They Can't Mean That! (JOM Goes To The Prom)

The NY Times Week In Review front-pages an article so mathematically misdirected that it is laugh-out-loud funny for anyone with an understanding of basic statistics, a group which apparently includes no Times editors.  Fortunately, the article includes mad sex pairings, a high school prom, and a mortified professor, so you know it is hot.  Here we go:

The Myth, the Math, the Sex

EVERYONE knows men are promiscuous by nature. It’s part of the genetic strategy that evolved to help men spread their genes far and wide. The strategy is different for a woman, who has to go through so much just to have a baby and then nurture it. She is genetically programmed to want just one man who will stick with her and help raise their children.

Surveys bear this out. In study after study and in country after country, men report more, often many more, sexual partners than women.

One survey, recently reported by the federal government, concluded that men had a median of seven female sex partners. Women had a median of four male sex partners. Another study, by British researchers, stated that men had 12.7 heterosexual partners in their lifetimes and women had 6.5.

So far, so good, but here comes the curve ball:

But there is just one problem, mathematicians say. It is logically impossible for heterosexual men to have more partners on average than heterosexual women. Those survey results cannot be correct.

It is about time for mathematicians to set the record straight, said David Gale, an emeritus professor of mathematics at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Surveys and studies to the contrary notwithstanding, the conclusion that men have substantially more sex partners than women is not and cannot be true for purely logical reasons,” Dr. Gale said.

Oh My Goodness - is this professor emeritus really unfamiliar with the difference between "mean" and "median"?  I assume not, and yet... the Times lead clearly referred to partners of the "median" man and woman. 

Well, let's see his reasoning:

He even provided a proof, writing in an e-mail message:

“By way of dramatization, we change the context slightly and will prove what will be called the High School Prom Theorem. We suppose that on the day after the prom, each girl is asked to give the number of boys she danced with. These numbers are then added up giving a number G. The same information is then obtained from the boys, giving a number B.

Theorem: G=B

Proof: Both G and B are equal to C, the number of couples who danced together at the prom. Q.E.D.”

For heaven's sake - I will grant that *if* the reporting by men and women is accurate then the means must be equal.  However, one reason for using medians rather than means is to mute the behavior of the, hmm, possibly misbehaving tails.  Of the distribution.  Since this is apparently not obvious to Times editors, let me illustrate by returning to the prom.

Suppose 100 young men and woman attend the prom.  Ninety of the young ladies choose to dance only with their dates; ten dancing femmes set out to dance with every guy in attendance, and succeed (Guys are soooo easy.  Who knew?).

So how does the reporting go at the end of the evening?  Ninety young men report eleven dance partners - the ten Dancing Femmes plus their date.  Ten guys have a mere ten partners, since their original date was one of the Dancing Femmes.  From the guys we get total partners equal to (90*11 + 10*10), which equals 1,090 partners.  *Averaged* over the one hundred guys, that is 10.9 partners per guy, with a *median* number of partners equal to eleven.

And how about the ladies?  Ninety of them report just one partner, their date.  Ten of them report one hundred partners.  Total partners from the ladies' ledger is (90*1 + 10*100), which also equals 1,090.  That produces a mean of 10.9 partners per lady, but the median number of partners is only 1.

The median is different from the mean because the median effectively ignored the behavior of the small group of mad dancers.  How about that?  Or should I say, Q.E.D?

Groan.  I have no doubt that mocking emails are piling up in David Gale's inbox; I further have no doubt that Prof. Gale is wishing he had been a bit more clear on what the Federal study was saying about medians and what he was saying about means.  As to whether the reporter inadvertently misrepresented the study to him (Mean, median, hey, I'm on deadline!), or Gale misunderstood the question, who knows?  But clearly neither the Times reporter nor her editors understood what they were presenting.

But let me just add this - Gale blew it, and the ends did not justify the means.

For those who care, the article overcomes this ghastly start to make some plausible points about cultural pre-dispositions to misreporting by both sexes.

MORE:  Singular Values makes a similar point.

TROUBLING:  A reader revolt:

Well, on behalf of the males here, I appreciate your efforts, TM. I really do.

But, let's face it, we're lying.

I have nothing to say on the record.

MEANS AND MEDIANS AT BERKELEY: Brad DeLong illustrated the difference at David Brooks' expense in July.

 

Comments

[Ann]

TO CAROL HERMAN:

You wrote this:

"you seem to think time is of the essence"

Au Contraire

[VIMH] Do not answer.....!!!!

I LIKE IT LONG AND SLOW AND

[VIMH] STOP IT NOW!! RIGHT NOW!!

[Ann]

I sure hope Clarice is asleep. :-)
I blame HR!

[clarice]

I never sleep when HIT is unchaperoned.

[hit and run]

I have a hard time sleeping when mrs hit and run isn't here too.

No worries, she should be pulling in in a couple hours.

[JM Hanes]

Hi guys!

I have a hard time sleeping at night myself:)

[Ann]

Clarice,

TOO FUNNY!

Anyways, since you are awake, I was hoping you didn't see the Hamas TV show for kids. After reading AT, I guess you did. Really DISGUSTING.

[hit and run]

Speaking of AT...

Charity starts at home

Of course, it world-premiered here on JOM first.

[Ann]

Cerulean,

Congratulations!

[Ann]

Cerulean,

They liked it so much they posted it twice.

[Ann]

Can't wait to see what you do with this:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/08/elizabeth-edwar.html

I have to learn how to link. Sorry

[TimK]

It is pointless, if not impossible to compare medians of any two populations without also knowing the means (and therefore the distributions).
The conclusions that the TImes make about the respective populations are not justified based on the median alone. The analysis that there must be a small cohort of women screwing around a lot can only be made if we know that the means are the same. I think that this is what the professors must have been pointing out: that in order to make a sensible conclusion, the Times needs to know the mean, and the means are the same.
Either that, or they were simply asked the wrong question.

[TimK]

Sorry, in my previous most, should have written:
Even TM's analysis that there must be a small cohort........

[PeterUK]

“God looks after fools, drunks, and little children.”

He's got at least a two for in there.

[hit and run]

I've only got one question with this tidbit:

Fred Thompson To Announce Bid For President Labor Day...

Very reliable sources tell me that Fred Thompson will announce his bid for the Presidency on Labor Day at the historic Ryman Auditorium in Nashville, Tennessee.

Is Labor Day the first day you can't wear white shoes, or the last day that you can?

Waiting to hear back from Robin Givhan...

[Jane]

Don't worry H&R, Fred will set the trend. (To date it has been the first day you can't I believe but I'm the last person anyone would call the fashion police.)

[hit and run]

Well, it's an interesting thought -- with Global Warming, perhaps white shoes should be acceptable in one's wardrobe until Halloween?

Speaking of which:

OSLO (Reuters) - Scientists are trying to improve predictions about the impact of global warming this century by pooling estimates about the risk of floods or desertification.

"We feel certain about some of the aspects of future climate change, like that it is going to get warmer," said Matthew Collins of the British Met Office. "But on many of the details it's very difficult to say."

If it helps Mr. Collins, try predicting that it will get warmer starting around late February, early March. Every year.

Unless you're in the southern hemisphere, of course.

[Cecil Turner]

Obviously, the second study refers to a MEAN-- not a median, as any non-innumerate person would know. And obviously, that is what the quoted statistics professor is referring to.

Your math is correct, but the conclusion is faulty. The piece refers to a "survey" and a "study." The first cites medians, the second is apparently means. The Professor cites "surveys and studies" . . . apparently referring to both. At the least, his phrasing was faulty. But more importantly, the Times placed the quote in the piece where it appears to refer to both, and failed to differentiate when claiming: "Those survey results cannot be correct" [emphasis added]. Considering they specified the "survey," even the most charitable interpretation suggests they don't get it. Which is precisely what TM claimed above:

But clearly neither the Times reporter nor her editors understood what they were presenting.

Yep, looks like a good opportunity for a self-correction to me.

[hit and run]

Judge Walton loves them Libby precedents, aka the revenge of Judy Miller:

Five reporters must testify about their law enforcement sources in a former Army scientist’s lawsuit against the Justice Department, a federal judge in Washington ruled yesterday.

The suit, filed by Steven J. Hatfill, a bioterrorism expert, contends that the government violated the federal Privacy Act by providing journalists with information about him in the F.B.I.’s investigation of the deadly anthrax mailings in 2001.

The reporters — Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman of Newsweek; Allan Lengel of The Washington Post; Toni Locy, formerly of USA Today; and James Stewart, formerly of CBS News — have acknowledged receiving information from the Justice Department and the F.B.I. about Dr. Hatfill, the judge, Reggie B. Walton, wrote in his decision yesterday. But they have refused to name their sources.

Judge Walton, of the Federal District Court in Washington, said Dr. Hatfill was entitled to the sources’ names because “the information sought is clearly central to his Privacy Act claims.”

“Denying civil litigants access to the identity of government officials who have allegedly leaked information to reporters would effectively leave Privacy Act violations immune from judicial condemnation,” Judge Walton wrote, “while leaving potential leakers virtually undeterred from engaging in such misbehavior.”

The reporters are not defendants in the suit but are likely to face contempt sanctions if they fail to comply with Judge Walton’s order. Lawyers for Mr. Lengel and Ms. Locy and a spokeswoman for Mr. Isikoff and Mr. Klaidman declined to comment yesterday. A lawyer for Mr. Stewart did not respond to a request for comment.

[Sue]

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/13/audio-john-gibson-grills-truthout-tool-jason-leopold-on-roves-departure/>Hot Air has audio of Jason Leopold on Rove. Check it out.

[clarice]

Actually, it isn't based on the Libby case but on the Wen Ho case and cases earlier, including Carey v. (Brit) Hume respecting civil cases.(I helped Hume then by getting the informant to come forward so he wouldn't be in trouble for refusing to reveal her name.)

[hit and run]

Actually, it isn't based on the Libby case

Well, ok. But I blame the error on...

1) Bush
2) Global Warming
2) Staying up til 3 waiting for mrs hit and run *and* still getting in to work at 6:30
3) Ignoramousness

Actually, when you get right down to it, since nos. 2,3 and 4 can all ultimately be blamed on Bush, I revise my statement:

I Blame Bush.

[hit and run]

And hey, at least I wasn't the only one to conflate the Libby and Hatfill cases!!!

A Daily Kos poster asks, Could Rove be the anthrax leaker?

That's the same Reggie Walton who presided over the Libby trial. Although he's a Republican, he is not a "loyal Bushy" and runs an honest courtroom. If Rove is behind this (and doesn't it have his signiture all over it?), Reggie could make life very difficult for this administration again.

And they have a poll!

Is Rove the leaker in the Anthrax case?

Yes 100% 42 votes
No 0% 0 votes
42 votes

Yes, I was the 42nd Yes vote in that poll!

[MayBee]

Heee! Completely by accident, I discovered that you can vote in Kos polls even if you aren't registered at the site.

[clarice]

OT but very amusing:
"D.C. resident John Lockwood was conducting research at the Library of Congress and came across an intriguing Page 2 headline in the Nov. 2, 1922 edition of The Washington Post: "Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt."

The 1922 article, obtained by Inside the Beltway, goes on to mention "great masses of ice have now been replaced by moraines of earth and stones," and "at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared."

"This was one of several such articles I have found at the Library of Congress for the 1920s and 1930s," says Mr. Lockwood. "I had read of the just-released NASA estimates, that four of the 10 hottest years in the U.S. were actually in the 1930s, with 1934 the hottest of all."

Worth pondering

Reacting yesterday to word that certain European governments and officials are suddenly trying to abandon their costly "global warming" policies, Royal Astronomical Society fellow Benny Peiser, of the science faculty at Liverpool John Moores University in Great Britain, recalls the teachings of Marcus Aurelius: "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." '

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070814/NATION02/108140063>Global Warming 1922

[Sue]

Clarice,

I read that earlier. And a half century later, the ice age was upon us.

[Topsecretk9]

Hey all - I've out of town, but wondered...did anyone see this OT for this thread, but on topic for JOM in general?

Libya stalls on vow to destroy uranium stock

Nuclear experts claim that Libya is sitting on a stockpile of almost 200 barrels of uranium despite agreeing in 2003 to dismantle its nuclear programme, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

The revelation that Libya allegedly has not yet complied with the international agreement to get rid of its supply of uranium will be a particular blow to the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, after his recent move to deepen ties with the regime of Col Muammar Gaddafi...

...The Sabha base was linked with Libya's nuclear weapons programme in a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 2004. The base, some of which is believed to be underground, was also alleged to have been a chemical weapons facility.

After Col Gaddafi officially abandoned Libya's nuclear weapons programme in December 2003 in return for the lifting of US and European sanctions, the IAEA was supposed to oversee the country's disposal of its uranium.

A source close to the situation said: "Gaddafi has gone through the pro forma process with the IAEA but he has delayed and delayed. He appears to want to use uranium as a bargaining chip to get a reactor."...

...Questions might also be asked about how Libya would be able to have possessed the uranium in the first place. ****Industry insiders believe it was mined in Niger and could have been acquired by Libya during the period of sanctions****....

Huh? What's that? NIGER? Mined in Niger and aquired during the period of sanctions? 1,000 tons of yellow cake ore from NIGER?

That must be a mistake because the uranium mining industry is tightly controlled by the French and it would be hard to hide and transport and of course the Nigeriens would NEVER do such a thing with a country under sanctions, right? /sarcasm off.

[kim]

If I'm not mistaken, Khaddafy was known by the IAEA to have a certain amount of yellowcake pre-capitulation, and was found to have more than expected. Is this our missing shipment, possiby paid for by Saddam?

I blame Rove.
========

[Sue]

Hi Top. Welcome back.

***Industry insiders believe it was mined in Niger and could have been acquired by Libya during the period of sanctions****....

Interesting. I wonder who the insiders are?

[kim]

C, I really like that 'escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane' bit from the Golden Mark. It is a good time to be a skeptick.

climateaudit.org should be up again tomorrow. Here's hopin'.
=================================

[PeterUK]

""We feel certain about some of the aspects of future climate change, like that it is going to get warmer," said Matthew Collins of the British Met Office. "But on many of the details it's very difficult to say."

Because we had blazing sun in Spring and this has been the coldest,certainly the wettest Summer for decade.Today,although not cold, a miserable blanket of grey with drizzling rain ,in August,the traditional month for holidays.
These geezers have their heads between their legs looking for the echo and they have to audacity to predict weather in the future.If they are that good why aren't they rich?

[HoosierHoops]

These geezers have their heads between their legs looking for the echo and they have to audacity to predict weather in the future.If they are that good why aren't they rich?

Posted by: PeterUK |
I dunno Peter.. I here junkscience.com is offering a 100,000 prize to whomever can prove global warming is caused by man..
here is thier chance to get rich...

I'm still stunned by the earlier posts here..
So that Stat is 12.7 women for every man..sex wise..? I'm no professor but I'm betting nobody has had a .7 partner..
( I'm lobbing a softball to Hit & Run )

[clarice]

Don't go there, with that .7 Hoosier..We are bound to hear tales that we'd rather not.

[hit and run]

HoosierHoops:
but I'm betting nobody has had a .7 partner..
( I'm lobbing a softball to Hit & Run )

Egads! As I've said it before:

But I had zero sex partners until the night of my marriage. By choice.

Though I confess to barely being able to claim that. You see there was this one time....

And it's still a great story that the VIMH is determined not to let me tell.

[VIMH: It's for your own good]
Yeah, but now I could even try and tie that story to the .7 partner thing!!!!

[VIMH: Whatever. If you won't listen to me, listen to Marcus Marcus Aurelius]
Why are people so down on the insane. Most of us are nice and relatively harmless.

[hit and run]

RIP Phil Rizzuto, The Scooter

[hit and run]

You only have to suck up so many times before it pays off...Geraghty:

Elizabeth Edwards, The Untouchable Attack Dog

Instapundit thinks John Edwards would be in better shape if we heard from Elizabeth Edwards less.

...

UPDATE: Heh. Jeff Dobbs suggests Mrs. Edwards wants John to speak less.

[VIMH: I can hear what you're thinking, don't say it out loud.]
What? That I would seriously consider .7 partnering with Geraghty?

[clarice]

Hit. You'll always be a solid 1 to me. %^)Even w/o Geraghty. I'm not one of those celebrity hounds.

[hoosierhoops]

RIP Phil Rizzuto, The Scooter
It's sad to see all our hero's fall by the wayside H&R.
One of my greatest thrills was to sit next to Jolt'n Joe Dimaggio watching the Ali-Spinks fight..I brought a wry smile to his face when i leaned over and whispered " Nobody really calls you Mr. Coffee do they?"
great men ..all.

[Sue]

H&R,

Geeze. You are almost a celebrity. Hell, maybe you are a celebrity.

Nice job, BTW.

[hit and run]

HoosierHoops, yeah, my dad once played in a golf tournament with Mickey Mantle. Not played with him as in his foursome, just same tournament. After one round they got back to the hotel and rode the elevator up with him.

It's a little strange yet very endearing watching and listening to your dad tell a story where his eyes light up like a little kid.

Of course after the 20th time hearing the story it gets a little old. Especially when he gets to the "I had a Mickey Mantle rookie card and put it in the spokes of my bicycle. If only I knew then what it would be worth today..." part.

Me? I once was in a restaurant with a bunch of Denver Broncos. John Elway got up to go to the john, so I figured what the heck. Didn't get to say anything to him, he finished up and turned to leave and ... didn't wash his hands.

[hit and run]

Clarice:
You'll always be a solid 1 to me.

::smooches::

Sue:
Hell, maybe you are a celebrity.

Not yet. Not yet.

[Sue]

he finished up and turned to leave and ... didn't wash his hands.

Ewwwww.....

[Ralph L]

Perhaps Elway is a French aristocrat. They wash their hands before peeing, so other people's germs won't get on their important parts.

[Sue]

They wash their hands before peeing, so other people's germs won't get on their important parts.

Double Ewwwww....

[Ralph L]

Sue, we know W uses lots of hand sanitizer. Kerry is the French aristocrat, or looks like one.

[Topsecretk9]

Hi Sue- good to be back.

[Ralph L]

I'm surprised no one's ribbed H&R for celebrity-stalking the men's room. Lots of jokes there, many with high EWW quotient. Perhaps that's why he admits to only one hetero contact?

[Rick Ballard]

H & R,

Nice work. All that's needed know is a light vivisection of Giuliani (fair and balanced, dontchaknow) and then maybe a run at The Beast in a nice long front pager.

Something that would make a nice counterpoint on Fred-day. Maybe a contrast piece on the deference shown The Beast on her attempt to establish a health care collective versus the obloquy heaped upon Cheney regarding the energy conference.

It's only 20 days to Fred-day, you know.

[Rick Ballard]

First know = now. For those in Rio Linda.

[Carol Herman]

You can "math sample" anything you want. Believing that the sample tells you anything, is a whole other matter.

In other words? Sometimes your ruler stinks. But you keep on working. And, you can't imagine why the things you build don't stand up.

Anyway, what's the margin of error? And, when you figure this out; what's the margin of error when you asking a woman her age?

[hit and run]

Ralph L:
I'm surprised no one's ribbed H&R for celebrity-stalking the men's room.

You sound just like mrs hit and run. :grin::

And hey, I really did have to go. I mean it's not like I was just standing in front of the urinal whistling dixie.

And don't be so hard on poor Mr. Elway. I mean, as Ralph has said, he probably realized I was men's-room-stalking him and he wanted to get outta there.

At 5'8" I'm a pretty imposing figure, especially to someone of Elway's physical stature.

And I wasn't whistling dixie, but perhaps humming dueling banjos also kinda put him on edge?

[Jane]

We need a new thread - altho who am I to be demanding?

[hit and run]

Rick,
Nice work. All that's needed know is a light vivisection of Giuliani (fair and balanced, dontchaknow) and then maybe a run at The Beast in a nice long front pager.

Thanks.

I had another Obama piece submitted (written before his latest "air raids and targeting civilians in Afghanistan" hoof in mouth gaffe), but damn if those layers of fact-checking and rigorous editorial scrutiny in the blogosphere didn't put the brakes on it.

Heh, that or Sir Lifson just wanted a little less gobbledygook in how I wrote it.

[hit and run]

In fairness to B. Hussein, his actual quote is

"so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians"

I used the word "targeting" above which is wrong - and unfair.

But then again, he says "so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians".

Just?

As in that's it? That's all we're doing?

As in, not killing terrorists? Not sending ground troops?

JUST air raids?

JUST killing civilians?

AT likes to use the line "not ready for primetime" for Obama.

The man is not ready for late-night cable access.

[hit and run]

By the way, was flipping through the JOM reruns from last week and had forgotten about this, from Sara:

FYI - Sorry to interrupt the live blogging, but Fox just did a promo for Hannity's America that runs on the weekend and this weekend it will be the Real Truth about the Wilsons.

Um, I know we were counseled that Hannity's claims were probably overblown and hyped up, but did anyone watch it?

[Sue]

I did. It wasn't anything we didn't already cover, months ago.

[hit and run]

More evidence that if we haven't turned the corner, we have at least hit the apex and are pressing the accelerator going around it...

Headline, lede of LA Times article making the rounds:

Top general may propose pullbacks

Petraeus is expected to tell Congress that Iraqis can assume duties in some areas, freeing U.S. troops for other uses.

Captain Ed quotes this passage:

Intent on demonstrating progress in Iraq, the top U.S. general there is expected by Bush administration officials to recommend removing American troops soon from several areas where commanders believe security has improved, possibly including Al Anbar province.

While Kos quotes this one, asserting WH is ghost writing Petraeus' report for its own political gain:

Despite Bush's repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

So how does that reflect turning a corner?

Captain Ed's chosen paragraph is paragraph #1.

Kos' is ::drum roll:: paragraph #28

[hoosierhoops]

yes Jane we do need another thread..And everytime I post something Dumb TM comes to the rescue and starts another posting..
So in the interest of all.. ( you can call me threadkiller )
Random thoughts from this thread..
So if my wife filled out the sex partner survey and put down ..say 6.5 partners..
I'd feel like half a man..
H&R:
Hannity show? Isn't that the guy that teams up with a left winger, coombes? or something like that? i watched that years ago and knew thier position from the tease...
So they need to take a night where they flip a coin and must take a position on the results.( left or right )..Now that would be fun to watch..
And O'reilly? everytime i've tried to watch him he is worried about the children.. I worry about people worried about children..
We've got 6..He should buy my autographed book...
And speaking of 6 kids..this whole thread about sex...well, let's just say at least i can still spell it..It's a red circled day calendared event.
We've been having a horrible heat wave in the midwest..I caught a cold...explain that one doctor.
Ever wonder where all the trolls go? I mean they come in like gang busters post 10,000 words and just disappear..is it like bird migration? ya feel me chichi16?
we'll the cold med's are working fine..it's all blurry and i've said enough to make TM create another post in near minutes...
wait...Clarice..
I've got to tell you something..everytime i read your name here i think of the silence of the lambs and i hear hopkins voice in my head saying " and what did you learn clarice?"
does that mean i'm insane?
Well..that should just about take care of the threadkilling.. sorry TM.

[Sue]

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_6624865>In keeping with the sex them of this thread

as opposed to the one I posted it on earlier

[hit and run]

Sue, that's funny. And ironic to me that it comes via the Denver Post.

Moscow - A Russian region of Ulyanovsk has found a novel way to fight the nation's birth-rate crisis: It has declared Sept. 12 the Day of Conception and for the third year running is giving couples time off from work to procreate.

Feh. Time off work? When we lived in Denver, our townhouse was less than two miles from work.

Nooner.

[VIMH: TMI!]
Yeah, probably. But that's what I'm here for.

[Sue]

I am having a time trying to get this post to without error. I really didn't mean "sex them" but was trying for "sex theme". ::grin::

[Sue]

Oh well. Forget it. I can't seem to post without error today. So, deal with it. ::grin::

[hit and run]

No worries, Sue, it's hard to concentrate when your mind is focused on sex.

[Jane]

did anyone watch it?

I did, and I was underwhelmed as expected. They pointed out Val's perjury to Congress, and the fact that Joe outed his own wife.

The least he could have done is read Sabotage.

[hit and run]

Can a   blogger   win a   Pulitzer?

Oooh, yes! (pdf warning)

A full range of online journalism, such as stories, databases, blogs, interactive graphics and still or video images, may be submitted for prize consideration.

Oh, wait, it has to also be in print for the category in which her work seems to best fit:

4. For a distinguished example of explanatory reporting that illuminates a significant and complex subject, demonstrating mastery of the subject, lucid writing and clear presentation, in print or in print and online,

"Breaking News" is the only category for which online only work can be submitted:

In Breaking News Reporting and Breaking News Photography, the entries may be made up entirely of content that was published online. In other categories, the entry may contain online elements but it must also contain material published in the newspaper’s print edition.

Dagnabbit.

We need an American Thinker Dead Tree Edition.

[cathyf]

Seems to me all we need is a laser printer and maybe a stapler...

[Ann]

Rove will be on Rush Limbaugh at 1:00pm EST.
Could be interesting!

[Jane]

H&R,

GO over to this website and check out the Edwards T-shirt. It's oh so low.

http://www.nerepublican.com/

[Ann]

I watched Hannity on Sunday and I agree it was nothing new to JOMers. Made me think Libby would have been cleared if more of the media read this Pulitzer Award Winning Site.

[Jane]

First Time's man of the year and now a Pulitzer. Oh the fame, the fame!

[hit and run]

Jane:
GO over to this website and check out the Edwards T-shirt. It's oh so low.

As long as no one photoshops him in a dress.....I draw the line there......he looks perfectly ravishing in a well-fitted pant suit.

[Jane]

As long as no one photoshops him in a dress

Well as long as Elizabeth comes along in a tie...

[SunnyDay]

re Hannity's piece on the Wilson's - I got the impression he's helping some senators put the pressure on for bringing charges against Joe and Val - he had a copy of the formerly classified Joe Wilson debriefing - the contents of which Joe leaked, although he lied about what was in it. IOW it was classified when he went public with it. Then, Joe lied to congress - he played the tapes. Then, Val lied to congress - played the tapes.

He brought out that the "Bush lied" meme was based on Wilson's lie, stressed that damage that had done, and said there should be some penalty. That although it wouldn't take away Libby's conviction, it might be a good thing to at least give the Wilson's a taste of what it's like.

Considering what the average person knows about this, I thought Hannity gave a good short version - it could hold their attention, get them to realize that what they've been told in the paper isn't true. He actually a sentaor there who is part of the group that wants to bring charges against Val and Joe.

[hit and run]

From instapundit...

The Dog ate my law license:

AUGUST 15--In a pathetic end to the Mike Nifong saga, the disgraced North Carolina prosecutor who handled the Duke rape investigation has turned in his law license, noting that he never framed or displayed the document because it had been damaged "by a puppy in her chewing stage."

Oh, and if you read the letter that Nifong submitted where he claimed the puppy chewing misfortune, it concludes thusly (I am editing out the reason for his conclusions because by golly I am having to retype it since it's an image and can't copy and paste, go to the link above if interested):

Mr. Williamson's e-mail assertion [...go to link...] is preposterous beyond belief, and is further evidence of the fundamental unfairness with which this entire procedure has been conducted.

Oh the irony.

He, of course, deserves fairness in this procedure.

But please pardon me if I shed no tears for him.

[Sue]

http://www.foxnews.com/hannitysamerica/>Here's the clip of the Hannity show.

[EW]

When will Tom be freed?

[cathyf]

Tom rarely posts much during the week...

[hoosierhoops]

GO over to this website and check out the Edwards T-shirt. It's oh so low.

http://www.nerepublican.com/

Jane: That t-shirt is funny..Is that tan spray painted on?

In the mist of a heat wave i've got a cold..
I blame global warming..
Are you considered doomed if your wife brings you 4 cold pills and a crown and coke to wash it down with?
( Why is she smiling?)

[hit and run]

Cathy:
Tom rarely posts much during the week...

Yeah, especially since being named Time 2006 Man of the Year.

Before, we were at least promised 2/5 ride-alongs with the mongrel horde...

[hit and run]

Breaking News, Congressional Approval Ratings Low:

The survey shows Bush's approval ratings at 35 percent, and Congress' even lower, 25 percent.

Well, some say, that's because the Dems haven't stood up to Bush on Iraq.

Let's see...

Asked whether they approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job after seven months of divided government, those surveyed were then prompted to volunteer a reason.
...
Among those who cited an issue, the war in Iraq was mentioned most often.

Aha! Get that? "Most often". You can't argue with that!

Oh, wait...

It was cited by 7 percent of those disapproving of Congress' performance

So, of the 1,003 people who were surveyed, approximately 250 approved of the job Congress is doing. Since the article doesn't give the actual disapproval rating (surely there are some "don't know's" or "no opinions" in there), let's assume approximately 750 disapprove.

Of those, 7% said Iraq is the cause of their disapproval.

53 people out of 1,003 disapprove of the job Congress is doing because of Iraq.

But wait!

Only...39 percent said they support the Iraq war, with 58 percent opposed.

If 39% overall support the war, let's assume these people aren't looking to the dems to end it or stand up to Bush on it ... that's 21 people.

So, 32 people out of 1,003 disapprove of Congress because they want the Dems to stand up to Bush on Iraq.

Sounds like a mandate.

------------------
Disclaimer: all numbers rounded to keep from having a .7 sexual partners problem in this comment. I suck at math, so please, don't be mean about my median. All corrections, gently offered, will be greatly appreciated.

[Sue]

In an interview, he said, "I think Congress should go over Bush's head and get these troops back here. There's got to be a way where they can override Bush to get the troops back here."

From your link, H&R, this caused me to chuckle. Obviously, he doesn't know what the constitution provides. They have the purse. They can override Bush anytime they want. They don't want, apparently.

[Sue]

And then there was this...

When it came to judging Bush, 70 percent of Republicans approved of his performance, with 27 percent disapproving. Democrats split 89-9 in disapproval, and 68 percent of independents disapproved.

Congress, by contrast, was held in disregard without regard to party.

[hit and run]

Sue:
Obviously, he doesn't know what the constitution provides.

Remember, though, Bush wants to throw out the constitution to install himself as the christofascist ruler of the neocon empire, so, if we have to trample the constitution to stop him, that's just the way it's gotta be.

Besides, well, he started it!

Or he will start it. Any moment now. I just know it.

And Rove's resignation proves it! Or will prove it. Any moment now. I just know it.

[HoosierHoops]

From your link, H&R, this caused me to chuckle. Obviously, he doesn't know what the constitution provides. They have the purse. They can override Bush anytime they want. They don't want, apparently.
-Sue
It's not that they don't want..They can't..
If Congress had the votes the troops would be written out of the budget and home next week..
See Congress playing the fiddle while the Middle East burns...

[Gmax]

Congress, by contrast, was held in disregard without regard to party.

that should be cut out and pasted on every refrigerator with magnets. Maybe framed and hung on the wall.

They certainly have earned it.

[Ann]

RUSH

[Ann]

Sorry, I thought I figured out how to link. My bad!

If you want to read Rove's interview, its up at www.rushlimbaugh.com

Is there a website where I can learn how to link?

[Ann]

Or is there a blog book for dummies I can buy? :)

[Ann]

Cerulean:

"christofascist ruler of the neocon empire"

You have such a way with words, I am envious!

[jean]

I have been waiting for days.Did anyone see Hannitys' show this weekend ?He talked about Wilson and Plame.There were some document on the Fox news site that had been declassified .These documents supposedly proved Joe a liar andVal no better.If you have already dicussed this I aplogize

[boris]

Ann, your HTML looks ok
There was an extra backslash in the link when you copied it.

HTML goodies

Rush with Rove

[Jane]

Hillary is getting fat.

[Ann]

Boris,

Many, Many Thanks!!!

I love JOMers!

[Ann]

Jane,

LOL

Today, she said she was going to eat her way across Iowa! :)

[Ann]

Jean,

Sue linked the Hannity show clip at 2:36pm.

And, yes, Joe and Valerie have been proven liars and worse.

[Rick Ballard]

Hillary is getting fat.

Nah. She's just retaining venom. Pretty common with basilisks during the summer.

[maryerose]

RB:
Best comment of the day regarding the Beast hillary. All dem comments against her because of high negatives have to be anonymous because everyone is afraid to get on her --it list. Whata bunch of dem wusses afraid of a little girl or in Jane's opinion the new fat girl.

[PeterUK]

A VERY IMPORTANT POLL

[hit and run]

HoosierHoops:
It's not that they don't want..They can't..
If Congress had the votes the troops would be written out of the budget and home next week..

Yes and know, chicken and egg, cart and horse.

They don't have the votes because, and again my math ain't pure but, 3.2% of poll respondents identify the current stance on Iraq as the reason they disapprove of the job congress is doing.

Would you want to vote to cut off funding when only 3.2% of your constituents say they're upset with you for doing it?

As much as I may deride politicians who are poll driven, I can't say I blame a politician for acting on information regarding 96.8% of his constituency.

Yeah, those who are nerds fluent in math can upbraid me for my sloppy use of numbers here, but hey, I'm talking about lib dems, so all that really matters is that I get The Narrative™ right.

[PeterUK]

A VERY IMPORTANT POLL

[PeterUK]

A VERY IMPORTANT POLL