"What do you hate most about America?" WTF?
Thompson is doing extremely well.
It seems that Ron Paul is not getting asked nearly as many questions.
Update: McCain is intense but not inspiring .
Big boon for Porkbusters. Lots of anger about Pork all around.
Update: Do you believe in evolution? Does anybody not believe in evolution?
2 or three raised their hands...but the camera was to the side...WHO WERE THESE NUTTERS?
UPDATE: Thomson was exceedingly professional, and generally good right up until the admittedly idiot question about firing people because they were gay....in which he inexplicably gave an obligingly idiotic answer. One of the legit roles and functions of government is to protect against theft, fraud and see that people are treated equal under the law. A good argument might be made that the case in point is not a FEDERAL matter and should be handled on the state or local level, but damn....
UPDATE: A surprisingly substantive debate....which given US debates lets the bar low...but still.
UPDATE:McCain seemed passionate but did not come off well, to me anyway. A lot of people are disappointed with Gulianni but he stood by his guns pretty much. He's libertine on a lot of social issues, people know that. Gilmore I liked, he seemed pretty professional, articulate, and reasonable....as he is the only one of these fellows I've met, and as a Virginian I'm slightly biased. The one time I met him he struck me as quite down to earth and competent, he did here too, but likely not enough to give him self a boost in the polls.
Stem cells: I liked the fact that though Gilmore and Romney and one other(?) are not in favor of govt. funding of stem cells, they are not in favor of an overall ban. Several were and I was distracted by an IM, spilled coffee, and a barista during that period....so no meaningful commentary there. Ron Paul made a remarkable pro-life argument for stem cell research on the local radio show here a few weeks back....he flubbed it here, but in fairness was cut off.
General competence: The whole field seemed pretty solid and there was some surprisingly good talk of actual issues. Ron Paul, who I disagree strongly with on the war, is, nevertheless a very smart guy who was not given the opportunity to make his case, in fact he was largely skipped over, or so it seemed. Duncan Hunter came off better than I expected, though his far right social conservatism is a bit off-putting.
Links to lots of rather more informed blather here:
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Friday, April 06, 2007
No, No Nukes in California?
Yes it IS a double negative.
Kirk Sorensen posts on political efforts to lift the 1976 ban on nuclear power plants in California.
Kirk Sorensen posts on political efforts to lift the 1976 ban on nuclear power plants in California.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Well This is Dumb
The Armenian Genocide was a terrible thing...but it was perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire...which was OVERTHROWN by the Turks.
So naturally...Congress is thinking about condemning Turkey for it and thereby fanning ethnic tensions in one of the more stable and forward looking Muslim nations.
The whole mess explained at Captains Quarters....where Ed Morrisey's wife has just undergone transplant surgery...please drop them some kind words.
So naturally...Congress is thinking about condemning Turkey for it and thereby fanning ethnic tensions in one of the more stable and forward looking Muslim nations.
The whole mess explained at Captains Quarters....where Ed Morrisey's wife has just undergone transplant surgery...please drop them some kind words.
Trust in America....Ye Gullible Fools
Murdoc posts on his tipping point.
This unspeakable sleaze is repulsive to be sure, but it should not really be in any way surprising. Given that the Dems pretty much told everyone they were going to do this, this should not be at all shocking, but in fairness to Murdoc, it still stings.
That many of us (including myself) strongly advocated (and still do) things like Porkbusters , which fed the Dems "culture of corruption" slogans, makes it all the more painful. Pointing out the failings of our own who failed to live up to their promises and ideals is one of the things that I actually like about the Republicans...we are much better at policing our own assholes. We do have standards beyond blind lust for power and given that the Republicans were elected in '94 specifically to deal with pork, sleaze and corruption, the shenanigans of a pork happy Republican Congress bloating the budget with their pet projects and nepotism quite rightly pissed off a lot of us and disillusioned the base.
We demanded that those that carry our standard live up to our standards regards smaller and cleaner government.
We did not stand in lock step with Cunningham, Abramoff, and on a far less sinister noteTubemeister Ted, the Seller of Bridges, we said " this must not stand...this is what the Dems do and we are not them and will not be represented by those who have only power as their goal".
Now, despite what my friend Bob says, this is not perfidy, this is good and proper. It is honest debate and open governance. It is what many of us on the right aspire to. It is also necessary to keep our team relatively clean and relevant...to the extent that is possible in politics. I think that keeping our own teams feat to the fire is an important thing for our side to do and if we cease to do it, then there really won't be much difference between us and the Democrats.
But, there is no doubt we got played this time.
Many of us, even those like me who gave little more than lip service and the occasional signature to the Porkbusters cause, were filled with pride when the media noticed us and began to rail against this. NZ Bear and the rest made a difference! Yay!
Of course it was a ploy.
Thanks to quite justified disgust with a Republican led congress that was presiding over discretionary spending that was swelling like a dead pig in the August sun, the base stayed home. Just enough....the '06 elections were a close run thing...just enough to tip the scales.
Actually, the sheer cynicism and arrogance of the Democrats and their media gophers is astonishing.
In 2006 the NYT was all about the evils of Republican Pork. Now of course, with a majority of congress-critters having "D" behind their name...what was pork is just "pet projects", part of the way good government works.
...earmarks, when dispensed fairly and openly, are an important way of addressing local needs...
Well...that's nice to know....
Porkbusters was able to track pork and embarrass people in part because of the Congressional research office, which for 12 years has been tracking congressional spending and making it available to the public. 12 years...yeah, that sounds like one of those Republican contract with America thingies....well, anyway, they are discontinuing the service now...no need to...the Dems are in charge.
The Democrats have bought congressional bills that are intended to undermine our troops and bring about our defeat. They've done so with with bribes that, as a result of their fiat, are now much harder to track. Of course, like wars and nation building the difference between good and bad or newsworthieness is the presence of a "D" or "R" behind ones name. Yes, Feinstein is in as deep or deeper than Cunningham was....yet hardly a peep about the culture of corruption.
So what the hell does the title of this post have to do with this rant?
Well it's not griping about being held to higher standards than the Dems, for that is as it always is and frankly is as it should be.
It's about the repercussions of what they want to do...this time in the north, where we made and broke promises before and through that realpolitick meddling and fecklessness caused terrible death and suffering.
Wretchard explains.....
If the U.S. leaves early and does not protect the Kurds, it will be the third time in a little more than three decades the ethnic group will have been betrayed by the United States, Qubad Jalal Talabany said during an afternoon sit-down interview with the Herald/Review. Earlier Thursday morning, Talabany spoke to nearly 350 people during the last day of a three-day Training and Doctrine Command Cultural Awareness Summit.
Not much to add to his pithiness...
...except these pictures from another part of the world that we broke promises to left to the tender mercies of our enemies the last time people like this got their way.
Keep in mind that for a lefty of a certain social strata and age....the protests and activism that led both directly and indirectly to the above pictures are hands down their proudest moments. Perhaps because of self image preservation they can make no connection between cause and effect...
Damned harsh, but true.
This unspeakable sleaze is repulsive to be sure, but it should not really be in any way surprising. Given that the Dems pretty much told everyone they were going to do this, this should not be at all shocking, but in fairness to Murdoc, it still stings.
That many of us (including myself) strongly advocated (and still do) things like Porkbusters , which fed the Dems "culture of corruption" slogans, makes it all the more painful. Pointing out the failings of our own who failed to live up to their promises and ideals is one of the things that I actually like about the Republicans...we are much better at policing our own assholes. We do have standards beyond blind lust for power and given that the Republicans were elected in '94 specifically to deal with pork, sleaze and corruption, the shenanigans of a pork happy Republican Congress bloating the budget with their pet projects and nepotism quite rightly pissed off a lot of us and disillusioned the base.
We demanded that those that carry our standard live up to our standards regards smaller and cleaner government.
We did not stand in lock step with Cunningham, Abramoff, and on a far less sinister noteTubemeister Ted, the Seller of Bridges, we said " this must not stand...this is what the Dems do and we are not them and will not be represented by those who have only power as their goal".
Now, despite what my friend Bob says, this is not perfidy, this is good and proper. It is honest debate and open governance. It is what many of us on the right aspire to. It is also necessary to keep our team relatively clean and relevant...to the extent that is possible in politics. I think that keeping our own teams feat to the fire is an important thing for our side to do and if we cease to do it, then there really won't be much difference between us and the Democrats.
But, there is no doubt we got played this time.
Many of us, even those like me who gave little more than lip service and the occasional signature to the Porkbusters cause, were filled with pride when the media noticed us and began to rail against this. NZ Bear and the rest made a difference! Yay!
Of course it was a ploy.
Thanks to quite justified disgust with a Republican led congress that was presiding over discretionary spending that was swelling like a dead pig in the August sun, the base stayed home. Just enough....the '06 elections were a close run thing...just enough to tip the scales.
Actually, the sheer cynicism and arrogance of the Democrats and their media gophers is astonishing.
In 2006 the NYT was all about the evils of Republican Pork. Now of course, with a majority of congress-critters having "D" behind their name...what was pork is just "pet projects", part of the way good government works.
...earmarks, when dispensed fairly and openly, are an important way of addressing local needs...
Well...that's nice to know....
Porkbusters was able to track pork and embarrass people in part because of the Congressional research office, which for 12 years has been tracking congressional spending and making it available to the public. 12 years...yeah, that sounds like one of those Republican contract with America thingies....well, anyway, they are discontinuing the service now...no need to...the Dems are in charge.
The Democrats have bought congressional bills that are intended to undermine our troops and bring about our defeat. They've done so with with bribes that, as a result of their fiat, are now much harder to track. Of course, like wars and nation building the difference between good and bad or newsworthieness is the presence of a "D" or "R" behind ones name. Yes, Feinstein is in as deep or deeper than Cunningham was....yet hardly a peep about the culture of corruption.
So what the hell does the title of this post have to do with this rant?
Well it's not griping about being held to higher standards than the Dems, for that is as it always is and frankly is as it should be.
It's about the repercussions of what they want to do...this time in the north, where we made and broke promises before and through that realpolitick meddling and fecklessness caused terrible death and suffering.
Wretchard explains.....
If the U.S. leaves early and does not protect the Kurds, it will be the third time in a little more than three decades the ethnic group will have been betrayed by the United States, Qubad Jalal Talabany said during an afternoon sit-down interview with the Herald/Review. Earlier Thursday morning, Talabany spoke to nearly 350 people during the last day of a three-day Training and Doctrine Command Cultural Awareness Summit.
Not much to add to his pithiness...
...except these pictures from another part of the world that we broke promises to left to the tender mercies of our enemies the last time people like this got their way.
Keep in mind that for a lefty of a certain social strata and age....the protests and activism that led both directly and indirectly to the above pictures are hands down their proudest moments. Perhaps because of self image preservation they can make no connection between cause and effect...
Damned harsh, but true.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
The Shipyard Problem...
Murdoc touches on something in this post that is extremely important.
The fact that an entity called "Northrop Grumman Newport News" even exists is maybe part of the problem in the first place, but because of the massive slowdown in shipbuilding that's where we are and we need to maintain what we have left.
One of the reasons big government is bad is that in the absence of competition things break down.
This also holds true for private enterprise. We don't have just one shipyard of course, but we have so few that fear that one will go out of business and result in near or total monopoly that there is insufficient sanction available against them for incompetence, overpricing or fraud.
According to Global Security.org ....
As of 2001, there were eight active shipbuilding yards in the United States. Six of those shipyards, referred to as the Big Six, were the primary builders of large U.S. Navy and commercial vessels. Those shipyards are Avondale Industries in New Orleans, Louisiana; Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine; Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut; Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Mississippi; National Steel & Shipbuilding Company in San Diego, California; and Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Virginia. In 1998, the Big Six accounted for two-thirds of the industry's total revenue (over $6.7 billion), and performed nearly 90 percent of all military work. Ninety-five percent of the revenues of these shipyards were defense-related. The Big Six also accounted for about 11 percent of the industry's commercial revenues from 1996 to 2000.
By 2005 two companies owned the Big Six shipyards. In 2001, Northrop Grumman purchased Newport News Shipbuilding and Litton Industries, which included the Avondale and Ingalls shipbuilding yards. General Dynamics owns Electric Boat, Bath Iron Works, and National Steel & Shipbuilding Company.
With respect to commercial vessels that must be constructed by a US shipyard under the Jones Act, there are approximately 20 private US shipyards that can accommodate the construction of vessels up to 400 feet in length. Because of the current overcapacity at US shipyards, the current small volume of commercial work available, and the fact that most contracts are awarded on the basis of competitive bidding, price competition is particularly intense. Since 1977, the number of privately owned major shipbuilding yards in the United States has fluctuated between 17 and 32. This includes combined statistics for active shipbuilders and shipyards with build positions. As of 2001 a total of 17 of the shipyards reported on had not constructed a major ocean-going vessel in the previous 2 years.
.....which is more than worrisome.
There is only ONE US shipyard that can make nuclear aircraft carriers, Newport News., which is just another feather in the cap of Northrop Grumman as a result of the massive consolidations of the early to mid 90's. There are only 2 other nuclear capable shipyards, one on each coast and I don't think Pearl Harbor has built anything in a long time.
Most of the shipbuilding capacity is held by two main companies Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics, neither has a good reputation for ethical conduct in defense contracting, partly as a result of the idiotic cost-plus procurement system which is more concerned with how much a percentage profit a company makes than the bottom line.
For example....
If a company can produce a good quality product, cheaper than anyone else and turn a 90% profit....more power to them, but the cost plus system sets a fixed profit margin....requires a legion of (expensive) lawyers and accountants that, in the big two, exceed the total employment of several of the smaller shipyards (one reason they don't do govt contracts). It gets worse. Since the profit margin is fixed this gives as the only way to increase revenues....cost overruns. It's simple math and is largely responsible for spiraling defense costs, but simple math, it seems, is beyond our legislators.
This and the near monopoly environment that has come about in all the heavy industries after the cold war has seriously undermined all aspects of our procurement, not just in shipyards but in EVERYTHING from aviation to vehicles. This is, IMHO, one of the bigger long term problems facing the US military.
Nothing short of getting rid of the idiotic cost plus system and a full on balls-out Teddy Rosevelt style "trust busting" campaign is going to resolve this. But I don't see this happening. The Dems are all about concentration of power, the Republicans did nothing about it when they were in office and the big two have been moving their assets between shipyards to ensure that most of them are fairly non-viable commercially (that is non-diverse, overspecialized)in the event they aere cut loose....this makes good business sense as it reduces redundancy...but it is also, no doubt, insurance against needed reforms.
I'm not optimistic....
The fact that an entity called "Northrop Grumman Newport News" even exists is maybe part of the problem in the first place, but because of the massive slowdown in shipbuilding that's where we are and we need to maintain what we have left.
One of the reasons big government is bad is that in the absence of competition things break down.
This also holds true for private enterprise. We don't have just one shipyard of course, but we have so few that fear that one will go out of business and result in near or total monopoly that there is insufficient sanction available against them for incompetence, overpricing or fraud.
According to Global Security.org ....
As of 2001, there were eight active shipbuilding yards in the United States. Six of those shipyards, referred to as the Big Six, were the primary builders of large U.S. Navy and commercial vessels. Those shipyards are Avondale Industries in New Orleans, Louisiana; Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine; Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut; Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Mississippi; National Steel & Shipbuilding Company in San Diego, California; and Newport News Shipbuilding in Newport News, Virginia. In 1998, the Big Six accounted for two-thirds of the industry's total revenue (over $6.7 billion), and performed nearly 90 percent of all military work. Ninety-five percent of the revenues of these shipyards were defense-related. The Big Six also accounted for about 11 percent of the industry's commercial revenues from 1996 to 2000.
By 2005 two companies owned the Big Six shipyards. In 2001, Northrop Grumman purchased Newport News Shipbuilding and Litton Industries, which included the Avondale and Ingalls shipbuilding yards. General Dynamics owns Electric Boat, Bath Iron Works, and National Steel & Shipbuilding Company.
With respect to commercial vessels that must be constructed by a US shipyard under the Jones Act, there are approximately 20 private US shipyards that can accommodate the construction of vessels up to 400 feet in length. Because of the current overcapacity at US shipyards, the current small volume of commercial work available, and the fact that most contracts are awarded on the basis of competitive bidding, price competition is particularly intense. Since 1977, the number of privately owned major shipbuilding yards in the United States has fluctuated between 17 and 32. This includes combined statistics for active shipbuilders and shipyards with build positions. As of 2001 a total of 17 of the shipyards reported on had not constructed a major ocean-going vessel in the previous 2 years.
.....which is more than worrisome.
There is only ONE US shipyard that can make nuclear aircraft carriers, Newport News., which is just another feather in the cap of Northrop Grumman as a result of the massive consolidations of the early to mid 90's. There are only 2 other nuclear capable shipyards, one on each coast and I don't think Pearl Harbor has built anything in a long time.
Most of the shipbuilding capacity is held by two main companies Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics, neither has a good reputation for ethical conduct in defense contracting, partly as a result of the idiotic cost-plus procurement system which is more concerned with how much a percentage profit a company makes than the bottom line.
For example....
If a company can produce a good quality product, cheaper than anyone else and turn a 90% profit....more power to them, but the cost plus system sets a fixed profit margin....requires a legion of (expensive) lawyers and accountants that, in the big two, exceed the total employment of several of the smaller shipyards (one reason they don't do govt contracts). It gets worse. Since the profit margin is fixed this gives as the only way to increase revenues....cost overruns. It's simple math and is largely responsible for spiraling defense costs, but simple math, it seems, is beyond our legislators.
This and the near monopoly environment that has come about in all the heavy industries after the cold war has seriously undermined all aspects of our procurement, not just in shipyards but in EVERYTHING from aviation to vehicles. This is, IMHO, one of the bigger long term problems facing the US military.
Nothing short of getting rid of the idiotic cost plus system and a full on balls-out Teddy Rosevelt style "trust busting" campaign is going to resolve this. But I don't see this happening. The Dems are all about concentration of power, the Republicans did nothing about it when they were in office and the big two have been moving their assets between shipyards to ensure that most of them are fairly non-viable commercially (that is non-diverse, overspecialized)in the event they aere cut loose....this makes good business sense as it reduces redundancy...but it is also, no doubt, insurance against needed reforms.
I'm not optimistic....
Sunday, March 25, 2007
On Rage
Two very good posts, one from Dean Barnett and one from Ed Morrissey on the coarsening of our discourse.
UPDATE: On a more positive note Joe Gandleman notes some touching humanity from Tony Snow. Let me say that I agree with Snow regards the awful Edwards situation.
And when you’re seeing Elizabeth Edwards saying, I’m going to embrace life and I’m going to move forward, that is a wonderful thing, because once you decide that you’re going to embrace life, you become a much better patient. And once you decide that you proceed with a sense of hope and optimism, people are going to rally to your side, and they do- What she is going to do is going to provide a lot of encouragement and example that I think is going to help a lot of people, and that is a truly wonderful thing, and I congratulate her for it.”
UPDATE: On a more positive note Joe Gandleman notes some touching humanity from Tony Snow. Let me say that I agree with Snow regards the awful Edwards situation.
And when you’re seeing Elizabeth Edwards saying, I’m going to embrace life and I’m going to move forward, that is a wonderful thing, because once you decide that you’re going to embrace life, you become a much better patient. And once you decide that you proceed with a sense of hope and optimism, people are going to rally to your side, and they do- What she is going to do is going to provide a lot of encouragement and example that I think is going to help a lot of people, and that is a truly wonderful thing, and I congratulate her for it.”
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Real Life Science Babe Under Attack !
Louise Riofrio, a cosmologist, has been asked to speak at the Imperial College in London on March 29th at the Outstanding Questions for the Standard Cosmological Model conference. She has some interesting and controversial theories. Her most controversial idea seems to be the GM=tc^3 equation which...well it's way beyond my paygrade...but seems to indicate that the speed of light is slowing. Physicists are unsure of what it means but she seems to be onto something. It is at least sparking some discussion and she is rated enough to get invited to the aforementioned conference. So far so good....but wait...there is a campaign to get her uninvited.
From Miss Riofrio's Blog:
From: Don Barry [mailto:don@isc.astro.cornell.edu]
Sent: 19 March 2007 00:51
To: De Nadai-Sowrey, Graziela C
Cc: Simeon Warner
Subject: A crackpot has slipped through your screens..
Dear organizers,
I notice that you have given a slot to Louise Riofrio in one of your
oral
sessions in your upcoming conference.. She's listed in your
"Participants"
section as affiliated with James Cook University, Queensland. A simple
search
will reveal that JCU/Queensland does not list her in any capacity.
She's been a frequent crackpot pest trying to post papers on the
Cornell
Arxiv
server. If you take a look at her blog,
http://riofriospacetime.blogspot.com/,
all should become clear. It's actually rather hilarious in spots.
In any event, you may get some comic relief as people become somewhat
glass-eyed on the last day of a conference.
Cheers,
Don Barry,
Spitzer Space Telescope Infrared Spectrograph Team,
Cornell University
Oookay. I'm not a physicist, I'm an undergraduate oceanography major so for all I know, she might be a crackpot, but she has some interesting ideas and was invited to give her viewpoint. In the above E-mail Mr. Barry indicates that she is not affiliated a JCU Queensland at all, but according to her blog her records got hacked. She is listed as affiliated with James Cook U in this lecture program and here as well as in these two abstracts from the Harvard Website. It would seem that Mr. Barry is wrong.
Indeed, Mr. Barry, it seems is quite a piece of work, according to his astronomy dept bio...he is a Chomskyite Marxist Leninist
OTOH he does use a slide rule which is way cool.....but can't really compensate for his moonbattery.
I'm still wondering what his bio has to do with astronomy.
More on the mad on Louise Riofrio gives certain scientists here. She may well be wrong, science, especially very hard to observe things like these is a LEARNING and EXPLORING experiment but she seems to at least be asking the right questions, not trying to ignore or silence the questions of others.
*********************************************************
OK bear with me as I have a tangentially related political digression for a moment. Feel free to scroll past...
Given the observable, objective failures of large scale Leftism in bringing about prosperity since people really began experimenting with it during and after the French Revolution, why do many scientists, who are, in theory, all about observing cause and effect, still adhere to this.
In spite of all the evidence of history, the above mentioned moonbat scientist at Cornell is an adherent to a philosophy that killed a comparable number of people in the last 80 years to those that were killed by all the religious wars in Europe and the Levant in the last thousand. He extols an economic plan that has never worked absent US subsidies or huge infusions of cash from local resources (see Norway) , one that really doesn't work well at its best and is absolutely catastrophic at its worst.
He is not an aberration.
Whiskey tango foxtrot?
I dunno, I have 3 theories.
1: A university by necessity, is essentially a socialist, bureaucratic structure with a big implicitly Malthusian component (research monies). Thus to operate in that system one must understand and apreciate the system. Being totally in the system at all times doesn't help.
2:To get to the highest levels of academia often requires that one spends ones entire careerer in a university environment so there is, ironically for such learned people, a certain amount of provincialism that informs their viewpoint.
3:Peer pressure. The left is very good about punishing heretics, if one does not extol politically correct viewpoints one does not get invited to the cool parties. More importantly, one might not get tenure, so there may be an subtle but active weeding of more dynamic viewpoints.
I don't think that things are quite as bad as some suggest, but I think it it does influence scientific debate. Global warming is a case study...
Global warming is happening
There likely IS an anthropogenic component.
But given that the whole solar system is also warming should we go whole hog into Kyoto, despite the fact that it gives a pass to non western polluters (some of the worst in fact).
Kyoto is an egalitarian socialist dream, it punishes the evil west and in particular the hated USA, It uses bureaucratic machinations to put the sort of centralized planning in place that has pretty much been a bust previously, but now is presented as an emergency earth saving measure.
Now I don't want to continue the transcendentally stupid experiment of deffacating in the atmosphere with tons of pollution every year and see what new wretched things happen, but the sort of dynamic "boing boingy:)" solutions, that are more likely to generate long term solutions than a top down statist approach. In the near term, nuclear power, small scale solar where practical and biofuels to the extent they don't egregiously displace food crops perhaps assisted with gene modified crops are a good bet.
Of course the first and last of my near term items are double-plus-ungood to the left...and therein lies the rub.
The semi-religious nature of leftism is not in any way conducive to open debate and inquiry the attempt to shut up L. Rofinio is symptomatic of this. *
*********************************************************
Anyway, my own wingnuttery aside, Those of us at Brickmuppet Blog (and, of course, the Brickmuppet's Crack team of Science Babes) wish the Babe in the Universe a successful speech received in the spirit of open mindedness and intelligent discourse. In the unlikely event she is a crank utterly without merit then she will make an ass of herself as certain IDiots did and her theories can be put to rest. If upon careful analysis her theories do not quite pan out, then eliminating them or perhaps modifying them will narrow down our search for the truth in this area and thereby expand our body of knowledge. If she's right then she certainly deserves not to be silenced, not just for her career but the good of mankind.
There are no real arguments for not hearing such an august individual, save the jealous rantings and cybermischief of an angry passive aggressive quidnunc.
*I don't mean to suggest in any way that Leftism is a religion:
Religion is the belief in that which cannot be proven or disproven...Leftism is the belief in the demonstrably false.
From Miss Riofrio's Blog:
From: Don Barry [mailto:don@isc.astro.cornell.edu]
Sent: 19 March 2007 00:51
To: De Nadai-Sowrey, Graziela C
Cc: Simeon Warner
Subject: A crackpot has slipped through your screens..
Dear organizers,
I notice that you have given a slot to Louise Riofrio in one of your
oral
sessions in your upcoming conference.. She's listed in your
"Participants"
section as affiliated with James Cook University, Queensland. A simple
search
will reveal that JCU/Queensland does not list her in any capacity.
She's been a frequent crackpot pest trying to post papers on the
Cornell
Arxiv
server. If you take a look at her blog,
http://riofriospacetime.blogspot.com/,
all should become clear. It's actually rather hilarious in spots.
In any event, you may get some comic relief as people become somewhat
glass-eyed on the last day of a conference.
Cheers,
Don Barry,
Spitzer Space Telescope Infrared Spectrograph Team,
Cornell University
Oookay. I'm not a physicist, I'm an undergraduate oceanography major so for all I know, she might be a crackpot, but she has some interesting ideas and was invited to give her viewpoint. In the above E-mail Mr. Barry indicates that she is not affiliated a JCU Queensland at all, but according to her blog her records got hacked. She is listed as affiliated with James Cook U in this lecture program and here as well as in these two abstracts from the Harvard Website. It would seem that Mr. Barry is wrong.
Indeed, Mr. Barry, it seems is quite a piece of work, according to his astronomy dept bio...he is a Chomskyite Marxist Leninist
OTOH he does use a slide rule which is way cool.....but can't really compensate for his moonbattery.
I'm still wondering what his bio has to do with astronomy.
More on the mad on Louise Riofrio gives certain scientists here. She may well be wrong, science, especially very hard to observe things like these is a LEARNING and EXPLORING experiment but she seems to at least be asking the right questions, not trying to ignore or silence the questions of others.
*********************************************************
OK bear with me as I have a tangentially related political digression for a moment. Feel free to scroll past...
Given the observable, objective failures of large scale Leftism in bringing about prosperity since people really began experimenting with it during and after the French Revolution, why do many scientists, who are, in theory, all about observing cause and effect, still adhere to this.
In spite of all the evidence of history, the above mentioned moonbat scientist at Cornell is an adherent to a philosophy that killed a comparable number of people in the last 80 years to those that were killed by all the religious wars in Europe and the Levant in the last thousand. He extols an economic plan that has never worked absent US subsidies or huge infusions of cash from local resources (see Norway) , one that really doesn't work well at its best and is absolutely catastrophic at its worst.
He is not an aberration.
Whiskey tango foxtrot?
I dunno, I have 3 theories.
1: A university by necessity, is essentially a socialist, bureaucratic structure with a big implicitly Malthusian component (research monies). Thus to operate in that system one must understand and apreciate the system. Being totally in the system at all times doesn't help.
2:To get to the highest levels of academia often requires that one spends ones entire careerer in a university environment so there is, ironically for such learned people, a certain amount of provincialism that informs their viewpoint.
3:Peer pressure. The left is very good about punishing heretics, if one does not extol politically correct viewpoints one does not get invited to the cool parties. More importantly, one might not get tenure, so there may be an subtle but active weeding of more dynamic viewpoints.
I don't think that things are quite as bad as some suggest, but I think it it does influence scientific debate. Global warming is a case study...
Global warming is happening
There likely IS an anthropogenic component.
But given that the whole solar system is also warming should we go whole hog into Kyoto, despite the fact that it gives a pass to non western polluters (some of the worst in fact).
Kyoto is an egalitarian socialist dream, it punishes the evil west and in particular the hated USA, It uses bureaucratic machinations to put the sort of centralized planning in place that has pretty much been a bust previously, but now is presented as an emergency earth saving measure.
Now I don't want to continue the transcendentally stupid experiment of deffacating in the atmosphere with tons of pollution every year and see what new wretched things happen, but the sort of dynamic "boing boingy:)" solutions, that are more likely to generate long term solutions than a top down statist approach. In the near term, nuclear power, small scale solar where practical and biofuels to the extent they don't egregiously displace food crops perhaps assisted with gene modified crops are a good bet.
Of course the first and last of my near term items are double-plus-ungood to the left...and therein lies the rub.
The semi-religious nature of leftism is not in any way conducive to open debate and inquiry the attempt to shut up L. Rofinio is symptomatic of this. *
*********************************************************
Anyway, my own wingnuttery aside, Those of us at Brickmuppet Blog (and, of course, the Brickmuppet's Crack team of Science Babes) wish the Babe in the Universe a successful speech received in the spirit of open mindedness and intelligent discourse. In the unlikely event she is a crank utterly without merit then she will make an ass of herself as certain IDiots did and her theories can be put to rest. If upon careful analysis her theories do not quite pan out, then eliminating them or perhaps modifying them will narrow down our search for the truth in this area and thereby expand our body of knowledge. If she's right then she certainly deserves not to be silenced, not just for her career but the good of mankind.There are no real arguments for not hearing such an august individual, save the jealous rantings and cybermischief of an angry passive aggressive quidnunc.
*I don't mean to suggest in any way that Leftism is a religion:
Religion is the belief in that which cannot be proven or disproven...Leftism is the belief in the demonstrably false.
Friday, March 16, 2007
In Defense of Catgirls
A message to Francis Fukyama....
When you oppose genetic research, chimeric investigations and human cloning you are trying to prevent catgirls from even being born.
Dude...you suck!
ahem....
Catgirls aside, this luddism is terribly counterproductive and antihumanistic...and I say this as someone who has reservations about utterly unfettered abortions. The reason those leave me uneasy is a concern for the life involved.....I have equal concern for those suffering from debilitating diseases, some of whom are friends of mine. Opposing this sort of research seriously stymies attempts to improve the quality and length of peoples lives. It is utterly incompatible with a concern for human rights and defining human life broadly and valuing it as much as possible. It is also not in keeping with a conservative interpretation of the Constitution, which is, in theory, is one of the 3 raison d'etres of the conservative movement...though many of the confused Johnny come latelies to our side of the aisle seem to be quite unclear on this point.
On a tangentially related note, this article in National Geographic reinforces the utter wrongness of Fukyama's argument, but something about it is bothering me. It postulates that interspecies trysts are more important to evolution than previously thought. I don't recommend actively testing this hypothesis though there are certainly furverts and Washingtonians who are trying...in vain I might add....as no amount of doing it with a horse is going to produce a centaur.
The article is interesting but I'm not sure about it's nomenclature...
If two "species" interbreed and produce a true breeding offspring (as opposed to a mule) then, as I understand it, they aren't actually separate species. For example, the Red Wolf is apparently a true breeding hybrid of the Grey Wolf and Coyote...but dogs are...DOGS and can pretty much interbreed with all dogs (mechanical difficulties between mastiffs and chihuahuas notwithstanding). The recent discovery of the Pizzly Bear is another case in point....though it's unclear if that animal was a mule or not.
This seems to be talking about combining genes from divergent points on the bell curve of a species genetic drift...or am I missing some secret thing that is kept from us lowly undergraduates?
Note:Here at Brickmuppet Blog we have nothing at all against miscegenation and indeed heartily endorse it.
Deceivingly cute .gif is from the ethically dubious UFO Princess Valkyrie which is seriously not my cup of tea...but which you can purchase here if you so desire.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Don is Officially Cooler Than Me.
Here is the proof.
No, really, I checked.
This is galling!
His sidekick loli is just...just.. gloating and insufferable!
I must do something about this.
NO SLAVE LABOR!!!
FREE TIBET!!!
TAIWAN IS SOVEREIGN!!!
FAULUN GONG!!!
Update:
Drat!!!
Ubu is cooler too!
Satharn has me beat!
PulpJunkie is secure in his coolness!
Gorilla Daze is cooler than me!
This is unforgivable!
I mean I actually have linked to stories on Organ Jacking at least once.
I just give up...
Sunday, March 04, 2007
I Would've Asked for Florence King....but Noooooo...
Well, while I was vegging and spaceblogging watching anime and sleeping there was a bimbo eruption at CPAC as Twiggy the Terrible had yet another moment of shock jock assininity.
Thanks for that Ann...
...and the idiot college kids of course ate it up. (Though there were a few boos.)
Fortunately most of the blogging righties were swift to denounce this asshattery for what it was, as were all the Presidential canidates including the one she so thoughtfully endorsed.
Michelle Malkin has a prescient reading recommendation.
I'm happy to see that she is being thoroughly denounced pretty much across the board on the right.
And that is all I'm going to say on that.
Thanks for that Ann...
...and the idiot college kids of course ate it up. (Though there were a few boos.)
Fortunately most of the blogging righties were swift to denounce this asshattery for what it was, as were all the Presidential canidates including the one she so thoughtfully endorsed.
Michelle Malkin has a prescient reading recommendation.
I'm happy to see that she is being thoroughly denounced pretty much across the board on the right.
And that is all I'm going to say on that.
Friday, March 02, 2007
BLOGGY DRAMA!!!
POPCORN FOR ALL!!!!
Well this is silly, but exams are over so I commented on it.
Dean Esmay has laid out some er...interesting ground rules.
This is the new editorial policy at Dean's World, stated concisely:
"This is an Islamophobe-free zone."
Fair enough....nay kudos!...it's his blog and certainly I have ground rules too...(but they're SECRET:)
BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!!
AT NO EXTRA CHARGE YOU ALSO GET THE 5 NONDEBATEABLE POINTS!!
It is henceforth the editorial policy that if you cannot write with the following as your presumptions, you do not belong here:
1) Islam does not represent the forces of Satan or the Anti-Christ bent on destruction of the Christian world.
2) There is no 1,400 year old "war with the West/Christianity" being waged by "The Muslims" or anyone else.
3) Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women's rights, or democratic pluralism than most ancient religions.
4) Medieval, anachronistic, obscure terms like "dhimmitude" or "taqiyya" are suitable for intellectual discussion & analysis. They are not and never will be appropriate to slap in the face of everyday Muslims or their friends.
5) Muslims have no more need to prove that they can be good Americans, loyal citizens, decent people, or enemies of terrorism than anyone else does.
That is our stated editorial position. You--and this includes commenters--will work from respect for that, or you just need to leave.
OKAY BuhBye!!
Well...
Dean's world had become a very interesting group blog with 20 or so co-bloggers from across the breadth of the political spectrum. Dean got some criticism as he tended towards the sort of smug condesencion one expects from those who call themselves liberal in this day and age, but he was generally interesting and thoughtful, and the wide range of opinions and civil discorse made the place an almost daily stop.
At least 2 of his co-bloggers bailed after the statement and given that I responded in the comments in a not excactly goostepplingly agreeing manner I'll likely be banned shortly.
My response:
I'm deeply disapointed, I'd actually defended Dean recently.
Point 2 is demonstrably false :Al-Quaeda is fighting the war you so blindly deny...yes Boweman and his cannibal crusaders fought it before they did...in response to...in response to the expansion of the muslims in the first place (denying a thing does nothing to foster understanding of it) .
Point 4 is Orwellian newspeak. Using Mideveal anachronistic obscure terms is perfectly legitimate, indeed necessary when dealing with Mideveal anachronistic obscure branches of Islam.
The kowtowing to Muslim wants regards things like sharia and womens rights in the face of violence IS dhimmitude.
IT'S WHAT THE WORD MEANS! ...at least in it's modern context.
What is going on in Europe with areas of Sharia law being enforced to the exclusion of the laws of the nations IS DHIMMITUDE. Denying people the ability to describe their greviances in words that have any meaning is Newspeak.
1 and 3 I am in complete agreement on.
3 in particular is WHY I supported the invasion of Iraq, I don't think anyone is condemned by their faith and I fervently believe that the Islamic world is capable of throwing off the shackles that despots, colonial administrators and the foetid evils of leftism left on their long suffering lands, ...this is not only possible it is absolutely necessary.
By doing this you only harden the opinion of those who are (with some justification) deeply suspicious of those of us who defend muslims. Closing off dialog especially in the insidious way you have (taking the words that mean anything off the table) does nothing except to reduce mutual understanding.
#5 I agree in principle with, (the # of cresents in Arlington, out of ALL proportion to their numbers in society should ram this home)
...but...
...while we are not fighting a religious war the jihadists are. No one can be blamed for casting an askance eye at people who represent a religion which we are reminded of daily has a VERY vocal element that wants to kill us.
This does not mean we don't offer our hand in friendship.
This does not mean that we don't befriend people and get to know them to the point that extra caution is not necessary.
This means that trepidation around muslims is NOT irrational.It is sad it hurts and it must be DAMMNED galling but it's human nature, it is a survival instinct.
Muslims SHOULD have no more reason to prove that they are good loyal Americans than anyone else...sadly the reality of the jihadists who have so thoroughly bloodlibled them means they do need to set peoples minds at ease. This sucks but it's the way it is.
The impulse to cover up muslim acts of terror, like the recent shooting, again only reinforces the notion that our enemies have as their useful idiots a see-no-evil PC myrmidon squad.
Actions like yours only drive away the people who you and Ali might win over.
I likely agree with you on a great many things and in a less totalitarian enviroment we could quite possibly be friends....but it is an all or nothing thing now and I'm 2 and 9/10 out of 5 which I'm afraid seems to mean I'm not welcome here.
I'll still stop by and I'd like to continue to comment, so, I won't delete my account. I'll leave that decision to you.
This whole thing is surely a tempest in a teapot. It's not like were locked in, but it is an interesting window into the mindset of those who claim that they are...
"Defending the Liberal Tradition"
...I don't think that means what you think it does.....
....of course thanks to a century of actions these 5 points, those who can now call themselves "liberal" and "progressive" tend to be neither.
This kerfuffel is silly of course.
As a Z-list blogger I'm not really getting upset that an A/B-lister is actually taking the effort to start policing his comment section...(not like anyone ought to do more of that...ahem).
Well this is silly, but exams are over so I commented on it.
Dean Esmay has laid out some er...interesting ground rules.
This is the new editorial policy at Dean's World, stated concisely:
"This is an Islamophobe-free zone."
Fair enough....nay kudos!...it's his blog and certainly I have ground rules too...(but they're SECRET:)
BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!!
AT NO EXTRA CHARGE YOU ALSO GET THE 5 NONDEBATEABLE POINTS!!
It is henceforth the editorial policy that if you cannot write with the following as your presumptions, you do not belong here:
1) Islam does not represent the forces of Satan or the Anti-Christ bent on destruction of the Christian world.
2) There is no 1,400 year old "war with the West/Christianity" being waged by "The Muslims" or anyone else.
3) Islam as a religion is no more inherently incompatible with modernity, minority rights, women's rights, or democratic pluralism than most ancient religions.
4) Medieval, anachronistic, obscure terms like "dhimmitude" or "taqiyya" are suitable for intellectual discussion & analysis. They are not and never will be appropriate to slap in the face of everyday Muslims or their friends.
5) Muslims have no more need to prove that they can be good Americans, loyal citizens, decent people, or enemies of terrorism than anyone else does.
That is our stated editorial position. You--and this includes commenters--will work from respect for that, or you just need to leave.
OKAY BuhBye!!
Well...
Dean's world had become a very interesting group blog with 20 or so co-bloggers from across the breadth of the political spectrum. Dean got some criticism as he tended towards the sort of smug condesencion one expects from those who call themselves liberal in this day and age, but he was generally interesting and thoughtful, and the wide range of opinions and civil discorse made the place an almost daily stop.
At least 2 of his co-bloggers bailed after the statement and given that I responded in the comments in a not excactly goostepplingly agreeing manner I'll likely be banned shortly.
My response:
I'm deeply disapointed, I'd actually defended Dean recently.
Point 2 is demonstrably false :Al-Quaeda is fighting the war you so blindly deny...yes Boweman and his cannibal crusaders fought it before they did...in response to...in response to the expansion of the muslims in the first place (denying a thing does nothing to foster understanding of it) .
Point 4 is Orwellian newspeak. Using Mideveal anachronistic obscure terms is perfectly legitimate, indeed necessary when dealing with Mideveal anachronistic obscure branches of Islam.
The kowtowing to Muslim wants regards things like sharia and womens rights in the face of violence IS dhimmitude.
IT'S WHAT THE WORD MEANS! ...at least in it's modern context.
What is going on in Europe with areas of Sharia law being enforced to the exclusion of the laws of the nations IS DHIMMITUDE. Denying people the ability to describe their greviances in words that have any meaning is Newspeak.
1 and 3 I am in complete agreement on.
3 in particular is WHY I supported the invasion of Iraq, I don't think anyone is condemned by their faith and I fervently believe that the Islamic world is capable of throwing off the shackles that despots, colonial administrators and the foetid evils of leftism left on their long suffering lands, ...this is not only possible it is absolutely necessary.
By doing this you only harden the opinion of those who are (with some justification) deeply suspicious of those of us who defend muslims. Closing off dialog especially in the insidious way you have (taking the words that mean anything off the table) does nothing except to reduce mutual understanding.
#5 I agree in principle with, (the # of cresents in Arlington, out of ALL proportion to their numbers in society should ram this home)
...but...
...while we are not fighting a religious war the jihadists are. No one can be blamed for casting an askance eye at people who represent a religion which we are reminded of daily has a VERY vocal element that wants to kill us.
This does not mean we don't offer our hand in friendship.
This does not mean that we don't befriend people and get to know them to the point that extra caution is not necessary.
This means that trepidation around muslims is NOT irrational.It is sad it hurts and it must be DAMMNED galling but it's human nature, it is a survival instinct.
Muslims SHOULD have no more reason to prove that they are good loyal Americans than anyone else...sadly the reality of the jihadists who have so thoroughly bloodlibled them means they do need to set peoples minds at ease. This sucks but it's the way it is.
The impulse to cover up muslim acts of terror, like the recent shooting, again only reinforces the notion that our enemies have as their useful idiots a see-no-evil PC myrmidon squad.
Actions like yours only drive away the people who you and Ali might win over.
I likely agree with you on a great many things and in a less totalitarian enviroment we could quite possibly be friends....but it is an all or nothing thing now and I'm 2 and 9/10 out of 5 which I'm afraid seems to mean I'm not welcome here.
I'll still stop by and I'd like to continue to comment, so, I won't delete my account. I'll leave that decision to you.
This whole thing is surely a tempest in a teapot. It's not like were locked in, but it is an interesting window into the mindset of those who claim that they are...
"Defending the Liberal Tradition"
...I don't think that means what you think it does.....
....of course thanks to a century of actions these 5 points, those who can now call themselves "liberal" and "progressive" tend to be neither.
This kerfuffel is silly of course.
As a Z-list blogger I'm not really getting upset that an A/B-lister is actually taking the effort to start policing his comment section...(not like anyone ought to do more of that...ahem).
Which begs the question of why I wasted several nonproductive minutes even posting a comment....
....the reason it got up my nose at all was point 4. The notion that you can't use the words necessary to describe the problems you have. This is as if you go to a town hall meeting to talk about red-light cameras, short yellows and how the city is using these to pay for extravagent perks for city council....but the city council has outlawed the use of the words "Red" "Light" "Cameras" "Revenue" (and synonyms "Yellow" (and "intermediate")"money" "timing" "council" "street" and "city".
This is exactly how so many "progressives" operate, and it is cloaked in niceties like "sensitivity". Indeed I have no doubt that it is frequently done (stupidly) in good faith but like the religously motivated puratanism on the Right, it serves no good purpose.
Deans World, of course, is just a blog, he is not a gatekeeper and he does not hold us by the shorthairs of an education and hope for the future if we don't tow his line. He won't take us to court if we speak truth to terror.
I see little examples of this almost every day in he Arts and Letters building. This non-event at Deans World, should not have generated such a long post....but it is a reminder of where such thought proceses can lead.
It's a free country. He can do what he wants.
The irony, it hurts.
....the reason it got up my nose at all was point 4. The notion that you can't use the words necessary to describe the problems you have. This is as if you go to a town hall meeting to talk about red-light cameras, short yellows and how the city is using these to pay for extravagent perks for city council....but the city council has outlawed the use of the words "Red" "Light" "Cameras" "Revenue" (and synonyms "Yellow" (and "intermediate")"money" "timing" "council" "street" and "city".
This is exactly how so many "progressives" operate, and it is cloaked in niceties like "sensitivity". Indeed I have no doubt that it is frequently done (stupidly) in good faith but like the religously motivated puratanism on the Right, it serves no good purpose.
Deans World, of course, is just a blog, he is not a gatekeeper and he does not hold us by the shorthairs of an education and hope for the future if we don't tow his line. He won't take us to court if we speak truth to terror.
I see little examples of this almost every day in he Arts and Letters building. This non-event at Deans World, should not have generated such a long post....but it is a reminder of where such thought proceses can lead.
It's a free country. He can do what he wants.
The irony, it hurts.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Cosmic Rays!??
One of the Brickmuppet's crack team of science babes rolls up her sleeves to get to work on assessing the merits of this politically incorrect story, (about which more here)that dovetails with this one and this one, this one and this one.
The whole solar system it seems, is getting warmer, and measurably so. While the BMCTOSBs work diligently and enthusiastically on alternate energy projects, it is not without an understanding that science is evolving and that the actual GW thing may be a bit overhyped.
In an earlier post I said this:
Which gets to another point I disagree with. The buggaboo of global warming. Oh it is measurable, it is happening, but given that it is happening on Mars and Jupiter as well, (no really) I think that there are larger forces at work than cow farts and industrial emissions. Kyoto like protocols only serve to inhibit first world economies and these economies are the engines of innovation. With thorium and pebble bed nuclear reactors built in a crash program powering both the grid and thermal depolymerization plants to produce biodiesel from waste and cash crops we could reduce our net emissions to near zero in 15 years...but the people who worry about emissions are largely (though not all of them) opposed to nukes on a visceral and religious level.
We have now facing humanity:
global mercury poisoning
dwindling/polluted drinking water supplies
ozone depletion
increasing vulnerability to pandemics
insect borne diseases (malaria alone kills millions)
famine
acid rain
the potential for nuclear terrorism
Apohis and other wayward space rocks
...and these people are getting the vapours over a longer growing season.
The appeal of Kyoto style agreements has nothing to do with reducing emissions...it is about putting a brake on capitalism and thus artificially making it less appealing than the train-wreck that is leftism. That is why the left supports it.
NONE of which is to say that we should NOT be investing in energy alternatives....many of those ACTUAL problems I list are caused by burning fossil fuels, especially coal. Mercury poisoning and acid rain are IMHO FAR worse problems than global warming.
We have finite sources of hydrocarbons and coal. Strategic reasons alone mean that to not be pursuing energy self sufficiency at this point would be irresponsible. But the whole Kyoto thing really bothers me as I think it is ultimately counterproductive. An agreement on sulfur dioxide and heavy metal emissions with tech transfer to those countries that need assistance in curbing them makes sense, but focusing on carbon is just silly right now.
Nookuler
Wind
Bio fuels powered by agricultural waste and perhaps even trash.
Solar in the tropical and subtropical latitudes it is practical.
These should all be pursued.
But if global warming is a transcendental threat (and I'm unconvinced that it is) we should focus on cooling things.....simple methods might be best.....until we can get more complex solutions online. :)
UPDATE: Upon re-reading it..the Times story,in the first link, actually implies that CO2 is not a factor at all.
This is bunk.
The greenhouse characteristics of CO2 are not in dispute. They have been proven by actual observations as opposed to computer models. Methane and water vapor as I understand it are more efficient greenhouse gasses, but CO2 is the biggest variable and has increased the most over the last 150 years as naturally sequestere carbon is injected into the atmosphere via coal and hydrocarbons.
Real Climate.Org ,which got some flack from some due to this sad piece trying to debunk the warming solar system (Mars has seasons! So ignore this! Don't talk to us about the other plantes!), IS nevertheless a very good source of info on this matter. Their take on this latest article is here and there is good discussion (as usual) in the comments.
I am actually sympathetic to the press release in this case as non-orthodox theories get rather shunned and buried (or so it seems) but the suggestion that Cosmic Rays are the only meaningful cause of GW....is silly.
Here at Brickmuppet Blog, while we don't buy into some of the climate change hysteria, we are perpetually astonished at the continued existence of morons who think that climate change is not occurring. They crop up in the comments at Real Climate with unnerving frequency.
HINT: NIAGARA FALLS DOESN'T FREEZE SOLID ANYMORE!
It did as recently as 1911...pictures were taken.
Ahem....
The issue is what to do about it, not if it is happening.
We support nuclear power, alternative fuels, and annoying taxes on fossil fuels but are deeply skeptical of the sort of socialist pipe dreams like Kyoto (which the signatories are cheating on anyway).
Given the warming of the solar system, an the many eco-issues mentioned above, I and the BMCTOSB would like to see a less mono-maniacal environmental policy than that advocated by Gore and others.
I'll blog more on this later.....I'm off to class.
Bias? Ignorance? or Biased Ignorance?
We Love The Aussies....
...but on this they do need to shut up.
Captain Ed offers up a frank response to Australian PM John Howard's dissing of US presidential candidate Barak Obama. Among other things the PM said that...
.....I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilize and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory," Howard said on Nine Network television.
While his assessment is not without merit, the comments from any non US observers on who we should elect are most unwelcome. The fact that the Jihadists have in fact, invested a lot of hope in a Dem electoral victory, on the assumption that it will facilitate our pulling out from Iraq, is a worriesome point that puts a huge monkeywrench in the electoral process here. It tends to stifle honest debate and criticism.
Obama seems to be a decent fellow who, despite his unfortunate C&R take on Iraq, is dedicated to doing what he genuinely thinks is right for the USA. Although he did not cover himself in glory with his impolitic response to PM Howard's unfortunate remarks, this seems borne of ignorance of the proportionality of Australia's contribution....and it is ultimately irrelevant to the main point to boot...
Americans, through the Electoral College, will decide who our next leader is. Like any nation, we have a whole slew of issues that mean something in our cultural and local context that pass foreigners by, just as elections in other countries frequently cause us to scratch our heads.
A leader of the caliber of Hugo Chavez, would certainly be cause for concern to other countries, but despite the hysterical frothings of the BDS Brigade we are not there and haven't had a such a worrisome executive in a VERY long time.
I agree with Captain Ed that we in America, and especially those of us on the right, need to join hands and denounce this unfortunate turn of phrase despite the high regard we have for PM Howard's and Australians in general.
**************************************************************
It should be noted that the Aussies have been at the forefront of this long war in places like East Timor even before we were forced off our asses by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many of us deeply respect them for that, especially given the somewhat limited resources their thinly populated nation has. They are always punching above their weight and doing it well.
Captain Ed offers up a frank response to Australian PM John Howard's dissing of US presidential candidate Barak Obama. Among other things the PM said that...
.....I think that will just encourage those who want to completely destabilize and destroy Iraq, and create chaos and a victory for the terrorists to hang on and hope for an Obama victory," Howard said on Nine Network television.
While his assessment is not without merit, the comments from any non US observers on who we should elect are most unwelcome. The fact that the Jihadists have in fact, invested a lot of hope in a Dem electoral victory, on the assumption that it will facilitate our pulling out from Iraq, is a worriesome point that puts a huge monkeywrench in the electoral process here. It tends to stifle honest debate and criticism.
Obama seems to be a decent fellow who, despite his unfortunate C&R take on Iraq, is dedicated to doing what he genuinely thinks is right for the USA. Although he did not cover himself in glory with his impolitic response to PM Howard's unfortunate remarks, this seems borne of ignorance of the proportionality of Australia's contribution....and it is ultimately irrelevant to the main point to boot...
Americans, through the Electoral College, will decide who our next leader is. Like any nation, we have a whole slew of issues that mean something in our cultural and local context that pass foreigners by, just as elections in other countries frequently cause us to scratch our heads.
A leader of the caliber of Hugo Chavez, would certainly be cause for concern to other countries, but despite the hysterical frothings of the BDS Brigade we are not there and haven't had a such a worrisome executive in a VERY long time.
I agree with Captain Ed that we in America, and especially those of us on the right, need to join hands and denounce this unfortunate turn of phrase despite the high regard we have for PM Howard's and Australians in general.
**************************************************************
It should be noted that the Aussies have been at the forefront of this long war in places like East Timor even before we were forced off our asses by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many of us deeply respect them for that, especially given the somewhat limited resources their thinly populated nation has. They are always punching above their weight and doing it well.
Friday, January 26, 2007
I Signed....
While I'm all about tilting at windmills and taking a stand, idealogical absolutism always leaves me queasy. I'm very happy that, despite the considerable dishonest spin to the contrary, the Republican party is fairly diverse. We have a broad range of opinions on most subjects, and I like that.
This petition therefore gave me pause:
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.
This is a huge, unsavory and un-Republican step and it smacks of the sort of things the Kossacks did to Lieberman. Despite its focus on the Senate it also has considerable potential to hurt solid libertarian leaning republicans like Rep. Ron Paul, who, while I disagree with them on the war, are otherwise nearly exactly where I want the party to be heading.
But this Senate resolution it opposes is poison. However well intentioned, (and I readily acknowlegdge that many who look at this do so in good faith,) the resolution in question aids and abets the enemy, will demoralize our troops, and can do nothing but undermine the war effort.
This long war is tremendously important to the future of the world, not just the US. If we pull out the bloodshed will be on a scale with the Khmer Rouge, the damage to our foreign policy will be catastrophic. When we abandoned SE Asia to the gentle ministrations of the far lefts darlings, millions died. For those that can shrug off the human cost of that as a necessary omlet, well first...screw you...second, the cascade effect was terrible. The word went out that the US was weak, in decline and could be pushed around. The obvious conclusion was that the US was an unreliable ally if the chips were down.
That catastrophy helped to fan the flames of the current extreme Islamic resurgence. The revolution in Iran was partly because of the diminished respect the US held. With wahabbist and Shiite extremists already ascendant now the future consequences of a pull-out could be catastrophic on a strategic as well as human level.
We could have replaced Saddam with another, more reliable autocrat like the Shah. Picked from the army we instead chose to disband. It would have been a bit of an improvement. Note that this sort of thing was arguably necessary during the cold war when we needed reliable surrogates on our flank as we faced an enemy with 26,000 warheads aimed at us...who defined peace as an abscence of opposition to world communism. The Bush administration did not do this. They attempted to build something better and were misled by wretched intel. This was a rational mistake and even a noble one for we did NOT take the realpolitick road on Iraq....we did what Carter and others had made hollow pronouncements about for decades, we started fresh to give them a real chance at democracy and freedom...it is costly...far costlier than I imagine any in the administration thought...but it is ever so slowly making progress. AlQuaeda, sensing victory at hand in the form of a Saigon style pull-out are pushing hard to put as much blood on American TV's as they can and their media dupes are only too happy to oblige.
Despite the terrible cost, we are sloooowly making progress. The Iraqis went out and voted under threat of death while many in America balk and claim oppression at showing an ID. We have given them a pledge hat we would stand by them, and our reputation and honor dictates tha we do so. For those who sneer at honor, then basic humanity or at least enlightened self interest should give one pause from setting the cascade of horror and danger that would result from a withdrawal.
A petition such as this is disturbing and eats at the soul of the Republican party, it has far more in common with the Dems. We should be VERY cautious about turning on our own and using such heavy handed tactics, which are ripe for abuse on a myriad of other issues for which there is disagreement in our party.
In this case, the stakes are high, so very,very high, and for that reason alone I sign this petition.
Pray we don't make a habit of this.
This petition therefore gave me pause:
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.
This is a huge, unsavory and un-Republican step and it smacks of the sort of things the Kossacks did to Lieberman. Despite its focus on the Senate it also has considerable potential to hurt solid libertarian leaning republicans like Rep. Ron Paul, who, while I disagree with them on the war, are otherwise nearly exactly where I want the party to be heading.
But this Senate resolution it opposes is poison. However well intentioned, (and I readily acknowlegdge that many who look at this do so in good faith,) the resolution in question aids and abets the enemy, will demoralize our troops, and can do nothing but undermine the war effort.
This long war is tremendously important to the future of the world, not just the US. If we pull out the bloodshed will be on a scale with the Khmer Rouge, the damage to our foreign policy will be catastrophic. When we abandoned SE Asia to the gentle ministrations of the far lefts darlings, millions died. For those that can shrug off the human cost of that as a necessary omlet, well first...screw you...second, the cascade effect was terrible. The word went out that the US was weak, in decline and could be pushed around. The obvious conclusion was that the US was an unreliable ally if the chips were down.
That catastrophy helped to fan the flames of the current extreme Islamic resurgence. The revolution in Iran was partly because of the diminished respect the US held. With wahabbist and Shiite extremists already ascendant now the future consequences of a pull-out could be catastrophic on a strategic as well as human level.
We could have replaced Saddam with another, more reliable autocrat like the Shah. Picked from the army we instead chose to disband. It would have been a bit of an improvement. Note that this sort of thing was arguably necessary during the cold war when we needed reliable surrogates on our flank as we faced an enemy with 26,000 warheads aimed at us...who defined peace as an abscence of opposition to world communism. The Bush administration did not do this. They attempted to build something better and were misled by wretched intel. This was a rational mistake and even a noble one for we did NOT take the realpolitick road on Iraq....we did what Carter and others had made hollow pronouncements about for decades, we started fresh to give them a real chance at democracy and freedom...it is costly...far costlier than I imagine any in the administration thought...but it is ever so slowly making progress. AlQuaeda, sensing victory at hand in the form of a Saigon style pull-out are pushing hard to put as much blood on American TV's as they can and their media dupes are only too happy to oblige.
Despite the terrible cost, we are sloooowly making progress. The Iraqis went out and voted under threat of death while many in America balk and claim oppression at showing an ID. We have given them a pledge hat we would stand by them, and our reputation and honor dictates tha we do so. For those who sneer at honor, then basic humanity or at least enlightened self interest should give one pause from setting the cascade of horror and danger that would result from a withdrawal.
A petition such as this is disturbing and eats at the soul of the Republican party, it has far more in common with the Dems. We should be VERY cautious about turning on our own and using such heavy handed tactics, which are ripe for abuse on a myriad of other issues for which there is disagreement in our party.
In this case, the stakes are high, so very,very high, and for that reason alone I sign this petition.
Pray we don't make a habit of this.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
The SOTU speech
Well it was a fine speech....Wish he'd given it last year.
Despite his detractors, the President showed he still has class.
I'm curious about the healthcare tax cut...it sounds dubious.
Porkbusters!! YAY! :)
The energy policy got all kinds of headlines, but is really a continuation of his policies of the last 8 years, which have been far more eco-friendly than he gets credit for. A lot of these things are only coming to fruition now as the technologuies for cellulosic ethanol and thermaldepolymerization as well as non-toxi batteries are only maturing now.
On the war, he gave a very good overview of the situation and explained the factional fighting between Sunni and Shia, and the dangers the extremists of both groups represent. This is a basic point often overlooked in news coverage and is important to understanding the situation. Like the "surge" I think it should have been done a year ago, but most observations of his critics, this observation is made with 20/20 hindsight.
Channel flipping, I watched the end on FOX because they stopped talking and turned the sound up, so we got to hear the unscripted banter between the President and the various Congresscritters, which was quite interesting. It was cool to hear members of the CBC come up and thank him for mentioning Darfur, and he made a real effort to sign the program books of as many Democratic congresspeople at he could, that was suprising. Despite a 20% approval rating a presidential signature still has cache'on eBay I supose. :)
I think it was his best SOTU speech,he certainly came off better than he did the other day and he leaves me with some hope that whatever else comes, he's not going to go wobbly on Iraq.
UPDATES: I'm curious about the healthcare tax cut...it sounds dubious.
Actually, now that I've heard more about it it sounds pretty decent. See here and here.
The Civillian Reserve Corps idea caused me some pause but it is better explained here. I'm still not sure how I feel about this...it is essentially a colonial office...something that a republic does not need. Of course, the millitary can't be building sewers and infrastructure...Seabees notwithstanding so it will help. Like everything else here I fear it may be a year or 2 late.
Regards my junior Seanators response, Via Instapundit, comes this humorous take on what he SHOULD have said....and the one odd gaffe in his response, the idea that a majority of the military opposes the war, is analyzed over here.
Despite his detractors, the President showed he still has class.
I'm curious about the healthcare tax cut...it sounds dubious.
Porkbusters!! YAY! :)
The energy policy got all kinds of headlines, but is really a continuation of his policies of the last 8 years, which have been far more eco-friendly than he gets credit for. A lot of these things are only coming to fruition now as the technologuies for cellulosic ethanol and thermaldepolymerization as well as non-toxi batteries are only maturing now.
On the war, he gave a very good overview of the situation and explained the factional fighting between Sunni and Shia, and the dangers the extremists of both groups represent. This is a basic point often overlooked in news coverage and is important to understanding the situation. Like the "surge" I think it should have been done a year ago, but most observations of his critics, this observation is made with 20/20 hindsight.
Channel flipping, I watched the end on FOX because they stopped talking and turned the sound up, so we got to hear the unscripted banter between the President and the various Congresscritters, which was quite interesting. It was cool to hear members of the CBC come up and thank him for mentioning Darfur, and he made a real effort to sign the program books of as many Democratic congresspeople at he could, that was suprising. Despite a 20% approval rating a presidential signature still has cache'on eBay I supose. :)
I think it was his best SOTU speech,he certainly came off better than he did the other day and he leaves me with some hope that whatever else comes, he's not going to go wobbly on Iraq.
UPDATES: I'm curious about the healthcare tax cut...it sounds dubious.
Actually, now that I've heard more about it it sounds pretty decent. See here and here.
The Civillian Reserve Corps idea caused me some pause but it is better explained here. I'm still not sure how I feel about this...it is essentially a colonial office...something that a republic does not need. Of course, the millitary can't be building sewers and infrastructure...Seabees notwithstanding so it will help. Like everything else here I fear it may be a year or 2 late.
Regards my junior Seanators response, Via Instapundit, comes this humorous take on what he SHOULD have said....and the one odd gaffe in his response, the idea that a majority of the military opposes the war, is analyzed over here.
Friday, January 19, 2007
That Grand Canyon Story...
Remember the story about how the Park Service at the Grand Canyon was forbidden to give the age of the big ole' hole in the ground for fear of contradicting the book of Genesis?It was fake
false
made up....
Alas it persists....
Big hat tip to both the Kossaks and Skeptic who promptly corrected this and swallowed what must have been a bitter pill for them.
Update: End times watch...I actually agree with the front page story on Kos as I post this. I blogged on this very thing here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
