by DemFromCT
There's a NY Times report on the gay sheep story:
Of Gay Sheep, Modern Science and Bad Publicity
The story of the gay sheep is an example of the distortion that can result when science meets the global news cycle.
John Schwartz does a nice fact-based summary of a story first posted here on TNH by emptypockets. In fact, emptypockets is intervierwed in the story:
Dr. Roselli and Mr. Newman persuaded some prominent bloggers, including Andrew Sullivan, who writes an online column for Time, to correct postings that had uncritically quoted The Sunday Times’s article. They also found an ally in the blog world: a scientist who writes under the pseudonym emptypockets and has taken up Dr. Roselli’s cause. The blogger, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he said a public stand could hurt his career, said he had been cheered by the number of bloggers who dropped their opposition when presented with the facts.
This has to be one of the first times the NY Times has quoted a pseudonymous blogger. That category is usually reserved for Senior Administration Officials like Scooter Libby.
Speaking of which, emptywheel's live blogging continues at FDL today. See also the emptywheel profile in the Ann Arbor News.
This is an open thread.
emptywheels, emtypockets...what is it with anonymous bloggers these days?
Posted by: Sir Oolius | January 25, 2007 at 13:30
emptywheel is indeed becoming a star. As I said earlier I await her appearance on Charlie Rose. I am reading her "non-transcript."
Thus far I would say that the Libby side is getting the better of the trial. The perfect memory/deciteful story mind set of Fitz is getting clobbered as the witnesses against Libby seem not to have very good memories themselves.
I am tired about hearing about those gay sheep. The way I look at it parents try to help their children adjust well to life, and of course set up certain objectives. For example the children shouldn't drink or do drugs, sleep around, steal or lie, and they should dress and look normal. It is also a good thing to be religious, to be helpful, to be a Girl or Boy Scout, to go to church regularly, and not spit in the kitchen sink. A significant part of what we consider normal is being straight in sexual orientation. There is nothing wrong with trying to keep children on the normal path, and that may include keeping them away from non-normal ideas, people, teachings, etc., getting them counseling, therapy, etc.
Posted by: Jodi | January 25, 2007 at 13:32
Jodi, what do choices in clothes, churchgoing, etc, have to do with sexual orientation? 'Normal' may mean something very different for you than it does for me; does that make either one of us non-normal? Not that I can see; it just means that we're not identical.
Posted by: P J Evans | January 25, 2007 at 13:43
If you care about schizophrenia, autism, drug addiction, artistic genius, marital fidelity... then you care about how hormones shape the brain, and how the brain controls behavior. That's what the gay sheep story is about.
Just checking in for a minute, but will try to post tonight - one more time; clearly - why the gay sheep story is NOT about gay sheep.
Posted by: emptypockets | January 25, 2007 at 14:35
>jodi
" .. It is also a good thing to be religious "
religious about what ?
Posted by: bianco | January 25, 2007 at 14:42
.. brushing your teeth ?
Posted by: bianco | January 25, 2007 at 14:43
brain controls behavior
There we go with that "c" word again...
Posted by: Sir Oolius | January 25, 2007 at 15:00
I'm a little thrilled to see EP quoted (especially as 'EP') in the NYT. Oh, pamphleteers!
Posted by: jonnybutter | January 25, 2007 at 15:45
Plame expert. EW is a dem. She is just following the agenda from the dems at CIA.
Posted by: pos sums | January 25, 2007 at 17:29
Not sure if this was mentioned before but Patrick Fitzgerald is posting all of government exhibits on his cool DoJ website (almost as cool as The Next Hurrah). Hat tip to Holden at First Draft who pointed it out.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/
Here's Fitz on why he's sharing:
"Due to public interest in this case, the Department of Justice is releasing the government exhibits in the format admitted in the court. The Department recognizes that these documents are in some cases not in an accessible format. If you have a disability and the format of any material on the site interferes with your ability to access some information, please email the Department of Justice webmaster at [email protected]. To enable us to respond in a manner that will be of most help to you, please indicate the nature of the accessibility problem, your preferred format (electronic format (ASCII, etc.), standard print, large print, etc.), the web address of the requested material, and your full contact information so we can reach you if questions arise while fulfilling your request."
Posted by: joejoejoe | January 25, 2007 at 18:45
Uh, that's "former Capitol Hill staffer Libby."
Posted by: SqueakyRat | January 25, 2007 at 21:17
Can any of our Federal Practice legal experts here answer a question that has been bugging me for the last week -- after I started spending much of the day reading the excellent liveblogging over at the lake.
(By the way, I have one profound complaint about live-blogging, you can't multitask. During the Ervin Hearings in Summer, 1973, I made eleven pair of slacks, some lined and tailored, and three pair of lined drapes, which I squared up on a board on the livingroom floor. All I can do while live-blogging is eat, and that isn't necessarily good for me.)
Anyhow, my question is can Judge Reggie Walton do to Scooter what Judge Sirica did to the Watergate Burglers, McCord, Hunt and Liddy -- namely Sirica took them into custody on conviction, announced very long provisional sentences (I think he started with 40 years), and then invited the prosecutors to take them to the Grand Jury again making it clear that talking honestly to the Grand Jury would influence his final sentence. That was when McCord finally broke, wrote the famous letter to Sirica, and gave up Halderman, Erlichman, Dean, MacGregor, Kalmbach and a few others. Are the rules governing post conviction the same now as they were in 1973? Given that the chief judge sent Judy to the slammer for contempt -- it strikes me as a possibility.
Would Libby, under such persuasion in the DC Jail likely turn turtle on others? Would he be a Liddy and show the judge just how macho he is, how much he really liked becoming a big man in Cell Block B, or would he cave like E. Howard Hunt did?
Posted by: Sara | January 25, 2007 at 23:45
Ha! Gay Sheep Mafia t-shirts!
http://www.cafepress.com/spookyharris
Posted by: spooky | January 26, 2007 at 12:20
I think sheep are sapient.
Posted by: Powerpuff | January 26, 2007 at 16:22
Buy Cialis Online - Buy Cialis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy Acomplia - Acomplia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generic Viagra Online - Generic Viagra
Posted by: jenny | October 08, 2007 at 12:46