William Galston talks 2012 election with Daily Kos, by DemFromCT Two Daily Kos/SEIU polls show why Americans Elect failed, by Chris Bowers Billionaire donors drive anti-teacher, pro-testing education reform agenda, by Laura Clawson Injustice and jury selection, by Denise Oliver Velez Mitt Romney is a coward, by brooklynbadboy A conversation with future voters, by Dante Atkins
“Our Court, as long as I've been around, has been in many ways our nation's most remarkable institution,” Mondale said. “It has been bipartisan, we've had great judges with a lot of vision. Without it, we wouldn't have civil rights, we wouldn't have so many things that have made America more open, more fair, more trustworthy. Now it's become a kind of harsh, partisan institution. You have 'Citizens United,' you have the Florida case, you have some real bummers coming up here. I really worry about what it'll do to the country. I've been around once during the worst of the Vietnam War when I really began to worry whether this place was going to blow up, whether the center would hold. We're nowhere near that now. But don't toy with that. Always try to act in a way that sustains trust, public trust. It's hard to explain but what makes us strong as a nation, fundamentally, is that people trust the system. And I don't think we should keep playing with that like we are now.”
Dr. [Robert] Spitzer in no way implied in the study that being gay was a choice, or that it was possible for anyone who wanted to change to do so in therapy. But that didn’t stop socially conservative groups from citing the paper in support of just those points, according to Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, a nonprofit that fights antigay bias. [...] “You know, it’s the only regret I have; the only professional one,” Dr. Spitzer said of the study, near the end of a long interview. “And I think, in the history of psychiatry, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a scientist write a letter saying that the data were all there but were totally misinterpreted. Who admitted that and who apologized to his readers.”
“You know, it’s the only regret I have; the only professional one,” Dr. Spitzer said of the study, near the end of a long interview. “And I think, in the history of psychiatry, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a scientist write a letter saying that the data were all there but were totally misinterpreted. Who admitted that and who apologized to his readers.”
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on my parahippocampal gyrus. Scientists at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute have found that suspicion resides in two distinct regions of the brain: the amygdala, which plays a central role in processing fear and emotional memories, and the parahippocampal gyrus, which is associated with declarative memory and the recognition of scenes. "We wondered how individuals assess the credibility of other people in simple social interactions," said Read Montague, director of the Human Neuroimaging Laboratory and the Computational Psychiatry Unit at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute, who led the study. "We found a strong correlation between the amygdala and a baseline level of distrust, which may be based on a person's beliefs about the trustworthiness of other people in general, his or her emotional state, and the situation at hand. What surprised us, though, is that when other people's behavior aroused suspicion, the parahippocampal gyrus lit up, acting like an inborn lie detector."
"We wondered how individuals assess the credibility of other people in simple social interactions," said Read Montague, director of the Human Neuroimaging Laboratory and the Computational Psychiatry Unit at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute, who led the study. "We found a strong correlation between the amygdala and a baseline level of distrust, which may be based on a person's beliefs about the trustworthiness of other people in general, his or her emotional state, and the situation at hand. What surprised us, though, is that when other people's behavior aroused suspicion, the parahippocampal gyrus lit up, acting like an inborn lie detector."
It's impossible to calculate exactly how black voters came down on Amendment 1, because there was no exit polling and voting precincts are rarely single-race. What is clear is that urban voters opposed the amendment; rural ones supported it; and that division cut cleanly across the color line. In each of North Carolina's five largest cities, voters in majority-black precincts rejected the measure: Charlotte (52 percent), Raleigh (51 percent), Greensboro (54 percent), Winston-Salem (55 percent), and Durham (65 percent). Durham's results were dramatic: Not a single majority-black precinct supported the amendment. Several crushed it by margins of 3-to-1 and even 4-to-1.
In each of North Carolina's five largest cities, voters in majority-black precincts rejected the measure: Charlotte (52 percent), Raleigh (51 percent), Greensboro (54 percent), Winston-Salem (55 percent), and Durham (65 percent). Durham's results were dramatic: Not a single majority-black precinct supported the amendment. Several crushed it by margins of 3-to-1 and even 4-to-1.
A federal district court in New York has ruled that the federal government cannot enforce the domestic military detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 because it unconstitutionally infringes on the rights of journalists and activists to associate with people the government might consider terrorists—exposing them to arrest and indefinite detention without a trial. “This court is acutely aware that preliminarily enjoining an act of Congress must be done with great caution,” wrote U.S. District Judge Katherine B. Forrest, in a 68-page decision handed down on Wednesday. “However, it is the responsibility of our judicial system to protect the public from acts of Congress which infringe upon constitutional rights.”
“This court is acutely aware that preliminarily enjoining an act of Congress must be done with great caution,” wrote U.S. District Judge Katherine B. Forrest, in a 68-page decision handed down on Wednesday. “However, it is the responsibility of our judicial system to protect the public from acts of Congress which infringe upon constitutional rights.”