Quick Question

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Michigoose

I’m working on my fourth (and hopefully final) post about the Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle, and I’ve run into a conundrum.  I’ve been using the term “anti-abortion” to describe the group of people that raised the ruckus over Planned Parenthood funding.  For me, that narrows their focus down to a single point: abortion.  “Pro-life” (again, for me) can encompass everything from no contraception to no death penalty, so I feel that “anti-abortion” suffices for my purposes in this argument.

But what is the converse?  It’s not anti-life, it’s not pro-abortion (for reasons lms has pointed out), help me figure out the right term.  I’d much prefer it to be “anti-something”,  just because I think that using “anti” v “pro” terms is inherently combative and argumentative.  I’d also like it to be narrowly defined: a medical procedure which is legal under US law to women up until 24 weeks after conception (a partially arbitrary date, but consistent with current viability outside the womb standards).  If you can come up with two “pro” terms that would fit the criteria for both sides I’m willing to switch to that, too.  And let’s not go into the weeds about the viability date; I’ll explain in the post when it goes up.

So what would be the best term(s) for me to use?  I’m trying to provoke discussion here, not diatribes from either side, so I want to know what would be acceptable to most.

Filed under: Komen, Planned Parenthood, politics | Tagged: | 78 Comments »

Yet Another Political Test

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Fairlington Blade

The Pew Research Center came out with what they classify as political typology. It’s a bit more refined than the political test in the other thread. It’s a more nuanced take than many I’ve seen. The full report and test are here:

http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/04/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology/

http://www.people-press.org/typology/quiz/

Mostly Republican

Staunch Conservatives (Highly Engaged Tea Party Supporters)

Main Street Republicans (Conservative on most issues)

Mostly Independent

Libertarians (Free market, small govt. seculars)

Disaffecteds (Downscale and cynical)

Post-Moderns (Moderates, but liberal socially)

Mostly Democratic

New Coalition Democrats (Upbeat, majority minority)

Hard Pressed Democrats (Relgious, financially struggling)

Solid Liberals (Across the board liberal positoins)

Bystanders

Young, politically disengaged

I scored as a post-modern, which feels about right. I’m clearly a Democrat, but have voted for the occasional Republican. [Note to NoVa – Sorry I missed your note the other date about Moran and his opponent.]

BB

Filed under: Uncategorized | 49 Comments »

Bits & Pieces (Thursday Night Open Mic)

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Kevin S. Willis

Bad Lip Reading does Newt Gingrich:

It’s about time that a visionary work of sci-fi accurately predicts our inevitable future. Iron Sky is this movie.

That’s it for me. — KW

Filed under: Bits and Pieces | Tagged: , , , , | 7 Comments »

The political compass

Posted on February 9, 2012 by markinaustin

The political compass attempts to isolate two different axes of thought.  One ranges from “radical” to “reactionary” and one from “libertarian” to “authoritarian”.  The questions allow for shaded answers rather than “yes” or “no”.  I have found the website.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

Here is the test.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/test

 

As I said, I was 3/10 libertarian and exactly on the midline between “rad” and “reac”.  My 100% R voting friend, no ticket splitter he, was 2/10 libertarian and 1/10 reactionary.  We were too close to even shake a stick at, but I am an inveterate ticket splitter.  So I think it’s more fun and less demeaning than a pigeonholed test that puts the enlightened at one end [lib, if a liberal wrote it, conservative, if a conservative wrote it].  If any of you take it, I don’t care how you score, but I would like to know afterward if you think it was relatively fair and/or relatively surprising to you.  In my case, my old friend and I were surprised we were so close.  But on reflection, we noted that we had been friends for 50 years at the time and always were able to pick up where we left off.  So maybe not so surprising.

 

Filed under: Uncategorized | 64 Comments »

A Thanks to All the “Moderates”

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Kevin S. Willis

Of course, by “Moderate”, I mean that as a name for a participants on this blog. Sort of like “Go Panthers!” except that, since the blog is called “All Things in Moderation”, we are all “Moderates”. In the same sense that the members of a sports team are “Panthers”.

When a new post comes up, or a new comment is posted, it is natural to dive right into the meat of it. Generally, we either start asking questions, concurring (with amplification), or disagreeing, and launching into debate. Which is all well and good: that’s sort of the point, after all!

However, when individuals make the sort of efforts that Michigoose has recently on her Komen articles, or someone takes time out of their busy schedule to contribute, as did ABC the other day, or someone like Fairlington Blade puts so much energy into explaining to all of us how his job works, I think a special thanks is also in order.

And the Morning Report! I realize Brent posts them at his own blog, but he takes the time to bring them over here and share, and they are awesome.

There are some really heroic efforts being made here when it comes to content, and I just wanted to express my own heartfelt thanks to everybody for their participation.

While citing Brent and Michigoose and ABC, the same shout out goes to everybody who contributes content. When we see a post, we often dig into the meat of the debate, which is good. But it’s also good to thank the folks who are devoting so much time and energy (and providing so much unique insight) for starting the conversations.

So, thanks!

Filed under: administrative | Tagged: | 56 Comments »

Morning Report

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Brent Nyitray

Vital Statistics:

Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1347.8 0.8 0.06%
Eurostoxx Index 2535.2 22.2 0.88%
Oil (WTI) 99.73 1.0 1.03%
LIBOR 0.51 -0.003 -0.63%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 78.556 -0.182 -0.23%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.04% 0.06%

Markets are up slightly on a better than expected initial jobless report. Initial Jobless claims were 358k last week versus 370k expected.  The ECB maintained rates and Draghi sounded bearish tones regarding the European economy.  Headlines are coming across right now that claim Greek leaders have agreed on an austerity package.

Bloomberg is reporting (on the pay site, not the free site) that the price of Bakken shale oil has fallen out of bed (down 25%) in the last week.  There are no futures contracts on Bakken so it can’t be traded, but it demonstrates how volatile oil can be.  The reason seems to be a lack of demand from the refineries, so the oil is backing up with nowhere to put it. Refineries are probably changing over from heating oil production to gasoline production right about now.  I plotted the prices of Brent, WTI, and Bakken oil over the past year so you can see the volatility.

It looks like we have a settlement with the banks and the state AG’s over foreclosures.  $26 billion from 5 banks.  $20 billion is to be used to cut principal balances and to refi current, but underwater, homeowners.  So, of the AGs and the banks, who won?  Both.  The AGs get their scalp, and the banks will be able to count losses already taken towards the settlement. (You owe $100 on your $70 home.  I’ll be a nice guy and cut your principal to $90.  Of course, I probably am already carrying the loan at 90 on my books anyway).  On the refis, the banks will be simply cutting the interest rate on a $100 loan, which stays marked at $100. So no write downs there either.  My guess is this will be earnings-neutral near term and may cause analysts to take down next year’s numbers a little. But that’s it.  So you might want to resist the urge to take some SKFs (Proshares Ultrashort Financial ETF) on the open.

Will it help support the housing market?  Maybe at the margin.  It is no silver bullet – consider my example above – will the homeowner who now owes $90 instead of $100 go out and spend more money?  Probably not. Plus a chunk of this is simply a direct transfer from the government to borrowers since Ally Bank (the old GMAC) is owned by the government.

Filed under: Economic data, Foreclosure, housing, Shale Oil | 12 Comments »