The Professor's Notes

Remember the fun we had with that blog, “A Liberal Dose?” I still occasionally visit his site, and this time in reading his post, I felt I had to point out yet again what happens when one checks the sources used in his journalistic misadventure.

In his posting today, November 16th, he writes:

Looks like the feline’s slipped the confines. Now we find out orders for the Abu Ghraib lightstick anal rapes and secret overseas prisons came from none other than…

yup, chimpboy hisself.

Okay–anyone else suspicious? Well, as usual I was, so went and read the story cited from the Washington Post. In that story we find that there are two documents that authorized interrogation. One was signed by the President and the other issued from the Justice Department.

To quote from the article:

The ACLU describes the first as a “directive” signed by Bush governing CIA interrogation methods or allowing the agency to set up detention facilities outside the United States. McPherson describes it as a “memorandum.” In September, Bush confirmed the existence of secret CIA prisons and transferred 14 remaining terrorism suspects from them to Guantanamo Bay.

The second document is an August 2002 legal memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to the CIA general counsel. The ACLU describes it as “specifying interrogation methods that the CIA may use against top al-Qaeda members.” (This document is separate from another widely publicized Justice memo, also issued in August 2002, that narrowed the definition of torture. The Justice Department has since rescinded the latter.)

So I ask you–do you see anything in there that confirms that the President authorized specifically those forms of torture listed in the posting at “A Liberal Dose?” (Remember, he wrote “lightstick anal rapes“) I read through the article quite carefully, and the article makes it quite clear that the only thing confirmed is the existence of the memos. Not the contents. So while we can conclude that perhaps these alleged abuses occured (but even that is yet to be conclusively shown) there remains no evidence that these actions were part of the methods approved by the President.

Alas, these sorts of conclusion jumping activities are going to be more commonplace with Mr Conyers now on the warpath. Perhaps one could argue those on the right have jumped to conclusions without sufficient facts, but it seems to me that emulating that against which you have railed is far from responsible.

Journalists, I thought, were supposed to report facts. Alas, the gentleman at A Liberal Dose doesn’t seem to agree.

The internet is a wonderful thing! I scoured the internet, to see if anyone else has experienced the same problem. While I haven’t found a “large number” of similar incidents, I have found “one.” Interestingly, it’s the same guy whose music I like to use for my various podcasts, Derek K. Miller.

In his post at Inside Home Recording, he writes:

I suspect this is more about the iPod than the TuneTalk, but it’s worth knowing how to stop your recordings from skipping. In summary, defragmenting your iPod by restoring it to factory settings, or otherwise freeing contiguous hard disk space, may help it work better.

Well, I have to agree with his first bit “it’s more about the iPod” since Read the rest of this entry »

Well, today was the first test. I replaced the battery in the Radio Shack microphone, so I know that wasn’t the problem. I figured that the battery should be replaced, regardless, since I apparently had left the switch on since Monday.

I recorded the class, as usual. No problem there. At the end of class it said it recorded 1 hour and 4 minutes. About right. I get home, and move the files over, and BAM! the file is completely dorked up. It starts fine (Sort of) but then starts jumping all around the lecture. When I open the file in Audacity and look at the waveform display, it shows long periods of silence, and when I do play the sections that actually have soundwaves, it has my sentences all jumbled up. (in image, audio on left, and the silence is on the right… and definitely not how the lecture was!)

So I am now left with it being a problem with the iTalk, or a problem with the iPod. Unfortunately, I don’t have another iPod photo that I can use to continue the trouble shooting. I have checked online and haven’t seen anything that would lead me to conclude that it is a problem with the iTalk. Given that it seems to be a problem with the way the data is stored, I am left with the conclusion that it is the iPod.

I welcome any other ideas, or suggestions. I really have enjoyed this technology working, and would hate to lose this capability.

The Professor

I have been recording my lectures this semester, and posting them as podcasts (that is, students can subscribe to them, and have them automatically downloaded). They have been reasonably well received. By that, I mean that many students listen to them, and take advantage of the opportunity to have the lecture available to them to go over again as necessary until they feel they have grasped the material.

In addition, I have been taking the time to record the solutions to the homework questions as tutorials. Once the homework is turned in, I make available an online “screencast”, or video, that not only gives the students the answers to the homework, but explains how the Read the rest of this entry »

My good sparring partner Fleshy posted 10 farcical reasons to vote for Republicans. I recommend you go read them from him.

I had to respond, since some of them are funny (but he actually believes them to be true) and some just factually, and historically, wrong.

My reply is listed below.

Let me cut to the bottom line here: One should not cast one party as being “corrupt” when your house is made of very brittle glass.

================

Fleshy wrote:

” Sorry you found the list skewed and inflammatory. I’d be… well… I’d be amused more than anything else… to listen to you try to defend or refute any of the issues on that list? Go ahead… defend Foley, Haggard, Rumsfeld, DeLay, Abramoff, Taft, Frist, Burns, Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney, Gibbons… need I go on?”

Actually, I wouldn’t need to refute most of them. Just publish a list of names on the Dem side that are just as guilty. It’s interesting. Apparently Democrats are able to either imagine themselves pristine, or else excuse their own failing because they never claimed to be anything otherwise.

But honestly, if you think a vote for a Republican is a vote of “hate (of) the military” then I would ask how many years of service you put in… And why you would think that John Kerry is somehow now to be seen as a Republican.

But if you wish… here we go:

1. ACLU–rarely seen as a conservative organization, has been opposed to any and all censorship Read the rest of this entry »

I have decided to post this short little podcast, sharing the experiences of my family this election day. It’s not about the politics, it’s about the experience.

That said, let’s get my predictions out of the way.

Dems barely take the house with a shift of 15 seats. This will be touted as a mandate for change, but it should be remembered that in 1994 Clinton lost 54 seats in the house. This election won’t even come close to that.

I suspect that the Senate with remain in Republican hands, with a 51 to 49 split. I am encouraged by news from TN, MD and Ohio, but am afraid it may be all over for Santorum here in PA.

I hate to say it, but be sure to go check out the post election gloating over at PressingtheFlesh. I am curious though, if the Republicans pull this out, will he lose graciously, or will fleshy lead the charge that somehow the Republicans “stole” an election? (And if you listen to the podcast, keep in mind that my daughter, bless her heart, is a Republican…)

The Professor

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

It’s funny. I recorded this podcast nearly a week ago, and now I hear George Bush is saying the same thing — Democrats will raise your taxes. I hadn’t posted this file, because the quality wasn’t quite what I had hoped for, but the elections are just a few days away, so here it is.

First, let me say that apparently the Democrats weren’t too impressed either, because this plan doesn’t seem to have received much press-time. One would think that, if it was actually their plan for moving our nation forward, they would be advertising it a tad more.

In this podcast, I tackle the Democrats “plan for progress” which I find weak in it’s “planni-ness” (to steal from Colbert). It actually says that “We will protect Americans at home and lead the world by telling the truth to our troops, our
citizens and our allies.” Why do I single this one out here? Because it is the penultimate example of it not being a “plan” but rather rhetoric. Tell me… what steps follow the “truth telling” that will lead to a stable government in Iraq? What then will we do to bring the troops home, while ensuring that the US is no longer a target for terrorists? Will the radical islamists hear our “truth” and suddenly, in classis SNL style, say “Oh… never mind…” (Thanks Gilda–rest in peace!)

The bottom line conclusion that I reach is that it is all about the bottom line. When you read through what they have in their plan, they want to do many vague things, while at the same time “reducing the deficit.” Last time I checked, you can only increase spending, and decrease debt, by increasing revenue. And for the government, increasing revenue means raising your taxes, and raising them by more than they increase the spending.

Conclusion? Hang on to your wallets, you’re in for a bumpy ride.

Give a listen, and let me know what you think. Comment here, and perhaps we can even get some sort of debate going on. And be sure to give a read to ol’ Fleshy at the pressingtheflesh blog. It was his suggestion “Every time that someone states that Democrats “don’t have a plan,” mention these six points.” that had me actually checking out what sort of plan the Dems could come up with.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download