[R]esearchers asked 482 students to read one of two reports about crime in the City of Addison. Later, they had to suggest solutions for the problem. In the first report, crime was described as a "wild beast preying on the city" and "lurking in neighborhoods".
After reading these words, 75% of the students put forward solutions that involved enforcement or punishment, such as building more jails or even calling in the military for help. Only 25% suggested social reforms such as fixing the economy, improving education or providing better health care. The second report was exactly the same, except it described crime as a "virus infecting the city" and "plaguing" communities. After reading this version, only 56% opted for great law enforcement, while 44% suggested social reforms.
The researchers also found that metaphorical frames influenced views when they were introduced at the beginning of a report, but not when they occurred at the end of a report.
"First girl page in National House of Representatives. Washington, D.C., Jan. 3. For the first time in history, a girl has been appointed a page in the House of Representatives. She is 13-year-old Gene Cox, daughter of Rep. and Mrs. E.E. Cox of Georgia. She was appointed by and will serve her father this session. Gene can speak 3 languages, 1/3/39"--Library of Congress
We don't need to rewrite the Constitution of the United States of America, we need to reread the Constitution and enforce the Constitution. ... And I know that there are some people that are not going to do that, so for the benefit of those who are not going to read it because they don't want us to go by the Constitution, there's a little section in there that talks about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
You know, those ideals that we live by, we believe in, your parents believed in, they instilled in you. When you get to the part about “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” don’t stop there, keep reading. Cause that’s when it says “when any form of government becomes destructive of those ideals, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.” We’ve got some altering and some abolishing to do!
Of course the US Constitution doesn't say these things; they're from the Declaration of Independence.
Lillie Robertson, a young spinner in Century Cotton Mills, South Boston, Va. Runs four sides. Sister Mamie (with cup) helps her and is ten years old. Baby doesn't work yet. Father works in wagon factory. Cotton Mills work is slack. Location: South Boston, Virginia. -- Library of Congress
Shortly after moving from the East Coast to Chicago, I learned that tornado watches can be issued several times in a week during a period of bad weather. Two days ago, when the tornado devastated Joplin, we were under a tornado watch for several hours, and warnings were issued for a few specific locations in Northern Illinois.
A tornado watch means conditions are ripe for tornado formation. A warning means that a funnel cloud has been spotted in the area. As my readers living anywhere in the middle part of the United States know, the chances of actually being a victim of a devastating tornado are quite slim.
The last deadly tornado to hit this area touched down in suburban Plainfield in 1990. In the years after that one, I saw several survivors with PTSD symptoms in my suburban office, which was not far from Plainfield. The stories were terrifying. I can't even begin to imagine what those unfortunate people in Joplin are going through.
But from late spring, through the summer and into the early fall, watches and warnings are so frequent that no one even mentions it. You can't run to the basement or hide in a closet every time one is issued.
Hamilton, who was called to testify before a grand jury investigating doping in cycle racing, said that trainers and team doctors actively supported doping. He was given limited immunity by the US prosecutor, so he will not be prosecuted unless he gets caught telling a lie. Athletes have learned from the Barry Bonds case: don't lie to a grand jury.
Personally, I don't like these prosecutions. The government has spent a fortune crawling through dumpsters and trash cans belonging to amateur and professional athletes, twisting arms and making friends rat out friends for behavior that has been widespread in professional sports for decades. What is the public benefit in these prosecutions? Are we worried that Barry Bonds is going to mug someone on the BART? Is Lance Armstrong going to steal bicycles off the street? Is Roger Clemons going to start stealing cars because he juiced when he played professional sports?
These prosecutions seem to be more about cleaning up cheating in sports than they are about prosecuting anyone for drug use. So what's next? Will prosecutors convene grand juries to investigate spit balls and corked bats?
The New Yorker ran an excellent piece on the steroid witch hunt back in March. If you're a subscriber, it is definitely worth reading.
CHARLESTON, SC – Tim Scott (R-SC) made the following statement today in response to President Barak Obama’s remarks calling for a return to the 1967 Israeli border lines: “I disagree in the strongest terms with President Obama’s call for Israel to return to the 1967 borders as a pre-condition for further Arab-Israeli peace talks.
The Prime Minister [Netanyahu] and the Secretary [Clinton] agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements." Those requirements will be fully taken into account in any future peace agreement. -- November 11, 2010
So the allegedly outrageous statement made by the president comes straight from a public agreement made with Netanyahu just 5 months ago. The words in the joint statement--based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps--are virtually identical to the language used by Obama. The statement is still posted on the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs site. (I've copied it just in case they scrub it.)
So why did Netanyahu make that insane statement after Obama's recent Middle East speech?
First, going into his meeting with Obama, the Israeli PM had to play tough for the Israeli right. They despise Obama for criticizing the ongoing expansion of the West Bank settlements, so Netanyahu attacked Obama for domestic political reasons. And since Obama said nothing controversial in his speech, Netanyahu had to pretend he did. Netanyahu's public tantrum was nothing but a disingenuous political performance piece.
Second, Netanyahu wanted to gain leverage going into his talks with Obama. He believes that it's easy to play Americans, and maybe he's right. To attack Obama in the extreme is just the sort of thing that the American right uncritically gobbles up.
As for Netanyahu's attitude toward Americans, don't take my word for it. Listen to the prime minister:
"I know what America is," Netanyahu told a group of terror victims, apparently not knowing his words were being recorded. "America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in their way." Netanyahu also bragged how he undercut the peace process when he was prime minister during the Clinton administration. "They asked me before the election if I'd honor [the Oslo accords]," he said. "I said I would, but ... I'm going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I'm concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue."