We've had this argument before. I suspect that there are more moderates who speak out against the extremists than we hear about, since it's not the sort of thing that the media cares to cover. I know, e.g., that a Spanish cleric has issued a fatwa against Osama bin Laden. But I also don't think that they have any particular obligation to speak out, much like Democrats have no particular obligation to disavow Robert Byrd, and Republicans have no particular obligation to disavow David Duke.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Surprisingly, that makes two of us.

Doesn't the number seem high to you?

The media interviews 50 muslims, all of whom condemn the bombings. You ssee one or two of those interviews, in very short clips, buried in the story. BUT, that one imbecile Muslim... that one rebellious shit-for-brains 19 year old who wants to give society the middle finger by applauding the bombings... he gets put on a loop and played over and over.

Last night, Carl Bernstien was blathering on Fox about how the media was the last honest outpost in society, and how it must be protected. He's right, but the fucking media needs to stop ccreating chaos by focusing on the virulent minority of idiots in every story. A foolish young muslim who doesn't know any better might think its cool or popular to join jihad by watching these media misrepresentations.

The media needs to stop fanning the flames.

This notion that they are on the sidelines is a myth. There is a civil war among competing versions of Islam going on right now, and the fundamentalists are attacking us for advantage in that war. The moderates control the governments of countries like Egypt and Jordan, and we support them. There is violence in these coutries between these factions, not that we pay much attention if it doesn't involve Westerners.

breaking.....
 

I disgaree. If you view things over the long term, its clear the status quo remains. Thats all checks and balances were designed to do.

People seem to expect the govt to create results. That is not what the Founders intended at all. Thats what Marx intended. The Govt is merely the manager of the basic infrastructure of rules that govern society. Viewing it as an agent of change which should proactively tinker in peoples' lives is missing the whole point of what our Republic is about.

I think you mean that the media should report the news, not make it. Unfortunately, that doesn't promote market share so we will not see it anytime soon.

On a related point, does anyone actually think reporters should be entitled to a reporter/source privilge? I find it ridiculous, but maybe others can pursuade me.

Unfortunately, the moderates aren't winning. Thats why we have to back their policies up with strongmen like Mubarrak.

Egypt is a time bomb. Mubarrak is 76. No successor yet ordained except a ne'er do well son. Yikes.

The problem with the Muslim civil war is the moderates can't promise the jihadis anything. They have no money to offer the jihadis in place of their idiot religious beliefs. The jihadis are like LA gangs in the 80s. They figure "I can't get money by joining society, so I have to join a gang."

Go read the london papers from yesterday and this morning. I get the sense that they're trying to find those outspoken moderates you mention - but they're not finding them.

I don't think this means that they all support the bombings - but they're under some severe pressure from the fanatic part of their social group to not condemn the Islamofacists.

Not unless it also extends to me, in my role as a poster on an internet board.

So moderate muslims are in the same predicament as moderate republican politicians?

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

FWIW, I recall another way to calculate it - one abortion for every 2.3 (I think) live births. I am not willing to expend the effort to even do back of the envelope calculations, but my gut is that the 5% number doesn't sound high.

Now you can have fun figuring out what the fact that women are fertile for, on average, about 25 years (15-40) means if 5% of them are having abortions each year. My vague recollection is hearing that (after controlling for repeat customers) somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of all women in America have had or will have an abortion at some point. I have no frickin' clue how they calculate that, though it seems most interesting to me in what it says about how many women are, in fact, repeat customers.

BR(I'd also love to see regressions of those repeats for (i) education, (ii) income and (iii) religious affiliation)C

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I have one sure fire way to lower the # of abortions - federally subsidized birth control and more sex education.

Why aren't those policies pushed? Who's holding them back. Aren't we all agreed that we wanted less abortions? If so, what reason on earth would we have not to implement policies which absolutely achieve that result?

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

'Cuz then we'd have to admit that kids/unmarried persons actually do have sex and there's not much we can do to stop it.

Interesting RP history here: http://slate.msn.com/id/2093187

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I am puzzled by people who think that facts will somehow magically not exist if they simply refuse to acknowledge them. Is there a name for that psychiatric condition? It has to be a mental health malady of a sort. We follow policies borne of psychiatric disorders? What if we passed a law that said that any policy deemed to be based on a psychiatrically unsound belief could not enacted into law. I wonder if that might be a good start to curing some issues. I'd at least like to hear the opposition...

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

What are you smoking? Do you really think that a lack of birth control and sex education is the reason? I would bet that the rate of abortions is highest in large cities, which are nearly all liberal and in which both birth control and sex ed is plentiful.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

And where there are more abortion clinics?

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Sheesh, a number of years ago, my health plan (which was otherwise a good one) wouldn't even cover birth control. Pregnancy, yes, abortion, yes, birth control, no. Stupidity.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I would be willing to make the same bet on a per capita basis.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

After adjusting for income and proportion of children who come from families with both parents, one parent, or no parent (raised by other relative/foster child/in an institution)? And I think you underestimate what goes on in rural communities. Hell, you probably think that most TANF money goes to cities . . .

I think Slave put the koolaid in your water supply on this one.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Whiff. For some women in rural, isolated areas, abortion really isn't an option.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Or, abortions that are going to be done by medical personnel and get recorded as such aren't an option.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Make all the adjustments you want for things of this nature. I bet it isn't even close.

Look, I'm not arguing for or against abortion, so you can step down from your dogmatic soapbox. The only thing I am arguing is that federally funded birth control and more sex ed will have little effect on the numbers.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Public schools can't teach kids to be literate or to add 1+1. Why have them move into other areas? Enough of my tax dollars already go down the drain (and add that to the $15K per kid I have to spend for private school to make up for the failure of he public school, thanks, btw, to the destruction of the same by the Teacher's Unions (hi Sidd!)).

Given my 103 IQ, on the internet, I may be more intelligent than the average person, but is there really a crisis of knowledge that sex=babies in kids age 11 and above? In my day there wasn't-although I was a youth during the height of the sexual revolution, although not as old as Bilmore (hi Wonk!), but maybe the MTV culture has blurred the understanding and kids today believe in the stork.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I'm having difficulty following your logic, and if you followed the FB more closely, you'd know that I'm Mensa-qualified (though still dumbest).

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

That's probably right. Compare New York City and DC to their surrounding areas.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr.../s309a1t3a.gif

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr.../s309a1t3b.gif

Source: MMWR Abortion Surveillance for 2001 (released November 2004)

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Not so easy to blow off, you know. You're adjusting for shit like:

* Market conditions in which folks choose not to set up rural areas
* State laws that make abortions more difficult
* Proximity of those states to other states where pregnant women seeking an abortion are able to pursue the "Hello option" and drive to a more receptive jurisdiction
* Probably other factors that aren't occuring to me now.

That would skew the per capital data significantly, I imagine, and I also imagine that studies aren't likely to follow all of that stuff, so you're probably safe with your bet in that neither you nor Shifty can be easily proven right.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

The table doesn't address availability of birth control and sex ed, or availability of abortion in rural areas. club's arguing that these have no or little effect. I beg to differ.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I wasn't saying that. I was just saying that his numbers probably are right.

If Robert Byrd was saying the klan is the way of the Democratic party (instead of its more pernicious ways of hurting minortiy groups) would it be on teddy or one of them to say no? there are clerics saying jihad is a-okay. It seems to me that other clerics should be saying soemthing contrary- especially if* the vast majority of the group doesn't support the bombings.


*big if- huh?

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

This is about Clinton ignoring al Queda for the late 90s?

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I don't get why the number for Florida is a few hundred in the left column but then for "occurrence" in the right column it jumps to tens of thousands. Are 400 women getting repeat abortions, like once every 3 hours, during their childbearing years?

Math is hard.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Or, in your case, availability of sheep, and in your sister's case, availabilty of donkeys.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

He also ignored Terri Shiavo during this time.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

and hillary.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Sure the numbers are higher, but that doesn't address the point he was making - i.e., bc and sex ed have no impact on rates of abortion.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

The first column is by residence and the second is by occurance. Florida did not provide much data on residents obtaining abortions, but they did provide information for the total number of abortions performed in the state.

Club will note that 56% of the abortions in DC were for out-of-state residents, leading some credence to Shape Shifter and gatti's points that abortions are more readily available in urban areas.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Don't you think that free birthcontrol (e.g., via planned parenthood) and sex education is far more prevalent in the big cities?

Look, I'm not looking at this in a vacuum. I went to public school in LA and both were as prevalent as silicon down there. It simply didn't matter. What I think you are implicitly saying on the federal funding side and the education is that poor, uneducated people have more abortions, which is absolutely untrue. My guess is that the rate for middle class educated women is at least as high if not higher.

As I said before, this is a question of needing to instill more responsibility, not birth control or education. And that starts at home.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

Fortunately, there were readily available sheeps and donkeys.

Das anti-Kapitalists!
 

I would argue that birth control and education are connected to responsibility somehow. Are you celibate?