Friday, November 21, 2008

What Are We Running Away From?
I know but won't tell, so there.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Texas grand jury indicts Cheney, Gonzales of crime

A grand jury in South Texas indicted U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and former attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Tuesday for "organized criminal activity" related to alleged abuse of inmates in private prisons.
The grand jury in Willacy County, in the Rio Grande Valley near the U.S.-Mexico border, said Cheney is "profiteering from depriving human beings of their liberty," according to a copy of the indictment obtained by Reuters.
The indictment cites a "money trail" of Cheney's ownership in prison-related enterprises including the Vanguard Group, which owns an interest in private prisons in south Texas.
Former attorney general Gonzales used his position to "stop the investigations as to the wrong doings" into assaults in county prisons, the indictment said.

Americans Want Racial Equality, Creme Filling

PRINCETON, NJ—According to a poll released Tuesday by Princeton University's Institute For Social Research, racial equality and creme filling rank at the top of U.S. citizens' wish lists
The comprehensive five-year study found that 64 percent of Americans favor greater racial equality in all sectors of American life, contending that, nearly 35 years after the signing of the Civil Rights Act, blacks still suffer discrimination in many areas.
The poll also found that 86 percent of U.S. citizens desire creme filling, and would like to see its presence increased in everyday American life

Study: Casual Sex Only Rewarding For First Few Decades

ARLINGTON, VA—An alarming new study published in the International Journal of Sexual Health reveals that casual sex, the practice of engaging in frequent, spontaneous sexual encounters with new and exciting partners, may only provide unimaginable pleasure and heart-pounding exhilaration for, at most, 25 to 30 years.

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Carroll doesn't understand how BCS works, thinks it 'stinks'

"I think it stinks. I don't think it's the way it should be. But all we can do is keep talking about it. "
Absolutely God Damn right.

Move over Barney, new dog moving into White House

Barack Obama's two daughters had another reason to high-five their dad's election to the presidency Tuesday night: they're getting a puppy.
I hope to God it isn't a Beagle, they're horrible.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Halleluja!

Well God, I guess I owe you one.

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

Thoughts on Dr. Stanley Milgram's Experiment

Milgram, a psychologist at Yale University, conducted a study focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II, Nuremberg War Criminal trials. Their defense often was based on "obedience" - - that they were just following orders of their superiors.
In the experiment, so-called "teachers" (who were actually the unknowing subjects of the experiment) were recruited by Milgram. They were asked administer an electric shock of increasing intensity to a "learner" for each mistake he made during the experiment. The fictitious story given to these "teachers" was that the experiment was exploring effects of punishment (for incorrect responses) on learning behavior. The "teacher" was not aware that the "learner" in the study was actually an actor - - merely indicating discomfort as the "teacher" increased the electric shocks.
When the "teacher" asked whether increased shocks should be given he/she was verbally encouraged to continue. Sixty percent of the "teachers" obeyed orders to punish the learner to the very end of the 450-volt scale! No subject stopped before reaching 300 volts!
At times, the worried "teachers" questioned the experimenter, asking who was responsible for any harmful effects resulting from shocking the learner at such a high level. Upon receiving the answer that the experimenter assumed full responsibility, teachers seemed to accept the response and continue shocking, even though some were obviously extremely uncomfortable in doing so. The study raised many questions about how the subjects could bring themselves to administer such heavy shocks. More important to our interests are the ethical issues raised by such an experiment itself. What right does a researcher have to expose subjects to such stress? What activities should be and not be allowed in marketing research? Does the search for knowledge always justify such "costs" to subjects? Who should decide such issues?

Monday, November 3, 2008

Saturday, November 1, 2008