Search LBO-Talk Archives

14686 [lbo-talk] indecency -- rank: 1000

On Jun 9, 2006, at 3:21 AM, ThatRogersWoman wrote: > The social/religious conservatives do not listen to or concern > themselves with hip/hop and rap, so they won't bother to report it. Bill O'Reilly does. He's pretty obsessed with it. Doug

Document Size:	4634
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Fri Jun 9 07:13:02 PDT 2006

14687 [lbo-talk] indecency -- rank: 1000

On Jun 9, 2006, at 12:35 AM, joanna wrote: > I don't get it. So, what happens to hip/hop and rap music? You gotta bleep out the nasty words. (Some WFMU type put together a version of NWA's Straight Outta Compton that consisted only of the bleeped part - "fuck fuck mothafucka shit" etc - it's pretty great.) The FCC is hinting that they'll treat euphemisms (e.g., "the f-word") as the equivalent of the original, too. Doug

Document Size:	4834
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Fri Jun 9 07:12:16 PDT 2006

14688 [lbo-talk] GS on CA-50 -- rank: 1000

DAILY FINANCIAL MARKET COMMENT 06/07/06 Goldman Sachs Economics * The result of yesterday's special Congressional election in the San Diego area bolsters our view that Democrats will pick up seats in both the House and Senate this autumn, but remain shy of majorities in both chambers. * While former Rep. Brian Bilbray's (R-CA) margin of victory was narrower than normal in this Republican leaning district, it was wider than what had been thought only a week ago when some predicted an upset ...

Document Size:	11174
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Thu Jun 8 19:47:31 PDT 2006

14689 [lbo-talk] indecency -- rank: 1000

Yesterday, the House passed the Senate version of the "Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act" by a 379-35 vote, following its unanimous passage by the Senate. It raises from $32,500 to $325,000 the maximum fine that the FCC can impose for violating "decency" standards - and the violators themselves will be subject to the same fines (previously it was just the station). There are some minor inconsistencies to be worked out between the two bills, but it's now certain to beco ...

Document Size:	4998
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Thu Jun 8 19:42:03 PDT 2006

14690 [lbo-talk] Rep victory in CA-50: Reps to keep the House? -- rank: 1000

On Jun 7, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Jim Devine wrote: > But then again, nothing is > _really_ settled by elections. Well, they are good at shutting down alternatives, aren't they? Doug

Document Size:	4935
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Jun 7 08:36:25 PDT 2006

14691 [lbo-talk] Rep victory in CA-50: Reps to keep the House? -- rank: 1000

[so the Republican candidate won the special election to replaced the jailed Cunningham - here's The Note's <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/ TheNote/story?id=156238> commentary] The Democratic on-the-record and not-so-on-the-record responses (the Republicans were forced to put a lot of resources in the race, Bilbray underperformed Bush 2004, Busby's last-minute gaffe was costly and she wasn't such a great candidate, it's a very conservative district and Democrats will pick up our seat ...

Document Size:	5873
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Jun 7 07:35:03 PDT 2006

14692 [lbo-talk] Henry "Hank" Paulson's Treasury -- rank: 1000

<http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060619/prins> Henry Paulson's Treasury by NOMI PRINS [posted online on June 6, 2006] In the coverage of President Bush's nomination of Henry J. "Hank" Paulson to replace John Snow as Treasury Secretary, I've lost count of the number of mainstream media discussing the "well-worn path" between Goldman Sachs and official Washington. But just because a road is well traveled doesn't mean it leads in the right direction. Tapping officials f ...

Document Size:	11535
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Jun 6 18:15:48 PDT 2006

14693 [lbo-talk] Chomsky on sociobiology -- rank: 1000

On Jun 6, 2006, at 9:49 AM, Ted Winslow wrote: > Language is our creature. The idea that it's not, that it's the > creator and we're the creature ("structuralism"), or that it's the > creature of a creator other than us (e.g. "of genetic programs"), > is another example of what Marx means by "fetishism". But we're born into a pre-existing language that shapes the way we see the world. It may be "ours" collectively, but not individually. We m ...

Document Size:	5141
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Jun 6 07:25:06 PDT 2006

14694 [lbo-talk] Re: language of contempt -- rank: 1000

On Jun 6, 2006, at 2:17 AM, andie nachgeborenen wrote: > all good > leftists know that biology has nothing to do with > human behavior Since you get annoyed at the critiques of SB as being unfoundedly deterministic, I gotta ask - who exactly says that biology has nothing to do with anything? Not even Judith Butler holds that position. She does say it's always important to ask why biology is being invoked, which can be a very fruitful question. Doug

Document Size:	5019
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Jun 6 07:03:04 PDT 2006

14695 [lbo-talk] Liberalism and preemptive evil -- rank: 1000

On Jun 5, 2006, at 8:24 PM, Jim Farmelant wrote: > Perhaps you should try explaining that to Breinart & Radosh, > since they seem intent on reviving the very sort of liberalism > to which the New Left so vehemently objected to. Hey, I used to bash liberals with glee. Now it seems like reciting the old high school cheers. The very fact that they feel the need to "revive" that sort of liberalism is proof that it barely exists today, if at all. The "left" of the ...

Document Size:	5319
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Jun 6 06:53:31 PDT 2006

14696 [lbo-talk] Liberalism and preemptive evil -- rank: 1000

On Jun 5, 2006, at 6:16 PM, Jim Farmelant wrote: > For all their faults, one positive achievement of the New Left > was their realization that it was > the liberals who were the main enemy, Don't you think that this perception is a little obsolete? Classic 30s to 60s liberalism is dead. This anti-liberalism would make sense when there was serious political unrest, and liberals were trying to co-opt the radical potential of the moment, but that ain't the case these days. Doug

Document Size:	5096
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Mon Jun 5 16:15:08 PDT 2006

14697 [lbo-talk] Re: language of contempt -- rank: 1000

On Jun 5, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Carrol Cox wrote: > Doug Henwood wrote: >> >> but isn't the standard line that men >> want to be sure any kids are theirs and not some other guy's, or they >> won't stick around to support them? > > This would only come into practice in the last 4000 years or so, with > the development of a social surplus controlled by a 'ruling class' of > distinct lineages through which property (control over a laboring > popualtion) is allo ...

Document Size:	6082
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Mon Jun 5 16:12:23 PDT 2006

14698 [lbo-talk] Re: language of contempt -- rank: 1000

On Jun 5, 2006, at 4:49 PM, JBrown72073 at cs.com wrote: > Yes, I'm aware of the SB explanation for allegedly greater male > slutiness, > but I was being arch since I'm not familiar with a SB explanation > for the bias > against women for equivalent behavior. I think SB is mostly post hoc stories invented to shore up the status quo in the guise of science, but isn't the standard line that men want to be sure any kids are theirs and not some other guy's, or they won't stick arou ...

Document Size:	5171
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Mon Jun 5 14:17:21 PDT 2006

14699 [lbo-talk] ABC SSM poll -- rank: 1000

ABC NEWS POLL: GAY MARRIAGE 6/4/06 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, June 5, 2006 Most Oppose Gay Marriage; Fewer Back an Amendment Most Americans oppose gay marriage, but markedly fewer especially outside George W. Bush's core supporters would amend the U.S. Constitution to ban it. Opponents, however, are far more likely to call it a make-or-break issue in their vote for Congress a finding in this ABC News poll that explains Bush's renewed push for a gay marriage ban. Among all American ...

Document Size:	10778
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Mon Jun 5 14:14:51 PDT 2006

14700 [lbo-talk] watch those emails! -- rank: 1000

New York Daily News - June 5, 2006 More workers axed for E-mails BY LORE CROGHAN DAILY NEWS BUSINESS WRITER When in doubt, leave it out - especially concerning E-mails. An increasing number of workers are losing their jobs because of E- mail violations, according to an annual survey of about 300 companies released today. A third of employers in the study sacked staffers in the past year for violating workplace E-mail policies. That's up from about one in four last year. "People don't see ...

Document Size:	8323
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Mon Jun 5 10:21:36 PDT 2006