queda isn't what it once was, but they can attack if they get the means to do it. Now, since you Dems have screamed that this man was "tortured" - if I were KSM, I'd simply say that he was coerced into his admissions. Bad move - again, why would Eric Holder even put himself in this situation? It's stupid, at best, and damn dangerous at worst. Now, I didn't mock you or your opinion, and I'd appreciate you doing the same. I am curious to see your defense of the decisions. That really isn't an Obama Administration decision though (at least not in total), the SCOTUS made that ruling back in I think '06 and the Bush Administration never really developed anything after that to adjust. Besides reworking the tribunals this is really the first attempt by the government to actually move forward since then, at least how I understand it. Eric Holder isn't really making up procedures, he's trying to go with established law in a way he knows is going to succeed. In this case though torture really isn't that relevant. Yeah it won't be admissible in civilian court but I'm sure (as you started getting at) the government had enough evidence to prosecute him before they even captured him.

Anyone here read Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative?

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 17, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) If we do land Gonzalez I really don't want him to be called AGon, that trend should die. Generally I hate the tendency of baseball fans to nickname players "first initial, first 3 letters of last name"