The Vice-Presidential Debate

While it certainly isn't saying much, Palin did do better than I expected; her machine gun fire delivery ALMOST masked the vacuousness of her statements. She was helped along by a format change, pushed through by Republicans, that limited both answer time and talk between the candidates (forgive me for misunderstanding what a 'debate' was). It was clear, however, that she was delivering canned answers only partially related to the questions, triggered by keywords. She herself, hoping to dispel criticism, addressed this early on, saying, (roughly) "I may not answer the questions the way Biden or the moderator want them to be...but I'm gonna tell you about my background." This turned out to be the most honest statement she made all night, surpassing "How long have I been at this? Five weeks?"

It was clear who her target audience was--she never failed to mention "Joe six-pack and hockey moms," and I laughed when she said, "main streeters like me." I had to gasp for air when, with blatant disregard for conservative talking points, she made a point with which I agreed: that predatory lending practices were largely responsible for the financial meltdown we're currently experiencing. Then again, you don't get far in politics telling people that the situation they are in is their fault.

Brushing aside the irony of a Neo-Con in training saying, "Patriotic is saying, 'Government, you're the problem'" (which, at least during the Bush years, would make me the most patriotic person on the planet), I have to note, as others have, that when you elect people who believe that government is inherently ineffective, you cannot be shocked when you get leaders who are incapable of governing.

Biden, for his part, did very well, though he was seldom able to mask his incredulity at some of Palin's remarks (his facial expressions were priceless). While he occasionally dove into wonkish detail, he hit his stride, hammering into the minds of voters the similarities between Bush and McCain. I particularly liked the way he couched the taxation of medical benefits under McCain's health care plan, although soon after he fumbled on the issue of tax shelters. He truly shone comparing an unstable Pakistan to a nuclear Iran (and I wholly agree that an unstable Pakistan is more problematic); Palin was clearly out of her league (in everything, but on foreign policy particularly). However, Brendan doesn't like it when politicians refer to themselves in the third person, as in "Nobody is a bigger friend to Israel than Joe Biden."

For me, maybe because I've read a couple studies on political psychology recently, the major cringe inducing moment in Biden's performance was his quip, (in retort to Palin's "freedom on the march" George Bush regurgitation) "The only thing on the march is Iran to the bomb." The reason I cringed at what might otherwise be a cogent remark is this:

"Threats to mortality have also shown to increase the appeal of the conservative party, even among liberals. For instance, a 2004 study by Florette Cohen and colleagues asked participants whether they preferred George W. Bush or John Kerry in the upcoming presidential election. Some participants first filled out a survey about how watching television made them feel and others filled out a questionnaire about how death made them feel. Those who had been emotionally primed with thoughts of death were strongly in favor of Bush, whereas those who had been primed with thoughts of television were strongly in favor of Kerry. This finding is consistent with what's known as 'terror management theory,' which holds that people use ideology to protect themselves psychologically from paralyzing fears of dying."

Perhaps this is one of the reasons Republicans are so good at winning elections, they know how to frame arguments in ways that trigger the lower, reptilian portions of the brain, precluding reasoned thought.

Still, I'm not sure that the debates will have made much of a difference. From the same link as above, researchers examined the brains of political partisans exposed to contradictory statements made by candidates of their own party. Dubbed "motivated reasoning," the thrust is this:

"Not only were the participants unable to see the contradiction for their own candidate, but the neuroimaging showed that they were regulating their emotional response...Essentially, participants detected the contradiction in their reasoning, but they weren't allowing it to affect their opinion...There's more. Westen showed the participants yet another slide, this one offering a rationale for the earlier contradiction: large areas in the ventral striatum became active, suggesting that participants were rewarding themselves for working through the problem. This combination of the suppressed negative emotions and reward for reaching a biased conclusion 'suggests why motivated judgments may be so difficult to change,' Westen wrote. 'They are doubly reinforcing.'"

I Hate the Governator (Part II)

From American's for Safe Access' blog:

"In a terse statement, the Governor said that employment protection was not the voters’ goal when they approved Proposition 215 in 1996."

While it is a known fact that the authors of the bill intended for employment protections to be part of it, we can be reasonably sure that the voters of California, approving medical marijuana usage, did not intend for the state's patients to be uniformly put out on the street. The choice between one's medicine and employment is a losing choice all around--for the patients themselves and for the populace generally which will shoulder the burden of increased unemployment and the claims on the system it entails.

How the Drug War Harms 'Unborn Children'

"...researchers found that prenatal care providers were not comfortable talking with their patients about dealing with drug and alcohol abuse in spite of routinely mentioning health risks of such behavior on the unborn infant" largely due to the fact that "'Pregnant women are sensitive about being asked about substance abuse and some health-care providers may feel that talking about these issues will compromise the provider-patient relationship, however, the evidence suggests that the benefits of a frank discussion about substance abuse far outweigh the costs to the relationship,' said Dr. Frankel, a medical sociologist."

I wonder why pregnant women may be reluctant to talk about substance abuse with their doctors. Could it be because they fear having their children taken away from them by police?

Of course, the results of this study shouldn't shock any supporters of the Drug Policy Alliance, which already has an excellent write-up on the effects this fear has on the potential health of unborn children and their mothers. Fear of prosecution apparently does not deter drug use, but it does deter them from seeking prenatal care and treatment.

I Hate the Governator

I could not have been more incensed over Governor Schwarzenegger’s senseless veto of AB 2279. AB2279 would have afforded employment protections to the state's medical marijuana patients in the wake of the Ross v. Ragingwire decision, which, ignoring basic principles of federalism and the pleas of the bill's authors, revoked them. The veto was not made on ideological grounds (so far as I can tell), with ASA stating:

"The governor vetoed a record number of bills this year, including some that passed both houses unanimously and had no registered opposition, in apparent retaliation for the legislature’s reluctance to adopt his controversial budget."

The only solace I can find in Schwarzenegger's miserable governorship is that if aliens or robots ever attack, we'll all be safe.

Quote of the Day

This one courtesy of Barbara Ehrenreich:

"This year marks the 160th anniversary of the Communist Manifesto and capitalism, aka 'free enterprise,' seems willing to observe the occasion by dropping dead."

It's Official: Hell Has Frozen Over

I NEVER thought I'd see the day where I was agreeing with Bill O'Reilly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDou01X5d28

Dreaming of a Martian Christmas

The Mars Lander has detected snow from Martian clouds. While the observed snowfall likely vaporized before reaching ground, mineral presence and pH bolster the hypothesis that Mars may have supported life in the past.

“'Is this a habitable zone on Mars? I think we are approaching this hypothesis,' said Peter Smith of the University of Arizona, the lander’s principal investigator."