A few questions about Bernard Madoff
I just read the verdict of 150 years for Bernard Madoff and all I can really think is "Why is it that someone who set up a Ponzi scheme gets more jail time than the majority of murderers?" I realize that many people were involved and yes, I would be angry if someone cheated me out of my life's savings (though I would not give only one person all of my money to invest but that is beside the point). Is Madoff just a symbol of Wall Street greed, which in today's society is worse than murder to so many? Is it because the people feel they trusted him and were ripped off and therefore justify any horrible thing they can think of to happen to him? Can anyone explain to me how what Madoff did is worse than murder?
" In my experience, the internet is not the disease but rather the symptom. "
I read with interest a short newsbite about how spending too much time online is straining Irish marriages (via Instapundit):
A commenter in response to the news story, I think, hit the nail, on the head, "the internet is not the disease but the symptom."
If a marriage is good, one will want to spend more time with their spouse, and perhaps if strained, will try to escape in various ways, which might include going online. Or, in my case, both spouses could spend a lot of time online and then use it to make their marriage better. Glenn and I discuss stuff online all the time and always have something fun to talk about. I have never laughed as hard at some of the things I read or had to think so much in response to some of them. So, I guess, like any hobby or vice (take your pick), it depends on how one uses it as to whether it is positive or negative.
If you wonder if you are "addicted" to the internet,there are all kinds of helpful books out there-- even one specifically geared towards Catholics called Breaking Free of the Web: Catholics and Internet Addiction.
The title makes it sound like "addiction" to the internet is always a bad thing.. .but I think it has its place.
Too much time spent on the Internet is causing increasing friction between couples in Ireland, a marriage counselling service said Friday.
Some seven percent of couples seen by ACCORD, the Catholic Church's marriage care service, say too much time spent in cyberspace by one partner is their main problem, according to figures for the first half of this year.
John Farrelly, its director of counselling, said the problem had come virtually out of nowhere in the last three years.
A commenter in response to the news story, I think, hit the nail, on the head, "the internet is not the disease but the symptom."
If a marriage is good, one will want to spend more time with their spouse, and perhaps if strained, will try to escape in various ways, which might include going online. Or, in my case, both spouses could spend a lot of time online and then use it to make their marriage better. Glenn and I discuss stuff online all the time and always have something fun to talk about. I have never laughed as hard at some of the things I read or had to think so much in response to some of them. So, I guess, like any hobby or vice (take your pick), it depends on how one uses it as to whether it is positive or negative.
If you wonder if you are "addicted" to the internet,there are all kinds of helpful books out there-- even one specifically geared towards Catholics called Breaking Free of the Web: Catholics and Internet Addiction.
The title makes it sound like "addiction" to the internet is always a bad thing.. .but I think it has its place.
The Art of Statisticulation
David Harsanyi has a column in the Denver Post entitled, How to lie with statistics � again:
I think that when stats "confirm" people's worldview, it is not the numbers themselves that are "magical", but rather the magical thinking a person engages in that allows them to believe the numbers are true.
Did you know that around 300 million Americans went without food, water and shelter at some point last year?
I am a survivor.
If you were blessed with the prodigiously creative and cunning mind of a politician, that kind of statistic � meaningless, but technically true � could be put to good use.
In the entertaining 1954 classic, "How to Lie with Statistics, "Darrell Huff writes that "misinforming people by the use of statistical material might be called statistical manipulation . . . or statisticulation."
One of the most persistent examples of modern-day statisticulation is the sufficiently true claim that 46 million (it becomes 50 million when senators really get keyed up) Americans are without health insurance.
Set loose on the public's compassion, this number is a powerful tool in the hands of eloquent orators like President Barack Obama when peddling government-run health care reform. And no matter how often the figure is debunked, no matter how many studies point to its inexact nature, it's just too politically inviting not to embrace.....
These facts does not undermine the argument for nationalized health care (history and common sense do that already). They do, however, point out that many statistics, to quote Huff again, get by "only because the magic of numbers brings about a suspension of common sense."
I think that when stats "confirm" people's worldview, it is not the numbers themselves that are "magical", but rather the magical thinking a person engages in that allows them to believe the numbers are true.
"...anxiety is much more likely to affect pitchers than position players "
A reader sends in an interesting article about athletes being treated by sports psychologists:
You can read the rest of the story here.
Mel Didier is as old-school baseball as they come.
The 83-year-old has been around the game for 58 years as a Minor League player, big league scout and executive and has seen and learned a lot.
It was Didier, for example, who told Kirk Gibson that Dennis Eckersley would throw a back-door slider with a full count and first base open and then watched one of the most famous home runs in World Series history leave Dodger Stadium.
In other words, not a lot surprises Didier, even though he has seen established Major Leaguers such as pitchers Zack Greinke and Steve Blass, catcher Mackey Sasser and infielders Chuck Knoblauch and Steve Sax suffer from diagnosed and undiagnosed psychological maladies that affected their play in strange and sometimes career-threatening ways.....
More and more, clubs are turning to sports psychologists to make these situations less difficult, and according to a prominent doctor in the Pacific Northwest, it's good to see anxiety disorders now being considered legitimately DL-worthy.
"It's a highly stressful situation with players these days," says Dr. Donald Smith, the director of the clinical psychology program at the University of Washington and a former roving Minor League psychology instructor for the Houston Astros (1985-96) and team counselor for the Seattle Mariners (1990).
"Anxiety is a mind and body phenomenon, and muscle tension interferes with the smooth, athletic movements we normally associate with Major League players. We tackle it by teaching stress management coping skills."
Smith says he has helped conduct studies that have shown that anxiety is much more likely to affect pitchers than position players and that even moderate muscle tension by a batter can "make an 85-mph fastball turn into 95 mph."
And for any team that has any doubts that psychological treatment can help players riddled with anxiety, Smith says clubs can go ahead and avoid it -- at their own risk.
"I met an old-school pitching coach who told me, 'I'm not here to coddle mental weaklings. It's a game of survival.'
You can read the rest of the story here.
Who's Afraid of John Galt?
Do you ever wonder what some writers are smoking when they try to interpret what you say in a blog post? Today, Glenn received a copy of Mother Jones magazine at his office with a note attached that there was an article he might be interested in. The article, entitled, "And the Rand Played On" was about "Right-wingers heading for the hills" by "going Galt." Unfortunately, it does not seem to be on the web, at least I couldn't find it at their site.
Anyway, the article begins by talking about me and states that I am a blogger for the "conservative Pajamas Media network" --newsflash to the author Amy Benfer: I am a blogger on blogspot, not at Pajamas Media-- but why get bogged down with too many facts? Benfer goes on to say that I liked what Joe the Plumber had to say and this "semi-employed, blue-collar media darling" reminded me of John Galt, and this is how I came up with with the "Going Galt theme." Huh? I don't remember doing this--if you can deduce how Joe the Plumber reminded me of John Galt from my "Going Galt" post, let me know.
Most of the article focuses on attempts to discount or insult anyone disagreeing with the author's worldview. I am seen as "confused," Right-wingers are "heading for the hills" and stars such as Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt who dare read Ayn Rand's books are "Celebrity fans of the cult of selfishness."
But I have to say that I like it that Mother Jones is so intimidated by the "Going Galt" theme that they have dedicated three pages at Mother Jones to it and seem quite put out that Rand's book Atlas Shrugged
is flying off the shelves to the tune of 200,000 copies in four months. If I can tie up that much lefty attention with so little effort on my part, I'm doing pretty well!
Anyway, the article begins by talking about me and states that I am a blogger for the "conservative Pajamas Media network" --newsflash to the author Amy Benfer: I am a blogger on blogspot, not at Pajamas Media-- but why get bogged down with too many facts? Benfer goes on to say that I liked what Joe the Plumber had to say and this "semi-employed, blue-collar media darling" reminded me of John Galt, and this is how I came up with with the "Going Galt theme." Huh? I don't remember doing this--if you can deduce how Joe the Plumber reminded me of John Galt from my "Going Galt" post, let me know.
Most of the article focuses on attempts to discount or insult anyone disagreeing with the author's worldview. I am seen as "confused," Right-wingers are "heading for the hills" and stars such as Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt who dare read Ayn Rand's books are "Celebrity fans of the cult of selfishness."
But I have to say that I like it that Mother Jones is so intimidated by the "Going Galt" theme that they have dedicated three pages at Mother Jones to it and seem quite put out that Rand's book Atlas Shrugged
is flying off the shelves to the tune of 200,000 copies in four months. If I can tie up that much lefty attention with so little effort on my part, I'm doing pretty well!
Women Abusers on the Rise in Australia
A reader emails an article from Australia about the rise of female domestic violence there:
Ms. Price, in the article, also points out that more and more women are engaging in violence--even murder-- because they can get away with it without consequences. This is an important point. The more we overlook female on male domestic violence, the more prevalent it becomes. The trouble is, no one cares and those of us who do are treated like pariahs or ignored. This must change--we must fight back against the stereotype of man perpetrator, woman victim--it is a matter of persistence and education.
Recently, a reader emailed to tell me he was upset that doctors and staff were asking his pregnant wife in front of him if she was "in a safe relationship." He asked me for help in finding research to give to these "do-gooders" to educate them about violence against men and children committed by women. If someone asked me at a doc's office if I was in a "safe relationship," I would have a few choice words for them. Or perhaps I would just hand them this article or this book
and save myself the aggravation.
New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics figures show that over the past eight years, the number of women charged with domestic abuse has rocketed by 159 per cent.
In 2007, 2,336 women fronted court on domestic violence charges, compared to around 800 in 1999.
Preconceived ideas of gender roles have led a lot of people to believe it would be virtually impossible for a women to physically abuse a man.
But co-director of Men's Rights Agency Sue Price says it is exactly this stereotype that leads to battered men hiding in shame, fearful of being ridiculed, or even prosecuted.
"I've had SAS soldiers in tears because the wife is a black belt karate expert and yet they know that if they even try to restrain her he might be charged with assault and domestic violence," she said.....
"We have so many reports of people having hot liquids poured over them in bed, glasses broken, men hit over the head from the back, attacked while they're asleep, cut, burnt," she said.
Ms. Price, in the article, also points out that more and more women are engaging in violence--even murder-- because they can get away with it without consequences. This is an important point. The more we overlook female on male domestic violence, the more prevalent it becomes. The trouble is, no one cares and those of us who do are treated like pariahs or ignored. This must change--we must fight back against the stereotype of man perpetrator, woman victim--it is a matter of persistence and education.
Recently, a reader emailed to tell me he was upset that doctors and staff were asking his pregnant wife in front of him if she was "in a safe relationship." He asked me for help in finding research to give to these "do-gooders" to educate them about violence against men and children committed by women. If someone asked me at a doc's office if I was in a "safe relationship," I would have a few choice words for them. Or perhaps I would just hand them this article or this book
and save myself the aggravation.
Ask Dr. Helen: Does a Father-Free Home Breed Success or just Power-Hungry Politicians?
I have a column up at PJM this morning in honor of Father's Day:
You can read it here.
Even on Father's Day, some think Dads are not just unimportant - they can even impede your drive to succeed.
You can read it here.
PJTV: Happy Father's Day: Why Dads Matter
In the spirit of Father's Day, I have Dr. Richard Driscoll, author of You Still Don't Understand
back on to talk about why fathers matter. His theory? ?That fatherhood is an extraordinarily versatile benefit that fueled progress and the prosperity that now gives us the options to condemn men and marginalize fathers. "So long as we fail to recruit men into families, we face a lower quality of life for ourselves and we bequeath the same to our posterity." But fatherhood and marriage is not such a good deal these days for men. Driscoll discusses what to do about it.
You can watch the show here.
back on to talk about why fathers matter. His theory? ?That fatherhood is an extraordinarily versatile benefit that fueled progress and the prosperity that now gives us the options to condemn men and marginalize fathers. "So long as we fail to recruit men into families, we face a lower quality of life for ourselves and we bequeath the same to our posterity." But fatherhood and marriage is not such a good deal these days for men. Driscoll discusses what to do about it.You can watch the show here.
How the government is killing jobs
I read over at Confederate Yankee that Amazon.com is letting their North Carolina associates go:
According to Wikipedia, there are over 900,000 "Associates" working with Amazon. If legislation and regulation cause Amazon to let many of these affiliates go as they are doing in North Carolina, unemployment will only increase. My guess is what is happening with Amazon is happening to companies across the country-- regulation and regime uncertainty are causing companies and small businesses to get rid of, or not hire workers in the first place.
This becomes a vicious circle. Everyone will talk about how high unemployment is without understanding how the government is sinking jobs at a fast pace. There will be a demand for government intervention which will only further the problem. Until people realize that more government, regulation and taxes is not the solution, my guess is unemployment will rise.
We regret to inform you that the North Carolina state legislature (the General Assembly) appears ready to enact an unconstitutional tax collection scheme that would leave Amazon.com little choice but to end its relationships with North Carolina-based Associates. You are receiving this e-mail because our records indicate that you are an Amazon Associate and resident of North Carolina.
According to Wikipedia, there are over 900,000 "Associates" working with Amazon. If legislation and regulation cause Amazon to let many of these affiliates go as they are doing in North Carolina, unemployment will only increase. My guess is what is happening with Amazon is happening to companies across the country-- regulation and regime uncertainty are causing companies and small businesses to get rid of, or not hire workers in the first place.
This becomes a vicious circle. Everyone will talk about how high unemployment is without understanding how the government is sinking jobs at a fast pace. There will be a demand for government intervention which will only further the problem. Until people realize that more government, regulation and taxes is not the solution, my guess is unemployment will rise.
"I wish I had a bit more courage,...."
The Spectator: "Toby Young says that Father�s Day is nothing to celebrate: today�s neutered dads have become overworked assistants to their children rather than paternal role models." Young makes some good points about dads in the article and how their role is diminished, but the main item that caught my eye was this:
I think a lot about how boys are faring in a society where they are treated like second class citizens, along with their dads. I was recently at a spa getting a pedicure and a young boy and his sister were sitting next to their mom. The young boy blurted out, "I can't help it that I'm not a girl!" in response to something they were saying. I was taken back a bit. When did you used to hear boys saying that and in a serious way?
Our society simultaneously thinks it's funny that boys have been regulated to second class citizenship and at the same time, they feel it it their "just desserts." Afterall, they must pay for whatever happened to women in past times. This is cruel and vindictive but worst of all, it is happening because we let it.
Perhaps this Father's Day, we should all think about what it mean to have "a bit more courage," when it comes to helping the next generation of boys succeed. Without courage, we (and they) are lost.
I wish I had a bit more courage, particularly as I have three sons. Among advocates of men�s rights, the main focus is on the iniquities of family law � and the bias shown towards women in custody agreements is clearly indefensible. But the people who suffer most from the diminution of paternal authority are adolescent males. A recent study by the Department for Children, Schools and Families discovered that white boys do worse in their GCSEs than Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, African and Chinese boys, not to mention girls from any background. The only groups that perform worse are �Traveller of Irish Heritage�, �Gypsy Roma� and �Pupil in Care�.
I think a lot about how boys are faring in a society where they are treated like second class citizens, along with their dads. I was recently at a spa getting a pedicure and a young boy and his sister were sitting next to their mom. The young boy blurted out, "I can't help it that I'm not a girl!" in response to something they were saying. I was taken back a bit. When did you used to hear boys saying that and in a serious way?
Our society simultaneously thinks it's funny that boys have been regulated to second class citizenship and at the same time, they feel it it their "just desserts." Afterall, they must pay for whatever happened to women in past times. This is cruel and vindictive but worst of all, it is happening because we let it.
Perhaps this Father's Day, we should all think about what it mean to have "a bit more courage," when it comes to helping the next generation of boys succeed. Without courage, we (and they) are lost.
Women behind Bars on WE
I was on an episode of "Women behind Bars" on WE (Women's Entertainment) last night that featured the story of Natasha Cornett, the teen who was part of the Lillelid murder and in my documentary Six. I thought they did a very nice job of telling several sides of the story from the perspective of experts, law enforcement and Cornett herself. You can watch the episode if you are a night owl (or have insomnia) again tonight at 2 AM eastern. For those who have more normal hours, it airs at other times noted here.
'"Complicated Patient" is the new scarlet letter..."
Dr. Wes has an open letter to patients regarding health reform:
As a "Complicated Patient," who already does all of the above to take care of herself, I don't look forward to our new socialist overlords of health care.
Dear Mr. and Ms. Patient,
It has come to my attention that in order for you to enjoy success as patients in the new era of health care reform, you must start working now to prevent illnesses that might befall you. Do not, under any circumstances, eat or drink too much. Fast food might as well be considered illegal. Exercise three, four, five times a day, even if it means take time off from work. It goes without saying that you should not smoke. The government has data that demonstrates how you have become fat, lazy, and a huge burden on our health care system. Your non-compliance threatens the very fiber of our economy....
Also, do not be a surgical case that has any risk of failure. After all, "Complicated Patient" is the new scarlet letter as we work to cut even more costs. Fortunately, thanks to the new multitudes of guidelines for care that we must follow, I will be carefully interviewing you to assure that you fit into one of several pre-determined renumeration bins called "bundles." Please don't confuse me with more than one major disease since there is currently no way to handle this circumstance. I would suggest you pick the disease that bothers you most.
As a "Complicated Patient," who already does all of the above to take care of herself, I don't look forward to our new socialist overlords of health care.
Vox Day is having a discussion of Jonah Goldberg's book, Liberal Fascism, 
including a quiz over at his blog. Go take a look.
including a quiz over at his blog. Go take a look.
Autism: The Extremely Male Brain?
I read a good article in a recent copy of Forbes on Simon Baron-Cohen, the author of The Essential Difference: Male And Female Brains And The Truth About Autism.
The article asks the questions, "What caused the explosion in autism diagnoses?" and "Why are boys more affected by this disorder?" Baron-Cohen's answers provide a different way of looking at autism:
Baron-Cohen (his first cousin is Sasha Baron Cohen of Borat fame) doesn't believe we should see autism as an epidemic. "The same genes that make a person good in a systemizing occupation, like math, physics or engineering, may also contribute to autism...Eradicating autism could mean eliminating genes from the gene pool that are probably key to such abilities as doing complex mathematics."
What do you think, should autism be "eradicated" as some parent groups believe or is it simply the result of an extremely male brain that does not require being "fixed?"
The article asks the questions, "What caused the explosion in autism diagnoses?" and "Why are boys more affected by this disorder?" Baron-Cohen's answers provide a different way of looking at autism:Baron-Cohen has been the first to advance and test some groundbreaking ideas in the field. But as for what has caused the increase in reported cases, he doesn't put undiscovered toxins at the top of the list of suspects. "A good part" of the rise, he says, can be explained by better diagnosis and an expanded definition of autism.
Since autism was first described in 1943, the definition has shifted. Doctors have come to agree that autism is characterized by poor social skills, communication difficulties and strong, narrow interests and repetitive behavior. Once upon a time it was understood as categorical: Either you were autistic or you weren't. Starting in the late 1990s, Baron-Cohen advanced the idea of an autism spectrum on which everyone falls, just as we would fall on a spectrum of height. As he sees it, we're all a little bit autistic. ...
Baron-Cohen is responsible for spreading the idea that the autistic brain is basically an extreme version of the male brain. He observed that people with autism were better at things for which men show more aptitude than women (like systemizing) and worse at things for which women show more aptitude than men (like empathizing). It's noteworthy that boys are diagnosed with autism four times as often as girls. "There was this massive clue that nature was giving us that autism might be in some way sex-linked," he says.
Baron-Cohen (his first cousin is Sasha Baron Cohen of Borat fame) doesn't believe we should see autism as an epidemic. "The same genes that make a person good in a systemizing occupation, like math, physics or engineering, may also contribute to autism...Eradicating autism could mean eliminating genes from the gene pool that are probably key to such abilities as doing complex mathematics."
What do you think, should autism be "eradicated" as some parent groups believe or is it simply the result of an extremely male brain that does not require being "fixed?"
Conservative women, cyber-rape and wimps
I read a piece over at Pajamas Media by Dr. Melissa lamenting the recent Playboy article about hate f***ing conservative women:
Hot Air has another segment of this little gem:
Naturally, a lot of people (mostly conservative) are upset by this kind of talk. Me, I say, "put up or shut up." Honestly, do you really think a pansy guy like this Guy Cimbalo would have the courage to get in a room with, much less actually rape any of these conservative women?
Liberal men who write for Playboy or any other such liberal publication are by their very profession, wimps. They have no integrity, courage or balls. They say these things because they are used to getting away with it, as their publications and the milieu of people they run with encourage it. Put them in a room alone with a conservative woman and they would be scared shitless. I've seen the way these guys operate. It's pathetic and only works if they have a pack of other wimps to back them up. Once a conservative woman cut them down to the core, they would leave with their little tails between their legs and go back to the only place where they feel empowered: the liberal media world that tells them that they champion the good and the just, when in their heart of hearts, they know what they are: cowards.
Last week, ten women were the subject of a cyber-rape. That is, without their consent, they were subjected to one misogynist, Guy Cimbalo, and his rape fantasies, which appeared in his Playboy article titled �Ten Conservative Women I�d Like To Hate F***.� (The article has since been taken down.)
Perhaps you think �cyber-rape� is extreme. But consider what was said about Mary Katherine Ham:
You get this one pregnant, she stays pregnant. Karma�s a b****, isn�t it?
Hot Air has another segment of this little gem:
Obama promised us the dream of post-partisanship�a cuckoo land where party affiliation and factional animosity were forgotten. Turn on cable news or open any newspaper, however, and you�ll quickly discover that the dream has yet to materialize. But there is a way to reach across the aisle without letting principles fall by the wayside. We speak, naturally, of the hate [f**k]. We may despise everything these women represent, but goddammit they�re hot. Let the healing begin.
Naturally, a lot of people (mostly conservative) are upset by this kind of talk. Me, I say, "put up or shut up." Honestly, do you really think a pansy guy like this Guy Cimbalo would have the courage to get in a room with, much less actually rape any of these conservative women?
Liberal men who write for Playboy or any other such liberal publication are by their very profession, wimps. They have no integrity, courage or balls. They say these things because they are used to getting away with it, as their publications and the milieu of people they run with encourage it. Put them in a room alone with a conservative woman and they would be scared shitless. I've seen the way these guys operate. It's pathetic and only works if they have a pack of other wimps to back them up. Once a conservative woman cut them down to the core, they would leave with their little tails between their legs and go back to the only place where they feel empowered: the liberal media world that tells them that they champion the good and the just, when in their heart of hearts, they know what they are: cowards.
Womenomics--the slow slide to socialism
I read a bit of a new book called Womenomics: Write Your Own Rules for Success,
started to post on it and realized I couldn't stomach it, and dropped it off at my local bookstore for someone more hardy to digest. There were a number of points I wanted to make about it, mainly that the female authors thought it a good thing for women to cut their workweek and just kick back and live the life they wanted. "If everyone decides to do this, what happens to US productivity," I thought, "and why is it that work is seen as distastefull unless one can set their own hours, have free access to childcare and a loving boss?" It's called a JOB, for goodness sakes. But, in the interest of staying calm, I did not blog about these things but I did see that Vox Day had a good post on the book and I will turn it over to him:
I fear that Womenomics is just a buzzword for a slow descent into becoming like France, where the unemployment is high and the vacations are generous. Is this really better?
started to post on it and realized I couldn't stomach it, and dropped it off at my local bookstore for someone more hardy to digest. There were a number of points I wanted to make about it, mainly that the female authors thought it a good thing for women to cut their workweek and just kick back and live the life they wanted. "If everyone decides to do this, what happens to US productivity," I thought, "and why is it that work is seen as distastefull unless one can set their own hours, have free access to childcare and a loving boss?" It's called a JOB, for goodness sakes. But, in the interest of staying calm, I did not blog about these things but I did see that Vox Day had a good post on the book and I will turn it over to him: The problem with this book, I suspect, is that the usual female fascism will likely rear its incoherent but lushly-maned head and demand that everyone do less work so as not to make working women look bad by comparison, thereby transforming what could be a reasonable call for workers to examine their individual priorities into yet another justification for government intervention into the workplace.
I fear that Womenomics is just a buzzword for a slow descent into becoming like France, where the unemployment is high and the vacations are generous. Is this really better?
What happened to three hots and a cot?
It turns out that there may only be two hot meals or less food on some days in prison due to cutbacks:
I have seen nursing homes where people started becoming angry and demoralized when the food quality went down, what will it do to prisoners? On the other hand, they are well... prisoners and states are cutting back in many other areas. What do you think? Should states cut back on food for prisoners?
The recession is hitting home for inmates, too: Some cash-strapped states are taking aim at prison menus.
Georgia prisoners already didn't get lunch on the weekends, and the Department of Corrections recently eliminated the midday meal on Fridays, too. Ohio may drop weekend breakfasts and offer brunch instead. Other states are cutting back on milk and fresh fruit.
Officials say prisoners are still getting enough calories, but family members and critics say the changes could make prisoners irritable and food a valuable commodity, increasing the possibility of violence....
Other states have kept three meals but are scaling back menus. Earlier this month, Alabama reduced the milk and fresh fruit it serves to save $700,000. Alabama inmates now receive an apple or an orange once a week, down from twice a week. Milk has been reduced from seven servings per week to three. Tennessee has also cut back on milk portions for men - from two servings a day to one - to save $600,000.
Gordon Crews, a professor at Marshall University in West Virginia, wrote a book looking at correctional violence and said historically there have been links between food and problems behind bars. He pointed to a February riot at the Reeves County Detention Center in Texas caused in part by poor food quality.
"A lot of prisoners will see something like that as some kind of retribution against them or some kind of mistreatment," Crews said. "It'll be something that the correctional staff will pay the price for ... another reason (for inmates) to argue and fight back."
I have seen nursing homes where people started becoming angry and demoralized when the food quality went down, what will it do to prisoners? On the other hand, they are well... prisoners and states are cutting back in many other areas. What do you think? Should states cut back on food for prisoners?
Facing a lay-off? You're not alone. Tony Chen at Hospital Impact Blog has just been laid off from his job as a hospital administrator and has some helpful thoughts.
Low-rise pants: What's the verdict?
Neo-Neocon is sick of low-rise pants. I feel the same. I have a great pair of jeans I bought recently but they are (unfortunately) low-rise which means I have to wear long shirts with them. Do men like this style? I don't hear many say they do--but maybe they're too busy looking to say much. Did you ever think that you would spend this much time looking at strange women's thongs or is this a good thing?
Ask Dr. Helen on PJTV: From Patriarch to Patsy
I interview Toby Young, British journalist and author of How to Lose Friends and Alienate People 
on his WSJ article, "From Patriarch to Patsy." He talks about the fear that British men have of fighting back against sexism (he states some lose their careers, can't get work, and face other hardships) and why women think it's okay to treat men like the household help. Many of my readers were incensed by this article and had some pretty strong opinions. So do I. Join us for this very important conversation.
You can watch the show here.
on his WSJ article, "From Patriarch to Patsy." He talks about the fear that British men have of fighting back against sexism (he states some lose their careers, can't get work, and face other hardships) and why women think it's okay to treat men like the household help. Many of my readers were incensed by this article and had some pretty strong opinions. So do I. Join us for this very important conversation.You can watch the show here.
More Atlas Shrugged
Amity Shlaes: "Rand's Atlas is shrugging with a growing load":
But "Atlas Shrugged"
Back Ache
You get the feeling plenty of Atlases are shrugging these days, in part because their tax burden is getting heavier. It�s interesting to compare sales of �Atlas Shrugged,� provided by the Ayn Rand Institute, to Internal Revenue Service distribution tables.
In 1986, a year when �Atlas Shrugged� sold between 60,000 and 80,000 copies, the top 1 percent of earners paid 26 percent of the income tax. By 2000, that 1 percent was paying 37 percent, and �Atlas Shrugged� sales were at 120,000. By 2006, the top 1 percent carried 40 percent of the burden.
Yet President Barack Obama has made it clear he would like to see the rich pay a greater share. Anyone irked at that prospect can find consolation in Rand�s fantasy, in which the most valued professionals evaporate from the work place because of such demands.
John Hawkins at RWN has an interview up with Aaron Klein, author of The Late Great State of Israel: How Enemies Within and Without Threaten the Jewish Nation's Survival.
Commenting on Instapundit
Ann Althouse is guest blogging at Instapundit and has enabled comments on one post. Many people seemed surprised to be commenting there but what I am most surprised about is that for the first 400 comments, there is no anger, mudslinging or trolling. It is a testament to Glenn's fine readers or maybe the shock just hasn't set in yet.
Two soldiers shot
I just saw this on Breitbart.com:
There is also a NYT's piece on the story here.
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Police in Little Rock, Ark., say a man who likely had "political and religious motives" shot two new Army soldiers, killing one, at a military recruiting center.
Police Chief Stuart Thomas identified the victim who died as 24-year-old William Long of Conway. He and the second soldier, both wearing fatigues, had recently completed basic training and volunteered to help attract others to the military.
The suspect pulled up a black vehicle outside the Army-Navy recruiting office in west Little Rock and fired shots about 10:30 a.m.
There is also a NYT's piece on the story here.
Shroud of Secrecy of the DSM-V
I saw this article linked by Ann Althouse (guestblogging at Instapundit) on the new DSM-V which, apparently has a number of new diagnoses added to it. For those of you not familiar with the DSM, it is the mental health bible used to make diagnoses of mental disorders. The new diagnoses being considered for inclusion in the DSM-V range from sex addiction to internet addiction. There are a number of critics of the way that mental health professionals diagnose these disorders:
While I think that many of the diagnoses in the DSM are useful at helping mental health professionals agree on what a cluster of behavioral symptoms mean and what they should be called, I also agree that much of "normal behavior" is pathologized. But my main concern is the secrecy of the DSM-V--only a group of psychiatrists and one psychologist are allowed to oversee the revision and they have been asked to sign confidentiality agreements. Psychologists are up in arms about being excluded from the process but a more pressing concern is that a small group of psychiatrists is making decisions about what is normal vs. abnormal behavior.
Shouldn't there be more oversight than this? Why the need to be so secret about what is being put in this manual? Why not have a more diverse group of mental health experts and others involved? I remember when we talked with APA past president Nicholas Cummings about how diagnoses were chosen for the DSM--apparently some are just reached by consensus. Huh, no research, just a decision based on a group of potentially PC or biased individuals without the research to back it up? What kind of science is that? I am started to think Szasz has a point.
Even though the APA asked the psychiatrists working on the manual�s revision to sign a nondisclosure agreement, leaked proposed additions to the new version have already stirred debate. �Psychiatrists manufacture mental diagnoses the way the Vatican manufactures saints,� says Dr. Thomas Szasz, an outspoken critic of modern psychiatry and author of Psychiatry: The Science of Lies.This view may be extreme, but some of the new �mental illnesses� under consideration for the new edition nonetheless sound a little�crazy. Here are eight you may already be suffering from, whether you knew it or not.
While I think that many of the diagnoses in the DSM are useful at helping mental health professionals agree on what a cluster of behavioral symptoms mean and what they should be called, I also agree that much of "normal behavior" is pathologized. But my main concern is the secrecy of the DSM-V--only a group of psychiatrists and one psychologist are allowed to oversee the revision and they have been asked to sign confidentiality agreements. Psychologists are up in arms about being excluded from the process but a more pressing concern is that a small group of psychiatrists is making decisions about what is normal vs. abnormal behavior.
Shouldn't there be more oversight than this? Why the need to be so secret about what is being put in this manual? Why not have a more diverse group of mental health experts and others involved? I remember when we talked with APA past president Nicholas Cummings about how diagnoses were chosen for the DSM--apparently some are just reached by consensus. Huh, no research, just a decision based on a group of potentially PC or biased individuals without the research to back it up? What kind of science is that? I am started to think Szasz has a point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)