By a similar argument, we should immediately pass a bill to ban spoons, forks, knives, paper, pencils, books, eyeglasses, and politicians.

Every time I watch videos like these, I'm reminded of this.

Somebody with a fear of public speaking.

Have you checked out the C64 emulators? Vice is the one I use.

Having checked out your site, I feel a need to make some sort of Recursion/C/Assembly (AT&T syntax) joke.

With that being said, I'm also tired of how science is abused by people to score cheap political points. Even the phrase, "anti-science", strike me as absurd in most cases since it implies that somebody opposes the idea of science rather than a particular conclusion held by members of the scientific community. It's almost impossible to have a meaningful discussion nowadays because people have become accustomed to mocking anyone who disagrees with the preening buffoons on the news.

It is not indoctrination if your students learn critical thinking skills. In order to indoctrinate effectively, you need to suppress the ability for students to question your point of view. This is why political correctness is so effective. If you want to indoctrinate somebody with one point of view, you simply deem opposing ones politically incorrect and shame the that person into silence. After all, who could possibly be against a fair wage? You must want the elderly and the impoverished to starve so you can fund your extravagant lifestyle on the backs of the working class.

Responding honestly to a question by your students doesn't strike me as a form of indoctrination. It seems to me that the areas of academia which indoctrinate most  effectively are those which do away with academic rigor and replace it with emotional appeals. It is no coincidence that so many people use the Appeal to Outrage as the basis of their arguments.

There are plenty of things to take away from the two clips above. My point was mostly directed towards the first video. It pains me to see how low the standards have become for what is considered intellectual discourse. Her argument is both unsound and invalid. Even if it were true that we don't spend enough on public education, her conclusion would still be absurd. It just goes to show how any argument, no matter how tenuous, which is in favor of collective ownership is bludgeoned into our heads as being the height of intellectual thought.

So she begins with the false premise that we don't spend enough on public education and somehow concludes that to remedy this non-problem we must eliminate the notion that children should be cared for privately by their parents.

This person has a television show.

A perfect example of the pseudointellectual who judges an idea solely on how antithetical it is to common sense.

Happy Easter everyone. For music worthy of the occasion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az7WSBW8WeY

It wasn't nearly as bad after I'd abused the "Hide" button for a few weeks. However, like others here I decided not to post anything political on my facebook. I only created an account during my last year in Highschool to keep in contact with my classmates. After three years, I had regretted ever deciding to make one. The night of the election was the last straw for me. I was fed up with the emotional ramblings, the calls for compromise (followed by slander against the side they disagreed with), and in general any post that began with "I hope that ...". Social media has many benefits, but it brings out the worst in some people.

How did the comment section learn to read my thoughts? I left facebook on November 6, 2012. I'd had enough.

Perhaps this post should have been more appropriately titled "A Progressive's Advice to Republicans". Conservativism is an ideology, and we who accept it have a set of principles. What you are proposing is to put politics above principle which is what political parties do. To follow all three of your points would mean rejecting (1) Social Conservatism, (2) Fiscal Conservatism, and (3) Free Market Principles; in other words, to develop a conservative majority we must become progressives. As this is a self-contradiction, you can see why I would have trouble accepting it.

I'm not a biologist, but:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system

I don't know, but somewhere a stack just overflowed.

John, Do you have any experience with Rasberry Pi? I'm considering a Pi because a port of Plan 9 is available for it.

I'm surprised Piers Morgan hasn't tried to get boxing banned yet.