The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) - Page 144

wendybeth · 10-13-2006, 08:40 AM

We may have troops there until 2010, but Britain wants out now.

And in other news: Rep Ney pleads guilty . Of course, he is seeking treatment for alcoholism, which no doubt lead him down this ethically challenged path.*

*Not to make light of alcoholism, but it sure is taking the blame for a lot of bad behavior lately!

Not Afraid · 10-13-2006, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wendybeth

And in other news: Rep Ney pleads guilty . Of course, he is seeking treatment for alcoholism, which no doubt lead him down this ethically challenged path.*

*Not to make light of alcoholism, but it sure is taking the blame for a lot of bad behavior lately!

Alcoholism causes all sorts of bad bahaviour, but the alocoholic still has to own the bahaviour not use alcoholism as the "excuse".

Alex · 10-13-2006, 08:50 AM

If someone issued a study saying that the sun is green, it would be possible to dismiss it without having seen it. I'm sure General Casey has a metric assload of statistics about what is going on in Iraq and if everything he has contradicts this study as ridiculously high I'm sure he is confident in rejecting its results. Doesn't mean he is right.

I find the claim that there are death certificates for almost all of these 600,000 excess violent deaths to be hard to swallow. If they existed then the passive surveillance methods should not be missing approximately 6 out of every 7 of them because they'd be moving through regulatory channels. Maybe not in the outlying provinces (which are also the more settled provinces) but in Bagdhad where a quarter of the popluation is and is the center of violence.

I haven't read the details yet. But I know that there were significant methodological problems with the first report they did (primarily in skewed sampling) and wonder if they were addressed in this second round. Also, I wonder if they address the fact that either the last two years have seen a massive upswing or the first study was way off (implying methodolical problems that, unless corrected for, could still be in the place).

I also tend to be wary of research that has a political goal in mind at the beginning rather than the end. Doesn't mean it is wrong and the technical points need to be addressed rather than the motivations, but it raises concerns.

Alex · 10-13-2006, 10:31 AM

Here is the Fred Kaplan article* from 2004 about the first study that lays out a lot of the problems in the first study and are many of the factors I'm wondering if they were corrected for this time around.

The one that I wonder most about is the argument that the 2004 study used a pre-war mortality rate for Iraq that was 33% too low which would massively inflate the number of "extraneous" deaths.

And the 95% confidence interval for the 2004 study was 92%. That is, they said the number was 98,000 but that they were 95% confident it was between 8,000 and 194,000. A range so as to make the result almost meaningless.

I'm reading the full article now to see if these were addressed (though I early on I see that they are still using what is likely a low pre-war mortality rate).

*And just for anybody not familiar with the source Kaplan is solidly anti-Bush and pretty negative on the war.

Gemini Cricket · 10-13-2006, 10:41 AM

Ney pleads guilty... Wow, what a mess.

Nephythys · 10-16-2006, 08:40 AM

So where is the ourtrage?

Ken Starr has an investigation that goes on for years and spends oodles of money and is vilified for it.

Fitzgerald knows immediately where the leak was- yet he "investigates" for years and spends oodles of money only to uncover- nothing.

I guess it all depends on which side is being "investigated"

Alex · 10-16-2006, 02:02 PM

Iraq Body Count, long dismissed by the right as offering inflated mortality numbers for Iraq has serious questions about the Lancet study. And they are good ones.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/press/pr14.php

Note: They do not dismiss the study as ideologically flawed. They assume an earnest attempt but find the outcome sufficiently flawed (read the details) that they believe there must have been a flaw in the random sampling.

innerSpaceman · 10-16-2006, 07:16 PM

I don't know what you're on about with Fitzgerald, Nehp. The investigation went on so long because Rove constantly changed his story, and so the grand jury kept calling him back in. It was Rove who dragged out the investigation, and not Fitzgerald.

And I'd hardly call a cover-up indictment of the Vice-President's Chief of Staff "nothing." As usual, it's always the cover-up and rarely the crime that gets these dweebs into trouble. Armitage confessed his leak immediately to the FBI and Justice Dept, and no criminal charges were pursued.

That the Administration's leaks came a few days later does not make them un-illegal. If you rape a woman who was just raped last week, you are still guilty of rape.

Nephythys · 10-16-2006, 08:13 PM

Heh- of course. It's Rove's fault. Sure.

wendybeth · 10-16-2006, 08:43 PM

Ken Starr investigation costs: $40,000,000. (approx)

Fitzgerald investigation costs: $1,500,000 (approx)

10-13-2006, 08:40 AM	#1431
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	We may have troops there until 2010, but Britain wants out now. And in other news: Rep Ney pleads guilty . Of course, he is seeking treatment for alcoholism, which no doubt lead him down this ethically challenged path.* *Not to make light of alcoholism, but it sure is taking the blame for a lot of bad behavior lately! __________________
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2006, 08:50 AM	#1433
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	If someone issued a study saying that the sun is green, it would be possible to dismiss it without having seen it. I'm sure General Casey has a metric assload of statistics about what is going on in Iraq and if everything he has contradicts this study as ridiculously high I'm sure he is confident in rejecting its results. Doesn't mean he is right. I find the claim that there are death certificates for almost all of these 600,000 excess violent deaths to be hard to swallow. If they existed then the passive surveillance methods should not be missing approximately 6 out of every 7 of them because they'd be moving through regulatory channels. Maybe not in the outlying provinces (which are also the more settled provinces) but in Bagdhad where a quarter of the popluation is and is the center of violence. I haven't read the details yet. But I know that there were significant methodological problems with the first report they did (primarily in skewed sampling) and wonder if they were addressed in this second round. Also, I wonder if they address the fact that either the last two years have seen a massive upswing or the first study was way off (implying methodolical problems that, unless corrected for, could still be in the place). I also tend to be wary of research that has a political goal in mind at the beginning rather than the end. Doesn't mean it is wrong and the technical points need to be addressed rather than the motivations, but it raises concerns.
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2006, 10:31 AM	#1434
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Here is the Fred Kaplan article* from 2004 about the first study that lays out a lot of the problems in the first study and are many of the factors I'm wondering if they were corrected for this time around. The one that I wonder most about is the argument that the 2004 study used a pre-war mortality rate for Iraq that was 33% too low which would massively inflate the number of "extraneous" deaths. And the 95% confidence interval for the 2004 study was 92%. That is, they said the number was 98,000 but that they were 95% confident it was between 8,000 and 194,000. A range so as to make the result almost meaningless. I'm reading the full article now to see if these were addressed (though I early on I see that they are still using what is likely a low pre-war mortality rate). *And just for anybody not familiar with the source Kaplan is solidly anti-Bush and pretty negative on the war.
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2006, 10:41 AM	#1435
Gemini Cricket ... Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 13,244	Ney pleads guilty... Wow, what a mess.
	Submit to Quotes

10-16-2006, 08:40 AM	#1436
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	So where is the ourtrage? Ken Starr has an investigation that goes on for years and spends oodles of money and is vilified for it. Fitzgerald knows immediately where the leak was- yet he "investigates" for years and spends oodles of money only to uncover- nothing. I guess it all depends on which side is being "investigated"
	Submit to Quotes

10-16-2006, 02:02 PM	#1437
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Iraq Body Count, long dismissed by the right as offering inflated mortality numbers for Iraq has serious questions about the Lancet study. And they are good ones. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/press/pr14.php Note: They do not dismiss the study as ideologically flawed. They assume an earnest attempt but find the outcome sufficiently flawed (read the details) that they believe there must have been a flaw in the random sampling.
	Submit to Quotes

10-16-2006, 07:16 PM	#1438
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	I don't know what you're on about with Fitzgerald, Nehp. The investigation went on so long because Rove constantly changed his story, and so the grand jury kept calling him back in. It was Rove who dragged out the investigation, and not Fitzgerald. And I'd hardly call a cover-up indictment of the Vice-President's Chief of Staff "nothing." As usual, it's always the cover-up and rarely the crime that gets these dweebs into trouble. Armitage confessed his leak immediately to the FBI and Justice Dept, and no criminal charges were pursued. That the Administration's leaks came a few days later does not make them un-illegal. If you rape a woman who was just raped last week, you are still guilty of rape.
	Submit to Quotes

10-16-2006, 08:13 PM	#1439
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	Heh- of course. It's Rove's fault. Sure.
	Submit to Quotes

10-16-2006, 08:43 PM	#1440
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	Ken Starr investigation costs: $40,000,000. (approx) Fitzgerald investigation costs: $1,500,000 (approx) __________________
	Submit to Quotes