![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Media: Seems there have been an awful lot of discussions on LJ lately that start with one author or another saying something mind-bogglingly dumb and/or offensive. The short context here: GLADD published a report on the presentation of homosexual characters on various TV channels, of those channels, only SyFy said, "Our bad, we'll try to do better in the future," ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
johncwright flipped out, expressing rage the SyFy was cowardly submitting to pressure from a lobby that subscribes to the mantra "evil is our good" (he claimed sarcasm on that last characterization, but in a later post decried the "antinomian* agenda" of the Left). The rest was a pretty typical homophobic screed, but the responses it prompted were interesting: autopope provides a bit of context here, Hal Duncan has a dramatic and detailed response, Kip Manley has a more pointed response that hits the "antinomian" bit specifically and also has some more general commentary on the relationship between the author's views and their work, Ampersand answers a specific point of Wright's post ("What argument can be given to outlaw incest that cannot be given with even more logic to outlaw homosexuality?").
* Presumably, with "tolerance" or some-such substituted for Jesus. He was suggesting that liberals think that homosexuality is evil / perverted / wrong, but that wrong things are okay if you're a liberal. This is worth some attention, especially given that there are significant groups with an antinomian agenda in the US (the salvation by faith in salvation by faith alone types).
Politics and Economics: The White House blog has a post on how income disparity is way up (almost to its previous, just-before-the-Great-Depression high) and how "this trend must reverse". Kind of surprising to see the White House saying such things so directly. Meanwhile, the second commenter on an article saying much the same thing puts it more succinctly. There's also an interesting op-ed suggesting that a second Great Depression was averted through the power of Big Government. Kind of annoying that there will never, ever be an objective perspective on whether that's true or not, economics is way too political.
Healthcare: Nate Silver explains exactly why and how much the public option is in trouble. According to that, the key is Senate Finance committee members, because anti-public-option senators would be willing to filibuster a pro-public-option amendment, but not the whole bill. Also an interesting bit about how the GOP in 2003 supported adding the sort of care to Medicare that they're now characterizing as "death panels". Er...
Business, Airlines, Music: United has horrible customer service, which produces entertaining results.
johncwright flipped out, expressing rage the SyFy was cowardly submitting to pressure from a lobby that subscribes to the mantra "evil is our good" (he claimed sarcasm on that last characterization, but in a later post decried the "antinomian* agenda" of the Left). The rest was a pretty typical homophobic screed, but the responses it prompted were interesting: autopope provides a bit of context here, Hal Duncan has a dramatic and detailed response, Kip Manley has a more pointed response that hits the "antinomian" bit specifically and also has some more general commentary on the relationship between the author's views and their work, Ampersand answers a specific point of Wright's post ("What argument can be given to outlaw incest that cannot be given with even more logic to outlaw homosexuality?").* Presumably, with "tolerance" or some-such substituted for Jesus. He was suggesting that liberals think that homosexuality is evil / perverted / wrong, but that wrong things are okay if you're a liberal. This is worth some attention, especially given that there are significant groups with an antinomian agenda in the US (the salvation by faith in salvation by faith alone types).
Politics and Economics: The White House blog has a post on how income disparity is way up (almost to its previous, just-before-the-Great-Depression high) and how "this trend must reverse". Kind of surprising to see the White House saying such things so directly. Meanwhile, the second commenter on an article saying much the same thing puts it more succinctly. There's also an interesting op-ed suggesting that a second Great Depression was averted through the power of Big Government. Kind of annoying that there will never, ever be an objective perspective on whether that's true or not, economics is way too political.
Healthcare: Nate Silver explains exactly why and how much the public option is in trouble. According to that, the key is Senate Finance committee members, because anti-public-option senators would be willing to filibuster a pro-public-option amendment, but not the whole bill. Also an interesting bit about how the GOP in 2003 supported adding the sort of care to Medicare that they're now characterizing as "death panels". Er...
Business, Airlines, Music: United has horrible customer service, which produces entertaining results.
