Yep, I’m still here. I know Rolling Doughnut has been mostly quiet this week. The site was down last weekend, and when it came back, the gremlins had eaten a necessary component of cgi. I couldn’t access my login. And then life stepped in with a few needs. But regular blogging will return this weekend. I have a backlog on several topics, including you know wrote (if that frightens you). Just in case you wondered where I’ve gone.
Category: Blogging
“Congress shall make no law…”
The NCAA kicked a reporter out of the press box for liveblogging a game at the baseball super-regional yesterday. I find that absurd, but the NCAA can set whatever restrictions it wants. What’s amusing is the inevitable reaction from the reporter’s newspaper:
Courier-Journal executive editor Bennie L. Ivory challenged the NCAA’s action last night and said the newspaper would consider an official response.
“It’s clearly a First Amendment issue,” Ivory said. “This is part of the evolution of how we present the news to our readers. It’s what we did during the Orange Bowl. It’s what we did during the NCAA basketball tournament. It’s what we do.”
It’s clearly not a First Amendment issue. The government has played no part in this. This is a dispute between two private parties who agreed to a set of rules. Obviously one party is either misunderstanding or ignoring the rules. But the government didn’t violate any free speech right.
Convoluted hat tip required. Link found at Instapundit, via KnoxNews, which linked from Poynter Online.
Update: New York City Department of Health on Circumcision
Found via RealityBias’ diary at Daily Kos, this follow-up on last week’s news from Thomas Frieden and the New York Department of Health.
Recent media reports misrepresent the Health Department’s response to recent studies showing that circumcision significantly reduces HIV transmission in some contexts. We do not yet know what impact circumcision could have on HIV transmission in New York City, and we have not suggested or planned any initiative or campaign. Quite to the contrary, I indicated in an interview with the New York Times (the source of the misrepresentation) that I very much doubted that even 1% of men at high risk in NYC would undergo the procedure.
Commissioner Frieden claims he was misrepresented. Maybe, and if so, I retract my statements implying as much. But that’s a conditional retraction, for I think he’s trying to save face while forging ahead with his push for circumcision. Saying that he doubts “even 1% of men at high risk in NYC would undergo” circumcision is different than saying “we are not pushing circumcision. Regardless of how he gets to office, Commissioner Frieden is acting like a politician. I don’t trust him.
Continue reading “Update: New York City Department of Health on Circumcision”
I’d like to thank the Academy.
Today, I had an entry Dugg for the first time (that I know of). Very cool. I had no idea how many people would stumble on a post from a link at Digg. Maybe I should investigate this not-so-new-fangled concept.
Adding to the fun, it inspired a user to leave a mildly bizarre comment on the original entry. I responded by posting it when I normally wouldn’t. It did prompt me to ponder, if Digg “suxxx”, why would someone use it to find links on The Internets?
New Comment Process
Rolling Doughnut has always faced a cyclical problem with comment spam. It’s been getting worse this week, and Movable Type appears to suck tremendously at blocking what is obviously spam. One comment replicated to fifty entries should set off an alarm that sends them all to the Junk folder. It does not. To resolve this, I’ve added a passphrase to the comments page. Before clicking post, you’ll need to enter the answer to a question. It’s an inconvenience, I know, and I apologize for that. I like getting comments. But it’s a waste of my time and bandwidth to sift through pages of spam to find the few valuable, valid comments.
With anything like this, there might be an occasional bug. If you spot one (your comment doesn’t go through, for example), e-mail me at Tony -at- Rolling Doughnut dot com so I can fix the problem. Thanks.
What do you think it means?
One of my small joys with blogging is reviewing the interesting ways people find Rolling Doughnut. Sometimes it’s traditional approaches. I leave a comment on someone’s site and hits follow. Other times, the fine spiders at Google send something my way that makes no sense to me. When did I talk about Nick Lachey’s penis? Never? I didn’t think so, but the hits still arrive. And then there are the people who don’t quite know what they’re looking for, so randomness is bound to happen. Like this:
controversial topic of euphemizing dogs
I never knew how controversial that might be, probably because I have no idea what that means. I know what the person meant, but surely Google can’t. Can they? And more important, in the words of my friend Melissa, how do these people get by in life? Seriously, I don’t understand. But I love it so much. Even when people drive me nuts, it’s little moments like this that remind me why I like free inquiry and thought. The world would be a little less acceptable if everyone thought like me.
Actually, that’s not true, but I think you know what I mean. I’m euphemizing dogs.
I’m still here
The last week-plus turned into a minor blog vacation, as I spent Christmas weekend and the rest of my break from work bonding figuratively (and almost literally) with my couch and my Xbox 360. For reference, I took my Gamerscore from 865 to 2,145 since Tuesday. Some of that was easy enough with Civil War, but I also finished Prey and played a bunch of Madden 07. I’ve had a blast and it’s felt good to step away from The Internets for a few days. But fret not, I will be back to regular blogging tomorrow, or Tuesday at the latest.
You’re excited, aren’t you?
New Temporary Look
If you come to the main site here, you’ll see that I’ve updated the template. This is temporary, until I can develop something I like. There are still glitches, but I’ll figure those out. I hope that this change to a default template will fix some of the code issues I’ve been having. (Other sites haven’t been able to read the link to Rolling Doughnut correctly.)
I’ll probably be busy tinkering with code for the next few days (please let it be only days), so I may be away from regular blogging. Thanks for your patience.
Quote of the Day
While reading this post at Cafe Hayek this morning, a quote from the author, Don Boudreaux, stood out.
It’s much easier — and probably more viscerally gratifying — to accuse those with whom you disagree of moral failings than to grapple with the content of their arguments.
I know I’ve fallen into that in some of my writing, although I try not to do so. But I like this quote for its universal applicability, especially to blogging, where opponents are faceless.
In the Interest of Full Disclosure
In yesterday’s post about Robert Rubin’s suggested tax increase, I forgot to mention that I voted for Clinton in ’92 (and ’96, for what it’s worth) and supported the tax increases. My acceptance of tax increases as the viable solution was naive, based in economic ignorance, but my basic fiscal philosophy was still there. The budget should be balanced. In surplus, actually, since we need to pay the debt, as well. But my understanding of what the government should be spending has changed, based on knowledge and reading the Constitution.
All of this is a prime reason why economics education should be mandatory in school. Before I’d taken any economics classes, political marketing influenced my economics understanding. Today, economics influences my political understanding. I’ve always been a libertarian, for my commitment to liberty has always been my fundamental philosophy. In the past I naively ignored how crucial economic liberty is to individual liberty.
If I’d been aware in ’92, I doubt I would’ve voted for Clinton in that election. I doubt I would’ve voted for Bush, although history has been kind to my recollection of his presidency. But I wouldn’t vote Democrat. Yes, I’ve voted Democrat in the last two elections, but I’ve been trying to find the best way to defeat the nonsense of the last five years or so. I desperately want to vote for a libertarian candidate, but Virginia politics isn’t keen on nominating libertarians. As such, it’s highly unlikely that a Democrat will get my vote in the near future because I don’t think they’ll change. If I have to vote for myself, I will. I’ll even be eligible for president in ’08.
In other words, cut spending to fix our fiscal crisis. Increased redistribution through taxes on “the rich” reduces liberty for all, which will not work in the long-term for a nation that strives for prosperity.