ha! This post did not end up where I intended it to. Apologies.

Posted at June 30, 2008 4:41 PM in response to Obama's Been Trying to Tell You

These folks are misinterpreting the numbers to advance their agenda. As jsfox mentions, you have to compare similar job functions and titles when considering pay. It's disingenuous to claim that women receive lower pay than men simply because there are a couple of very high earners with the campaign who are male. I would be concerned if you had, say, a male staff assistant or two who made more than the other (female) staff assistants.

What you have provided in your link is a very poor analysis of the data. If you would like to offer a more sound analysis here, in an attempt to defend your position, we certainly welcome that. What you have posted/linked is just silliness, and I am pretty sure you know that.

Posted at June 30, 2008 3:58 PM in response to Obama’s for Equal Pay, Yet Pays Female Staffers Less Than Males

I wish more posters could examine their tendencies in such an honest way. Highly recommended. We all need to look at ourselves critically and productively like this. It will help us focus and bring some much needed perspective back into our discourse.

Posted at June 30, 2008 9:46 AM in response to A Week of Lessons About Politics

cute. (;

Posted at June 30, 2008 9:36 AM in response to Obama's Been Trying to Tell You

"Germane," not "germaine." I promise that I am not trying to be a dick. It's just one of those little things that drives me nuts. I can't just ignore it.

I apologize.

Posted at June 27, 2008 10:15 AM in response to Obama's Been Trying to Tell You

The phrase "thrown under the bus" has "jumped the shark."

Much like the phrase "jumped the shark."

Posted at June 25, 2008 4:42 PM in response to Disappointed in Barack

Wow. Just, wow.

Posted at June 25, 2008 1:05 PM in response to Nader To Obama: You Want To Talk White?

Folks are warming up to doing monetary business on the Internet. It's obvious to me that more and more donors will give money through the Internet; I wouldn't be surprised if the next presidential election was DOMINATED by internet contributions, for all candidates involved. It's just so much simpler than writing a check, addressing an envelope, and licking a stamp. Not that those things are really all that difficult, but the Internet is THE WAY lots of people do business now.

Posted at June 25, 2008 11:49 AM in response to Magical Internet Money Power

Have you heard anything from Shane Claiborne? I heard him on NPR when he was speaking as part of some kind of Evangelical panel. Interesting stuff. This type of Evangelical seems closer to the heart of what Jesus was trying to do, IMO.

(This is not to distract from Scientific's post, because I think it's a great discusssion. I apologize for being a little bit off-topic. Always love your posts, Scientific.)

Posted at June 25, 2008 11:42 AM in response to Reap what you sow.

It's very interesting how our vocabularies differ. Often, when I meet someone who says, "I am pro-life if I were put in the situation, but I am pro-choice when it comes to someone else's decision," I respond, "That means you are pro-choice! That is what pro-choice is all about!"

Like I said at the start, it's a communication issue. Often, we behave as if the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" are two well-defined and static categories that everyone agrees about the meaning of. It's just not the case. When you say "pro-life" or "pro-choice," you may not mean the same thing I mean or the same thing Randall Terry means. It's the age-old problem of labeling and categorizing a diverse group of people using one blanket term (see: feminist).

Thanks for your post. I imagine there are a lot of people out there who are in the same boat: personally opposing abortion and choosing to reject it, but respecting the personal decisions and rights of others.

Posted at June 25, 2008 11:10 AM in response to Abortion