TomDispatch

TomDispatch

The New York Review of Books: The Secret Way to War

The New York Review of Books: The Secret Way to War: "The aide said that guys like me [i.e., reporters and commentators] were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'[6]"

Joseph Goebbels, made the same point but rather more directly:

There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be "the man in the street." Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.

^[6] See Ron Suskind, "Without a Doubt," The New York Times Magazine, October 17, 2004.

Daily Kos: Let's Play: Follow The Money

Daily Kos: Let's Play: Follow The Money: "Let's Play: Follow The Money

Earlier, we noted that Sue Kelly raises more campaign cash from PACs than she does from people, and far more than she does from actual constituents here in the 19th Congressional District. Wouldn't you just love to know what kind of PACs she takes money from, and how she's helped their pet causes?

So would we, so it's time to play, Follow The Money, or, Who's Sue's Daddy?'

Here are the rules, and if we all play nice, we can all be winners:"

A Young Bush Appointee Resigns His Post at NASA - New York Times

A Young Bush Appointee Resigns His Post at NASA - New York Times: "George C. Deutsch, the young presidential appointee at NASA who told public affairs workers to limit reporters' access to a top climate scientist and told a Web designer to add the word 'theory' at every mention of the Big Bang, resigned yesterday, agency officials said.

Mr. Deutsch's resignation came on the same day that officials at Texas A&M University confirmed that he did not graduate from there, as his résumé on file at the agency asserted.

Officials at NASA headquarters declined to discuss the reason for the resignation.

"Under NASA policy, it is inappropriate to discuss personnel matters," said Dean Acosta, the deputy assistant administrator for public affairs and Mr. Deutsch's boss.

The resignation came as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was preparing to review its policies for communicating science to the public. The review was ordered Friday by Michael D. Griffin, the NASA administrator, after a week in which many agency scientists and midlevel public affairs officials described to The New York Times instances in which they said political pressure was applied to limit or flavor discussions of topics uncomfortable to the Bush administration, particularly global warming."

86 Evangelical Leaders Join to Fight Global Warming - New York Times

86 Evangelical Leaders Join to Fight Global Warming - New York Times: "Despite opposition from some of their colleagues, 86 evangelical Christian leaders have decided to back a major initiative to fight global warming, saying 'millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors.'"

Study Finds Low-Fat Diet Won't Stop Cancer or Heart Disease - New York Times

Study Finds Low-Fat Diet Won't Stop Cancer or Heart Disease - New York Times: "A lot of observational data show diet matters, but those studies have big flaws and that's why we have to do experiments,' Dr. Freedman said. 'We, the scientific community, tend to go off the deep end giving dietary advice based on pretty flimsy evidence.'

Dr. Jules Hirsch, physician in chief emeritus at Rockefeller University, agreed. 'These studies are revolutionary,' he said. 'They should put a stop to this era of thinking that we have to all the information we need to change the whole national diet and make everybody healthy.'

For decades, there has been a widespread belief that what you eat — the composition of the diet — determines how likely you are to get a chronic disease. But it has been hard to prove. Studies of dietary fiber and colon cancer failed to find that fiber was protective. Studies of vitamins thought to protect against cancer failed to show an effect. Gradually, an increasing number of cancer researchers began questioning the dietary fat-cancer hypothesis, but it has retained a hold on the public imagination.

Some medical experts said they expected that the results would be met with disbelief. The conclusion, after all, was that the composition of women's diets had no appreciable effect on their health.

That goes against deeply ingrained notions, Dr. Libby said. "Nothing fascinates the American public so much as the notion that what you eat rather than how much you eat affects your health," he said.

But Dr. Thun of the American Cancer Society said that now, with results that he describes as "completely null over the eight-year follow-up for both cancers and heart disease," his group has no plans to suggest that low-fat diets are going to protect against cancer.
But the overall message, said. Barbara Howard, an epidemiologist at Medstar Research Institute, a nonprofit hospital group and a principal investigator in the federal study, was clear. "We are not going to reverse any of the chronic diseases in this country by changing the composition of the diet," Dr. Howard said. "People are always thinking it's what they ate. They are not looking at how much they ate or that they smoke or that they are sedentary."

State of Delusion - New York Times

State of Delusion - New York Times: "Next Article in Opinion (3 of 9) >
Related Articles

* Bush Will Use Address to Focus on Alternative Fuels (January 31, 2006)
* Summing Up the Union, and in the Boss's Words (January 30, 2006)
* Times Select Content WHITE HOUSE LETTER; The Man Who Puts Words in the President's Mouth Defends His Style (January 17, 2005)
* Times Select Content In World Where Talk Doesn't Come Cheap, Former Officials Are Finding Lucrative Careers (March 10, 2004)

Related Searches

* Bush, George W
* Speeches and Statements

Inside NYTimes.com
The Carpetbagger
in Times Square

36 Hours
in Naples, Fla.
Celebrating
FDR's Legacy
It's Halftime and
They Like It
Dowd: Didn't See It Coming, Again

"

The Nation of the Future - New York Times

The Nation of the Future - New York Times: "At least 22 out of the top 30 universities in the world are American. More foreign students come to American universities now than before 9/11."

The Nation of the Future - New York Times

The Nation of the Future - New York Times: "Is the United States becoming a less important player in the world economy? Not yet. In 1971, the U.S. economy accounted for 30.52 percent of the world's G.D.P. Since then, we've seen the rise of Japan, China, India and the Asian tigers. The U.S. now accounts for 30.74 percent of world G.D.P., a slightly higher figure.

What about the shortage of scientists and engineers? Vastly overblown. According to Duke School of Engineering researchers, the U.S. produces more engineers per capita than China or India. According to The Wall Street Journal, firms with engineering openings find themselves flooded with résumés. Unemployment rates for scientists and engineers are no lower than for other professions, and in some specialties, such as electrical engineering, they are notably higher.

Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation told The Wall Street Journal last November, 'No one I know who has looked at the data with an open mind has been able to find any sign of a current shortage.' The G.A.O., the RAND Corporation and many other researchers have picked apart the quickie studies that warn of a science and engineering gap. 'We did not find evidence that such shortages have existed at least since 1990, nor that they are on the horizon,' the RAND report concluded."

Daily Kos: Middle Class is Circling the Bowl

Daily Kos: Middle Class is Circling the Bowl: "Health insurance premiums are actually increasing faster. For the years 2000-2004, the respective annual increases in insurance premiums were 8.2%, 10.9%, 12.9%, 13.9% and 11.2%. In 2004, average annual single payer insurance premiums were $3,695 and average annual family premiums were $9,950. The three-year national median income for the years 2002-2004 was 44,473, meaning the average health insurance coverage for a single adult is 8.3% of income and average health insurance coverage for an adult is 22% of median national income. Employers and employees typically share health insurance payments, giving the middle class some breathing room. But not much. And considering the percentage increase in insurance premiums, stagnating wages, and the increased use of high-deductible policies, the middle class income doesn't stand much of a chance."

Think Progress

Think Progress: "FACT — POVERTY RATES HAVE INCREAED UNDER BUSH: The poverty rate has risen each year since 2001, with 12.7 percent of the population now living in poverty. African-American poverty has risen from 22.7 percent in 2001 to 24.7 percent in 2004, and child poverty has gone from 16.3 percent in 2001 to 17.8 percent (1.3 million children under the age of 18). [U.S. Census Bureau, Aug. 2005, Tables B-1 and B-2]

FACT — BUSH TAX CUTS TARGETED AT HIGH-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS: The tax bills enacted since 2001 “have helped high-income households far more than other households,” according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Households with incomes exceeding $1 million have received average tax cuts of $103,000, “an increase of 5.4 percent in their after-tax income.” But in 2005, the bottom fifth of households “will receive an average combined tax cut of $18 from these bills, raising their after-tax income by 0.3 percent.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 10/17/05]"