Rusted Sky

Freakonomics - Opinion - New York Times Blog - And the New Six-Word Motto for the U.S. Is -

Our Worst Critics Prefer to Stay (194 votes)

As someone once noted - look to see how the fences are arranged. Are they keeping people IN, or OUT? The USSR, for all the people who used to promote it as a wonderous place, had its fences (along with various other things like passport controls, internal passports and such) arranged to keep the people INSIDE the Worker's Paradise.

That we're trying to keep people OUT says a lot about the US.

J.

The Weekly Standard

Northrop Grumman and EADS have somehow managed to defeat heavy-favorite Boeing in the battle to replace the Air Force's aging fleet of aerial refueling tankers. The initial contract for 80 aircraft is valued at $40 billion, and the service has plans to purchase as many as 100 more at an as yet undetermined cost.

The Northrop KC-30, which is based on the EADS Airbus A-330 passenger jet, had been considered the more capable aircraft. It's bigger, which means it can carry 20 percent more fuel, 20 percent more passengers, and 30 percent more cargo. It can also carry 45,000 pounds more fuel than Boeing's KC-767. But Boeing had pitched the smaller size of the 767 as a feature, rather than a handicap. However, the 767 is at the end of its commercial life. The military would have been the only customer for the airplane had Boeing won the contract, raising concerns about maintenance costs.

Frankly, with Boeing's attempt to 'lease' tankers to the Air Force a few years back, I'm glad to see they're being bought outright. These are aircraft that'll be used for decades - you don't want to have to worry about 35 cents a mile overage when you turn them in at the end of the lease period!

J.

Caught a few minutes of a Hillary Speech today. (What can I say - I wasn't fast enough changing stations.) In it, she was blasting Bush for not coming up with changes in our energy policy.

Of course, people were cheering her.

If you'd paid any attention over the last 8 years, you'll have noticed that every time Bush took on something large (Social Security reform, tax reform, energy reform) the Democrats stonewalled it like cracy. So, to the extent that we're still dependent on ME oil, the Democrats have kept us from pursuing something else. To the extent that we're going to have problems with Social Security - the Democrats have done their best to make it impossible to change things on THAT front.

Energy? About the ONLY thing they haven't visibly blocked is nuclear power - and the Greens have done the job there. (There's no reason to stick your political next out on the line when you can get a third partyy to do so, right?)

So I'm less than impressed at Hillary's attempt to demagoge an issue that SHE and her party have helped bring about.

Now, your mileage may vary but my impression of the Democrats over the last two, three decades is that they will NOT solve a problem if it can be used for election fodder. And in view of the fact that Hillary is NOW blaming Bush for a situation she and her fellow Democrats helped create, you can understand why I'm less than confident that she'll be able to take care of the problem.

But there's folks trying to deal with it -

Nuclear Energy Institute Update Shows Plants Pave Clean Road for Nuke Power - Florida Electrical Outage - Popular Mechanics

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) just offered its annual outlook for the future of nuclear power, and it’s optimistic—partly of necessity. Today’s 104 nuclear power plants generate about 20 percent of electricity in the United States. Due to rising energy demand and aging infrastructure, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission predicts that industry will need to build 50 new reactors to continue producing the same proportion of the country’s power over the next 30 years.

Most of these plants have gotten past the glint-in-the-eye stage: Thirty-one reactors, representing 17 power companies and consortia, are somewhere in the application process—though NEI predicts only four to eight of those will be in commercial operation by 2016. By that time, pressure for an affordable, clean source of energy could inspire a second wave of applications. “Coal with carbon sequestration looks more like 20 years away than 15,” says John Rowe, CEO of Exelon, the largest nuclear power provider in the United States. “Wind and solar are still more expensive than nuclear.”

You might think I'm being too hard on the Dems... but really, what HAVE they managed to solve? Obama's record is pretty much empty. So is Hillary's. JKerry's record... 20 years in Congress and nothin'.

And those people are considered the best and brightest the Democrats have to offer?

Man, how they've managed to go downhill...

J.

Bush declines to promise troop withdrawl.

President Bush is declining to promise that more U.S. troops will return home from Iraq before he leaves office in 11 months.
Putting aside "enormous speculation," he says decisions about troop cuts beyond those planned through July would be based on generals' recommendations for success in Iraq. But he strongly suggested Iraq's provincial elections in October may mean more troops can't return before the voting.

However, due to political considerations, there's no way in hell that the Dems would do something like that. They've got their repuations to uphold, after all - and if it means Iraq fails... well, that's too bad.

I swear - the Democratic party needs a Miller/Lieberman ticket - at that point I'd believe they were serious about national security. Until then, all else is pandering to the far-left base.

J.

Recently, Obama/Hillary have been pushing dumping NAFTA. They're shoving the protectionist meme when it comes to labor - and in speeches to factory workers, they push the idea that NAFTA stole their jobs.

So dump NAFTA, and they'll come back. Well, this has some of the folks in the Democratic Party worried - because if you're trying to 'repair' America's image in the world - the last thing you want to do is kick your neighbors hard.

Potomac Watch - WSJ.com

Other Democrats are likewise worried this bout of anti-trade fervor risks undercutting the party's key foreign policy plank: that it will do more on the diplomatic front. When asked about the wisdom of reopening Nafta at the university event, Rep. Artur Davis (an Alabama Democrat who happened to be the first congressman outside of Illinois to endorse Mr. Obama) replied: "I'm not a fan for reopening agreements we have negotiated because the rest of the world thinks that we don't keep our word enough as it is."

In other words, it's hard to make nicey-nice with the global community when you are stiffing it on trade. Ask Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, who clearly tuned into the Ohio Democratic debate long enough to catch Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton threatening to withdraw from Nafta unless his country rolled over for their new demands. "[They] should recognize that Nafta benefits the U.S. tremendously. Those who speak of it as helpful to [just the] Canadian and Mexican economies are missing the point," he responded, and not lovingly.

I don't think either of them are ready for Prime Time. They're trying to make sound-bite rhetoric their policy planks - and they're not terribly sturdy...

J.

One of the things I've noticed in our 'ruling class' is the sense of entitlement that seems prevalent on the Democratic side. (There's less of it on the Republican side, but it's not absent.) Let's face it - you've got to be nuts to go through the ordeal of running for the office - and you've got to be very focused to start at the bare beginning in politics and work your way up through the crowd to a point where you've got a serious shot at the office.

Of course, there's some things that help - like being married to an ex-President, or having pretty much nothing going for you but your skin color and a charismatic performing ability. (Which, oddly enough, is about how I think of the two running on the Democratic side.) And it doesn't hurt to have a 'moral claim' to the office.

RealClearPolitics - HorseRaceBlog - Clinton's "Moral Claim"

Sunday's Meet the Press featured a spirited debate between James Carville, Mary Matalin, Mike Murphy, and Bob Shrum. Shrum made a very insightful point, noting that Hillary Clinton has to find some kind of "moral claim" to the nomination if she hopes to take it from Barack Obama.

This is a concise version of an argument I made last week - that Clinton needs to assert that she is the "legitimate" candidate of her party. I particularly like the use of the word "claim" because it underscores how legitimacy is contestable. Both she and Obama will make claims to the nomination, which the super delegates will arbitrate.

But that kind of got knocked out of her after the Hillary Health-Care debacle. Since then, she's been working to get into the Presidency... because she wants that title. NOBODY will question her then, and she knows it.

As I said - you've got to be nuts. I found this...

Blissful Knowledge: WHAT DO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES, BASEBALL PLAYERS WHO TAKE STEROIDS, AND AMY WINEHOUSE HAVE IN COMMON? Archives#000736

And I know the candidates have no choice, regardless of whether they are smarter than the drivel they spout. From what I've recently read and heard, the one candidate in this election cycle with whom I might have been more impressed if I'd been paying closer attention, rather than less, was Fred Thompson. (Which is not to say that I would've voted for him.) And it was not coincidental that Thompson's candidacy never caught enough fire to flame out. As expertly detailed by Andrew Ferguson, the modern presidential campaign requires a level of both substantive pandering and personal exertion as to screen out virtually any normal human being. I think we should replace the "anyone can grow up to be President" mantra with "Mom, don't let your kids grow up to be a Presidential candidate." (This may be an underrated factor in the increase of political dynasties - they're the only ones who think of the lifestyle as normal.)

As I said, you've got to be nuts. Or feel like it's your RIGHT to be President, and by Ghu, you're gonna get it or die (politically) trying.

J.

Twenty years back or so, it was my great privelege to have Pete Blair as a dungeon master in the D&D sessions the Five Points Chowder and Marching Society would hold weekly. And as Pete passed on many years back, so Gary Gygax has gone on to that great Game Room in the Sky. I'll bet Pete in his purple shirt is waiting, shaking the dice.

And in tribute - my present stats are as follows. (As determined here.)

I Am A: Neutral Good Human Wizard (7th Level)


Ability Scores:

Strength-13

Dexterity-14

Constitution-13

Intelligence-12

Wisdom-12

Charisma-12


Alignment:
Neutral Good A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order. However, neutral good can be a dangerous alignment because because it advances mediocrity by limiting the actions of the truly capable.


Race:
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.


Class:
Wizards are arcane spellcasters who depend on intensive study to create their magic. To wizards, magic is not a talent but a difficult, rewarding art. When they are prepared for battle, wizards can use their spells to devastating effect. When caught by surprise, they are vulnerable. The wizard's strength is her spells, everything else is secondary. She learns new spells as she experiments and grows in experience, and she can also learn them from other wizards. In addition, over time a wizard learns to manipulate her spells so they go farther, work better, or are improved in some other way. A wizard can call a familiar- a small, magical, animal companion that serves her. With a high Intelligence, wizards are capable of casting very high levels of spells.


Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus (e-mail)

Thank you, Mr. Gygax. You done good, for a lot of folk.

J.

Saw this article, and thought "Hmmm... if they get into the General Aviation market, maybe we WILL get flying cars!"

But - it looks like they're going for the commuter market. Wtih 70-95 passenger models, that'll be 'skinny'. (The fuselage is about 9.5 feet in diameter. Info on the Mitsubishi Regional Jet is here.)

Toyota considers entering aircraft industry: official

Japan's Toyota Motor, which is widely expected to overtake General Motors this year as the world's top-selling automaker, is considering entering the aircraft industry, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.

Toyota may put up funds to a company to be set up by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for its passenger jet project, Toyota spokeswoman Kayo Doi said.

"Mitsubishi Heavy has invited us to invest (in the venture) and we are considering it," she said, while adding nothing has been decided yet.

The comment came after a report Wednesday in the Asahi Shimbun daily which says Toyota plans to put up 10 billion yen (97 million dollars) in the venture to be set up in April.

Mitsubishi has been developing small passenger airplanes under its Mitsubishi Regional Jet project.

J.

Top 10 Worst Captchas | John M Willis ESM Blog

Woo. My eyes! My eyes!

J.

Weather Channel Founder Blasts Network; Claims It Is 'Telling Us What to Think'

The Weather Channel has lost its way, according to John Coleman, who founded the channel in 1982.

Coleman told an audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 3 in New York that he is highly critical of global warming alarmism.

“The Weather Channel had great promise, and that’s all gone now because they’ve made every mistake in the book on what they’ve done and how they’ve done it and it’s very sad,” Coleman said. “It’s now for sale and there’s a new owner of The Weather Channel will be announced – several billion dollars having changed hands in the near future. Let’s hope the new owners can recapture the vision and stop reporting the traffic, telling us what to think and start giving us useful weather information.”

The Weather Channel has been an outlet for global warming alarmism. In December 2006, The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen argued on her blog that weathercasters who had doubts about human influence on global warming should be punished with decertification by the American Meteorological Society.

That's why Global Warming is so good. It's long-term, nebulous, with supposed effect that can be described catastrophically - and you don't have to worry about whether it's 'real' or not, but it's good for ratings. What's not to like?

Aside for being pretty much blown out of proportion, that is.

J.

And the whole equation's blown.

DailyTech - Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"

New derivation of equations governing the greenhouse effect reveals "runaway warming" impossible

Miklós Zágoni isn't just a physicist and environmental researcher. He is also a global warming activist and Hungary's most outspoken supporter of the Kyoto Protocol. Or was.
That was until he learned the details of a new theory of the greenhouse effect, one that not only gave far more accurate climate predictions here on Earth, but Mars too. The theory was developed by another Hungarian scientist, Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Langley Research Center.

After studying it, Zágoni stopped calling global warming a crisis, and has instead focused on presenting the new theory to other climatologists. The data fit extremely well. "I fell in love," he stated at the International Climate Change Conference this week.

"Runaway greenhouse theories contradict energy balance equations," Miskolczi states. Just as the theory of relativity sets an upper limit on velocity, his theory sets an upper limit on the greenhouse effect, a limit which prevents it from warming the Earth more than a certain amount.

Well, you fill in the rest. This guy figured out that something was missing - and came up with it. As a result, the equation fits observed data much better. The only problem with it is that it's no longer 'right' if you're attempting to persuade people that Global Warming is a problem, and that something MUST BE DONE RIGHT NOW. (Preferably carbon offsets, to make AlGore rich. But hamstringing your economy works too.)

It's funny to me how hard the Global Warmists have tried to force the issue. How their insistence that there's only ONE way to do things. It's not about science - it's about control via a scam. Persuade the mark that only YOU have a solution to a problem YOU have identified, and you'll be able to persuade them to buy it, no matter the cost.

But one thing you can't afford is to have the mark talk to someone who might persuade them that there's not the problem you've been teling them they have. AlGore and the GW folks have tried hard to persuade us there's a problem, and that only THEY have the solution, and that solution MUST be implemented NOW. There's no time to debate, no time to question, no time to check the science...

Doesn't that sound just like a scam to you?

J.

Startup Makes Cheap Solar Film Cells With Inkjet Printer - Konarka Power Plastic - Popular Mechanics

This year could bring the Silicon Valley-funded renaissance in solar power we've all been waiting for. First, San Jose-based Nanosolar began delivering its affordable thin-film solar coating, followed by a construction boom in American solar thermal power plants—essentially the reflective equivalent of geothermal power. Now, for the first time, the solar cell revolution is arriving by droplet.

Konarka Technologies, the Massachusetts-based company we first recognized with a 2005 Breakthrough Award for its affordable Power Plastic solar film, said this week that it has successfully manufactured those thin solar cells using an inkjet printer. In addition to decreasing production costs because it relies on existing inkjet technology, the printable Power Plastic cells can be applied to a range of small-scale, highly variable power opportunities, from indoor sensors to small RFID installations.

J.

village voice > news > David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a 'Brain-Dead Liberal' by David Mamet

I took the liberal view for many decades, but I believe I have changed my mind.

As a child of the '60s, I accepted as an article of faith that government is corrupt, that business is exploitative, and that people are generally good at heart.

These cherished precepts had, over the years, become ingrained as increasingly impracticable prejudices. Why do I say impracticable? Because although I still held these beliefs, I no longer applied them in my life. How do I know? My wife informed me. We were riding along and listening to NPR. I felt my facial muscles tightening, and the words beginning to form in my mind: Shut the fuck up. "?" she prompted. And her terse, elegant summation, as always, awakened me to a deeper truth: I had been listening to NPR and reading various organs of national opinion for years, wonder and rage contending for pride of place. Further: I found I had been—rather charmingly, I thought—referring to myself for years as "a brain-dead liberal," and to NPR as "National Palestinian Radio."

This is, to me, the synthesis of this worldview with which I now found myself disenchanted: that everything is always wrong.

But in my life, a brief review revealed, everything was not always wrong, and neither was nor is always wrong in the community in which I live, or in my country. Further, it was not always wrong in previous communities in which I lived, and among the various and mobile classes of which I was at various times a part.

And, I wondered, how could I have spent decades thinking that I thought everything was always wrong at the same time that I thought I thought that people were basically good at heart? Which was it?

Hmmm.

More on this later, hopefully.

Later -

You might want to take a look at the comments. Boy, there's a lot of folks who are calling him everything but a traitor to the liberal cause (and by the time you get to them, there's probably going to be someone saying that) ... but some who are saying he nailed it. What's your take?

J.

It's... interesting watching what's going on between Obama and Hillary. Accusations of racism, Ferraro coming out and saying Obama wouldn't be where he is if he weren't black, Hillary offering Obama the #2 spot - Obama refusing because if he's not good enough to be #1, why would she want him as #2? The Spitzer scandal... Hillary trying to get Florida and Michigan's elections to count again... things are getting real interesting on the Dem side of the spectrum. I do believe that the Obama and Hillary show will be getting even uglier in the next few weeks - there's a strong undercurrent of 'entitlement' there for Hillary, and I don't believe she's going to let go without a real fight.

Of course in order to do that, she's going to have to get the media involved as her proxy weapons involve trashing Obama, but they don't seem as sympathetic as in years past. I believe that at least SOME of them are starting to understand that the existance of this country does depend on having competent leadership in the White House, and having someone with a royalty complex in the Hot Seat may very well end up with them being forcibly silenced. And for all the griping about how Bush stifles free speech rights, they ain't seen nothin' yet - and will likely get an up-close and personal look at that if Hil gets into power.

On the Republican side... well, things are pretty set on McCain at this point. Well, it could be worse - Ron Paul only recently gave up his run for the Hot Seat.

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next month or two with the Democrats. After Hil's Mississippi loss, I don't believe she can win without the Superdelegates intervention, and with Spitzer being forced out of office I think she just lost one.

Will she fight to the end? Will she attempt to slam McCain as being unfit to lead? Stay tuned for the next episode of "Stomach Churning Politics"!

J.

Audiophiles can't tell the difference between Monster Cable and coat hangers - Engadget

It's about getting power to the speakers - get that done and you're golden. You don't get more power by using a more expensive cable, you get more power by making sure you've got enough metal to handle the expected load. 4-gauge stranded copper would probably be best - and it'll be a lot cheaper per foot than Monster cables.

(And the theory you need high-cost cables for DIGITAL signals? Heh. If you need an ethernet cable, you can get a 25' Cat6 cable at WalMart for under $10. But the salesman will tell you that you're going to need something that costs roughly $5 a foot... If the 1s and 0s make it through, that's all that counts.)

J.

I wonder if the Dems support Chavez because they envy him...

Consider it - he's got near-total power. He's got oil. He's moderately photogenic. He's flippin' off Bush. What's not to love?

The question is - would the Democrats deliberately screw over one country to support a dictatorship? The answer, apparently, is "In a hearbeat."

The Chávez Democrats - WSJ.com

These are the same Democrats who preach the virtues of "soft power" and diplomacy, while deriding Mr. Bush for being too quick to use military force. But trade is a classic form of soft power that would expand U.S. and Latin ties in a web of commercial interests. More than 8,000 U.S. companies currently export to Colombia, nearly 85% of which are small and medium-sized firms. Colombia is already the largest South American market for U.S. farm products, and the pact would open Colombia to new competition and entrepreneurship. (Whoops! Can't have that! - J.)

Which brings us back to Mr. Chávez and his many Democratic friends. Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd's early support helped the strongman consolidate his power. Former President Jimmy Carter blessed Mr. Chávez's August 2004 recall victory, despite evidence of fraud. And then there are the many House Democrats, current and former, who have accepted discount oil from Venezuela and then distributed it in the U.S. to boost their own political fortunes. Joseph P. Kennedy II and Massachusetts Congressman Bill Delahunt have been especially cozy with Venezuela's oil company. If Democrats spurn free trade with Colombia, these Democratic ties with Mr. Chávez will deserve more political scrutiny.

Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are both competing for union support. But if they wanted to demonstrate their own Presidential qualities, they'd be privately telling Ms. Pelosi to pass the Colombia pact while Mr. Bush is still in office. That would spare either one of them from having to spend political capital to pass it next year.

Instead, both say they oppose the deal on grounds that Mr. Uribe has not done more to protect "trade unionists." In fact, Mr. Uribe has done more to reduce violence in Colombia than any modern leader in Bogotá. The real question for Democrats is whether they're going to choose Colombia -- or Hugo Chávez.

J.

boortz.com: More Boortz The Ultimate Peep Show

Enjoy!

J.

The Democrats... gack. I'm sick of the Eternal Campaign, I'm tired of watching the fratricidal antics of Obama and Hillary... yet at the same time it's like watching a car wreck - you want to see what happens next, and see if any survivors manage to make it out even as you're dragging out your cell phone and calling 911.

But I don't think there's any paramedics that can rescue the Democrats at this point - their digging at each other has gotten too hard, too deep, too angry. Even the media can't hide it, and the explanations coming from both sides don't satisfy any but their most ardent supporters.

Hillary - well, what can I say? She's trying to change the rules of the game after the game's started, trying to get Florida and Michigan back into play. And Obama? Well, the latest revalations about the 'pastor' of his church being violently anti-white and anti-American (really, preaching about the United States of KKK-America) tend to explain why Michelle Obama has the attitude she does.

This 'pastor' has been spewing his venom for the two decades Obama's been going to the 'Church of Hate Whitey and the US' - looks like some of it rubbed off.

And again you've got to ask yourself - if these two are the BEST the Democrats have to offer - dishing out liberal (in the quantitative sense, not the political sense) servings of anger and racism, class-warfare and divisiveness, coupled with inept campaigning and fratricidal politicing within their own party, why in the hell would we want them running the country?

Or anything, for that matter?

J.

spiralbound.net ｻ MIT Guide to Lock Picking - Table Of Contents

Well, you just never know what you'll find on the internets...

J.

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - NOAA: Coolest Winter Since 2001 for U.S., Globe

The average temperature across both the contiguous U.S. and the globe during climatological winter (December 2007-February 2008) was the coolest since 2001, according to scientists at NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. In terms of winter precipitation, Pacific storms, bringing heavy precipitation to large parts of the West, produced high snowpack that will provide welcome runoff this spring.

But somehow? I've got my doubts...

J.

Information Warfare: The Iraq War Fades Away

News directors say they are putting more effort into covering the presidential election, and the usual stories (celebrity scandals, disasters of any sort, notorious criminals). But there are other reasons for ignoring Iraq. Since last Summer, more good news than bad news began to come back from the front. This was not useful for news organizations. Bad news makes money (by attracting larger audiences for advertisers), good news is useless.

J.

Obama Decries Racial Rhetoric

PLAINFIELD, Ind. (AP) - Sen. Barack Obama on Saturday decried "the forces of division" over race that he said are intruding into the Democratic presidential nomination contest.

"We have to come together," he told a town-hall meeting at a high school.

He cited videos of inflammatory sermons given by his pastor that are now being used as political ammunition against him—remarks that Obama has denounced.

And if someone like Romney is unsuitable for the Presidency because of his Mormon background - how should Obama be judged, looking at the beliefs of the church he attends?

J.

My parents like white French Provincial. (Rather, my mother did, and Father didn't much care.) Me? I dislike it. I've not been much of a furniture buff - before I got married my idea of furniture was a 3/4th inch sheet of plywood to hold a mattress, a 'cheap' couch that cost way too much, and sufficient bookcases to hold everything. Add in a cheap chest of drawers, a dining room table and some chairs (again, overpriced and low-quality) and the ensemble was complete. If you wanted an upgrade, you swapped out block and board bookcases for Sauder self-assembled one from Office Depot. Ah, class - what luxury!

Of course, I'm a guy. Furniture = expensive, and the idea of actually coordinating furnishings... well, when the primary desire is for low cost, you don't worry about whether the pieces match. Especially if there's not much money to spare after the basics of food, rent, car expenses and the like are satisfied.

But over the years, being steadily employed and married to a woman who has a good sense of style and taste which pretty much matches my own (no way she'd ever go for white French Provincial without a severe case of dane brammage - she prefers simpler stuff like Mission style, which I like) we've been able to furnish the house pretty comfortably.

Of course, that was before the IKEA store opened here in Atlanta.

I like browsing through that place. (Yes, I know, I'm a guy - I'm not supposed to like something like that.) Primarily, I like the styling, which in a lot of cases could best be described as well-designed, attractively functional minimalist. For instance - take the IKEA LAXVIK shelving system. It's pretty minimal - comes in small packages, made of powder-coated steel and glass, puts together easily... and it fits nicely up in my room. (For details and pictures of THAT, though not nearly so... 'lived in' as it is now, (Yeah, cluttered. I'll admit it.) go here.) Anyway, there were some pipe and flange shelves pulling out of the wall, so I replaced them. However - the silver paper I used to cover the holes didn't look good, and the bins I'd had on the shelves didn't look so good on the Laxvik unit. Time to change the look.

So down to Ikea again. Got some mirror tiles, and put those up in place - it looks pretty sharp. They also had an interesting clock that I like... but it's got about the same accuracy as a chronometer I used a long time back in a certain job - you can count on it gaining 10 minutes a day. And the darn thing isn't adjustable... Oh, well. I can either return it, or get one that might be a bit more accurate... but I digress.

To get at the wall, I tried moving the shelf assembly. And I found out the one real problem that I hadn't anticipated - even after putting gliders under the legs of the unit to move it across the carpet.

The unit has pretty much zip in the range of lateral strength. It does a good job up and down - I figure I could load probably 1000 lbs on it easy if I didn't mind it punching a hole in the carpet... (the feet are, I think, less than a square inch in area. You really don't want to concentrate much stress on an inexpensive carpet...) but when I tried to slide it, the dang thing twisted pretty badly.

Ikea makes good furniture - but it's not sturdy stuff. It looks good. It goes together easily. But once it's in place, it needs to STAY in place. This isn't heavy-duty stuff - it's essentially disposable after a few years, though durable enough if you don't mind just leaving it alone.

However, each rule seems to have exceptions. The Lerberg shelves are pretty solid - but I still wouldn't want to put much torque on them. Perhaps my expectations are unrealistic...

Well, I could always go back to wood crates. The classic look... wood never goes out of style.

Nah. Crates are expected when you're in your 20s and into your 30s. Above that? Nah.

I guess I'll stay with Ikea furniture...

J.

Okay. I'm thinking the economy is indeed in trouble.

Why?

The Sharper Image filed for bankrupcy.

So did the Lillian Vernon catalog retailer.

And Hillary's got a plan to fix it all.

The sad thing? There's people out there who DO believe that it's all Bush's fault, and Hillary will make it all better.

Ah, well. Interesting times ahead...

J.

Writer Arthur C. Clarke dies at 90 - Yahoo! News

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka - Arthur C. Clarke, a visionary science fiction writer who co-wrote "2001: A Space Odyssey" and won worldwide acclaim with more than 100 books on space, science and the future, died Wednesday, an aide said. He was 90.

He predicted much of our present future, up to and including comsats and mp3 players. (The latter was in a story called "The Lion of Comarre")

Thank you, Mr. Clarke, for giving us a glimpse of a future worth living.

J.

Houston - News - Barack Obama and Me

It was the year 2000 and I was a young hungry reporter in Chicago covering a young hungry state legislator.

It's not quite eight in the morning and Barack Obama is on the phone screaming at me. He liked the story I wrote about him a couple weeks ago, but not this garbage.

Months earlier, a reporter friend told me she overheard Obama call me an asshole at a political fund-raiser. Now here he is blasting me from hundreds of miles away for a story that just went online but hasn't yet hit local newsstands.

It's the first time I ever heard him yell, and I'm trembling as I set down the phone. I sit frozen at my desk for several minutes, stunned.

I can think of another orator that pretty much ruined his country and caused incalculable deaths in the process... Not that I'm comparing the two directly, but it's starting to look like the only real talent Obama has is a near blank-slate record that people can project what they want to believe on, and an eloquent manner.

That's not good enough.

This article... well, you read it and let me know what you think. It's kind of confirming what I already though - that Obama just won't cut it.

J.

Chris Gerrib and I seem to have gotten into a dialog about government actually 'fixing' problems. Specifically, the attitude of politicians towards things like alternative energy and drilling in ANWR and the like.

Well, you know what my beliefs are on that matter... that a politician only solves a problem when there's absolutely no other choice. A problem solved is a vote lost - when you can keep the voter's attention and interest by promising a solution you have no intention of delivering.

My take is that the Dems are blocking a lot of stuff we need. His seems to be that it's the Republicans' fault since they're in power.

My reply is as follows.

Don't get me wrong - I'd LOVE to see them get serious about alternative energy. But observe what's actually going on.... Did Ted Kennedy encourage the wind farms off Cape Cod, or has he been doing his utmost to block them building where he might see them while sailing?

Drilling in ANWR - http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/21/politics/21cnd-congress.html?pagewanted=1 - "Senate Blocks Arctic Drilling" - It failed by 4 votes. But it was attached to a military spending bill - guess the Democrats got a two-fer on that one. (I really dislike that sort of tactic, by the way. I'd rather see bills stand or fall on their own rather than lumping a bunch of them into one.)

Shall we talk about Social Security? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/01/AR2006100100872.html has this little bit.

--There's a long tradition of demagoguery on entitlement reform, but refusing even to discuss the challenge plumbs new depths of cynicism. A decade ago, Democratic centrists such as Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska argued that runaway entitlement spending would rob the rest of the budget, draining money from social programs that liberals are supposed to care about. Today, a pragmatic Republican such as Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah can propose a progressive fix to Social Security that does not involve personal accounts. But Democrats won't come forward to support him.

In rejecting Social Security discussions last week, the Democrats painted the conservatives' petition as a Trojan horse designed to get personal accounts back onto the table. Even if that were true, since when was all mention of personal accounts taboo for Democrats? A decade ago, a majority of the appointees to Bill Clinton's Social Security commission came out in favor of personal accounts. Even the dissenting minority was open to the idea of investing Social Security funds in the stock market. --

When you have a bare majority of members (on either side) - you need cooperation to get anything passed that needs a 2/3rds majority. That cooperation's been lacking, and there's sufficient animosity built up that we're not going to have Congressional cooperation for a long time to come, barring some major sea change in how they get along.

At what point do the problems become the fault of the party in charge? They always are, sir, if you change 'fault' to 'responsibility'. However, if the party that isn't in the majority actively blocks the attempts of the party in charge to fix things the party that isn't in charge has been screaming about, they share in the responsibility. Indeed, they may eventually become completely responsible when their time comes. (At which point they'll ignore them - but that's for another time.)

Perhaps a better analogy is a sports team. Take a 5-man pickup basketball team. Two of the men can't stand one of the others and will trip him up whenever possible, 'accidentally' bump him, won't pass to him, block his shots. You got two guys playing that are trying to play basketball - but the two who are after the one screw things up for them all. How far do you think that team will get?

It's not an article of faith - it's a conclusion drawn from a lot of observation. I gave up believing in politicians back around the time Clinton got elected in '92. Now the best I'm hoping for is benign neglect from them.

Or not. It's tired and I'm late. Yak at ya'll later..

J.

Best of the Web Today - WSJ.com

Last October the Associated Press reported that Barack Obama had made a decision not to sport an American flag pin on his lapel:

Asked about it Wednesday in an interview with KCRG-TV in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the Illinois senator said he stopped wearing the pin shortly after the attacks and instead hoped to show his patriotism by explaining his ideas to citizens.

"The truth is that right after 9/11 I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security.

"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest," he said in the interview. "Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism."

But did anyone notice that when Obama gave his "major speech on race" Tuesday--the one necessitated by the revelation that his "spiritual mentor" had, among other things, called on God to "damn America"--he did so amid a row of American flags? We checked the video and counted eight of them, of which four are visible in the photo nearby.

Looks like the plot's changing, though. Can't say I like it - and I sure wouldn't get the DVD.

One real drawback to the Eternal Campaign the Democrats have instigated - it gives us PLENTY of time to see what the candidates are like. It's not like the whirlwind courtships of the past, where you had just a few months to get a feel for the candidate. That's akin to meeting someone in Vegas, getting hitched - and waking up the next morning and going "Oh, man. What've I done?" Now we've got plenty of time to examine the candidates.

And it's NOT working to their benefit.

When you add in the identity politics angle, things get worse. The Dems have really, really painted themselves into a corner with Hillary and Obama. They've been going for the niche market - when they need to get the middle. And neither of them are terribly appealing to the mid-range voter. Their only real hope is to completely slam the Republican candidate, McCain, before the election... but they're spending so much time and money trying to kill each other to get nominated that there's not going to be any left for the election.

We'll see what happens. But the Dems have severely wounded themselves this election cycle.

J.

Well, maybe.

Methane detected on alien planet - Space.com- msnbc.com

Scientists have detected the presence of an organic molecule in the atmosphere of an extrasolar planet for the first time, NASA announced today.

The finding, detailed in the March 20 issue of the journal Nature, marks a breakthrough in the attempt to detect signs of life on planets beyond our solar system.

Ah, the speculation about the directions alien intelligence could take run wild...

Gaia obviously didn't get Gore's memo.

The Mystery of Global Warming's Missing Heat : NPR

Some 3,000 scientific robots that are plying the ocean have sent home a puzzling message. These diving instruments suggest that the oceans have not warmed up at all over the past four or five years. That could mean global warming has taken a breather. Or it could mean scientists aren't quite understanding what their robots are telling them.

This is puzzling in part because here on the surface of the Earth, the years since 2003 have been some of the hottest on record. But Josh Willis at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory says the oceans are what really matter when it comes to global warming.

But it sure seems like the oceans don't figure into the equation when it comes to global warming. Of course, they're not acting right.

"There has been a very slight cooling, but not anything really significant," Willis says. So the buildup of heat on Earth may be on a brief hiatus. "Global warming doesn't mean every year will be warmer than the last. And it may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming."

In recent years, heat has actually been flowing out of the ocean and into the air. This is a feature of the weather phenomenon known as El Nino. So it is indeed possible the air has warmed but the ocean has not. But it's also possible that something more mysterious is going on.

But if the aquatic robots are actually telling the right story, that raises a new question: Where is the extra heat all going?

Kevin Trenberth at the National Center for Atmospheric Research says it's probably going back out into space. The Earth has a number of natural thermostats, including clouds, which can either trap heat and turn up the temperature, or reflect sunlight and help cool the planet.

Trenberth and Willis agree that a few mild years have no effect on the long-term trend of global warming. But they say there are still things to learn about how our planet copes with the heat.

J.

One of the things that's supposed to be a problem with medical care in the US is that it's too expensive.

I won't argue with that. Back around '90, I cut the back of my hand severely enough to require a visit to our workman's comp physician - for 5 stitches and a handful of bandages, he got paid over $600. But that was through the workman's comp system - and like any bureaucracy, it tends to be rather non-competitive or cost effective.

Now there's a number of proposals to have government essentially take over health care in the US. Having been on the receiving end of government-run health care in the Air Force, I must say I'm less than convinced that it's a good idea to have government run medical care for the entire population. It's one thing to provide it for a select group of reasonably healthy, medically pre-screened individuals. But EVERYBODY? That way lies severe problems... and I'm not convinced at all that it can be done in a cost-effective manner. Unless you want to have another large, bureaucratic power group inside the government, wasting more than you think possible in your wildest dreams, that is.

So. If you're looking for some entity to provide health care, what would you want it to look like?

First - it has to be convenient to the majority of the population, with locations already available that can be easily adapted. We're not talking building hospitals and critical care facilities - this would be targeted at the folks who need first aid for minor wounds and illnesses. Congrats, you're feeling bad, got cough, a cold, the flu or a bad cut? Go to this place for help/triage. If you've got a heart attack or amputation or serious medical condition, you'll be referred to the local hospital or an associated doctor if you weren't smart enough to call 911 in the first place. The emphasis would be on getting the patient in, diagnosed, and treated if it was practical or moved on to a hospital if not.

It would also help to have a comprehensive pharmacy co-located with it, so whatever might be needed would be on hand.

Now the question arises - who should pay for it? It might be tempting to have government handle it all - but he who pays makes the decisions on such things as staffing and policies. And after seeing just how efficient the TSA is, I'm doubtful of the government on this. I'd prefer to keep government out of it and let the private sector run things.

What if... you could get a chain or two of drugstores, or a major retailer to sponsor the clinics? Make the cost a nominal amount - $20 or so. (Don't say it isn't affordable for the poor. You really want to tie it to the local economy, make it the same as 3 packs of cigarettes.) If absolutely necessary, in order to keep a clinic open that doesn't have enough customers, there could be a subsidy... but under no circumstances should government have primary control.

Let's see... are there enough potential outlets? Looking at two chains of drugstores and one major retailer...

There's 4141 Wal-Mart stores, Super Wal-Marts, Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets and Sams' Clubs (a Wal-Mart retail affiliate).

There's 6,237 Walgreens stores.

There's 6200+ CVS pharmacies.

5000+ Rite-Aid drugstores.

That's a total of well over 21 THOUSAND locations that could easily be turned into commercialized clinics.

You've got infrastructure, location, and (with a bit of advance prep) a medical model that would work pretty well.

But you say "Well, they might be able to do that - but what if they turn a profit!" Well - what if? Is there some law somewhere that says that if you're providing a service to the country, that you can't make money off it? I mean, seriously - is there some moral imperative that our country has to spend trillions of dollars, with associated waste and fraud and layers upon layers of non-productive bureaucratic overhead, to provide marginally adequate health care? If so - please explain to me just WHY it's so important that government provide this, when Wal-Mart can... and make it affordable to boot?

J.

Amazon Screening Room's Blog: Battlestar Galactica Cast Scores a 10 on Letterman Permalink

Why should you watch the new season?

Well, #6 was good, #2 was better.

Supposedly this will be the last year of it. After bringing Starbuck back from the dead, it ought to be interesting.

J.

About the 4-year Presidential Campaign is that it gives us plenty of time to see what the candidates are like. In most cases, that familiarity hasn't done much but breed contempt - Obama's looking like a bigoted jackass, and now Hillary's being exposed as someone who has 'stretched the truth' a little in her Bosnia stories. CBS, oddly enough, is going after her now.

This does not bode well for the Democrats. As I've asked before - are these two the best the Democratic Party has to offer?

I suppose I shouldn't be excessively worried - after all, we DO have a few months yet before the Dems finally select their candidate. There's even been some speculation that AlGore is going to get tapped at the convention, with both Obama and Hil bowing out. (Don't see that one, myself - Hillary's not going to 'give up her position' to anyone. I don't thing we've seen the real dirt on Obama yet - there's still more stuff to come. And for someone like AlGore to step in? No, you'd see a hell of a lot of people REALLY ticked off in that case.) The convention may very well be the last one for the Democrats, if they can't get together on a candidate.

The big problem, I think, is that Hil's practicing scorched-earth politicing inside the Democratic party. It's nominally okay to do that to Republicans - but when Democrats start doing it to each other, there's a serious problem in the party. Fratricide doesn't lend itself to building coalitions afterwards, and if there's one thing that's been proved very clearly by the Dems over the last 8 years, they know how to hold a grudge until the proper time to act on it. Bitter internal rivalries have brought the Democrats to this point - and now we're seeing the results.

Pretty, ain't it?

J.

Amy Proctor - Blog - Iraq War Costs Less Than 1% of U.S. GDP

Interesting analysis - also points out that the cost of NOT going to war would have been less, but not by much.

Realistically, this is war done on the cheap - in both men and materiel. Our national output is such that we're not hurting at all financially from it. It's an interesting article, with much to think about...

J.

Burglaries on the Decline in the United States : NPR

For almost 20 years, Mathis burglarized homes to support a drug habit. He only got caught a few times. Mathis says he stopped breaking into homes because there's just no money in it anymore.
"If you're going to do a burglary, you need to have some buyers," Mathis says. "Everybody has everything now."

Mathis says there's just too much on the street already. Everyone he knows already has a digital camera, iPod knockoffs and pirated DVDs shipped in from China.

"And if it's not new, a lot of people don't even want to fool with it," Mathis says.

Forget about last year's video games and old laptops, Mathis says. And don't even bring a VCR or boxy TV to the street.

Funny thought, though - if the economy was tanking, wouldn't we see burglaries rise?

J.

I'm going to try an upgrade to Moveable Type 4.1...

Well, what's the worst that could happen?

Oh. Yah.

Well, I'll try not to cut the red wire.

Or was it the green?

J.

Kind of. I'll find out in a few minutes here...

J.

You may now recline your stewardess and unbuckle your seat belt...

Or something like that.

J.

I attempted an upgrade to MT 4.1.

(Note to self - don't do that again. Wait for at least a .2, look at the screen shots, look at reviews. Alternatively, hit hand with hammer.)

And what happened?

Oh, things kind of worked... somewhat. Not really well enough to make it work keeping, and it worked too slowly for my comfort. Also, there were some things missing that were exceedingly useful.

So I did a reload into an empty folder, pointed the domain name to it, and crossed my fingers.

That, at least, seems to have worked.

It remains to be seen if the spamcatcher and blog janitor are on call - but I think they should be...

J.

Sorry - couldn't resist. However, at Gateway Pundit: Chicken Comes Home to Roost in $1.6 Million Home - we get to see the retirement digs of Obama's pastor.

Oddly enough, it's in a gated community.

One commentor posted : "Wright's a frikken' slave trader. He sells his own people out to something that will enslave and condemn them to a life of dis-ease, paranoia, and resentment. What an evil little man."

Hey, at least the pay is good.

But you know something? This "I'm supposed to feel guilty on cue" stuff about racism, and slavery, and oppression is starting to wear real thin. I didn't own any slaves, neither did my folks, neither did THEIR folks. I will admit to having a great-great granduncle somewhere who DID have 4 slaves - but they were freed after the Civil War.

That is, for all you history buffs, a good 140+ years back. I wasn't around then, and I have no intention of taking responsibility for their actions.

Neither will I take responsibility for 'keepin' the black man down'. I'm not a race-baiting poverty pimp, doing my damndest to ensure my personal gravy-train is kept full to overflowing by contributions from liberals who firmly believe that our country's collective guilt regarding slavery is eternal and a debt that must be paid - I'm a guy who works in a factory with all colors (and sizes. There's some places you simply need a severely vertically-challenged person to fit into...) and we focus on getting the job done. It was the same way in the military - the job was the important thing, and we all had the same color uniform.

I REALLY dislike people who make an issue of skin color - no matter what color their skin is. Skin is thin - but bigot goes to the bone.

Martin Luther King once had a vision. "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Good thing he isn't around any longer - the poor guy would be appalled by the racism practiced in the black community. He'd be encouraged by the progress we've made overall - and probably disgusted by the anger and hatred inside the black subculture.

It's rather pathetic that those who profit most from racism, who insist on judging by skin color are themselves black. And that they insist that only through hate, paranoia, and an obsessive remberance of the institution of slavery can they be freed. They have embraced the true cult of the victim.

And it's funny that a pastor that feeds that hate, that reinforces the paranoia that the white boogie monster is out to get the black man, that preaches the damnation of America will end up in a very expensive house, inside a gated community. That way - I guess he'll be able to avoid seeing the folks in AmeriKKKa that might take issue with him being a bigoted racist.

Man. Could we have done worse for the Democratic candidates? They're starting to make Ron Paul look good!

J.

I blame sleep deprivation for my lack of enabling them last night.

None of the restore process was especially difficult - but by heaven it took a while to get stuff moved back up. (Yep, even with a fast connection. I'll be posting about the various FTP programs I used later.)

J.

I have a rather simplistic criteria when it comes to choosing who I'm going to vote for.

In the primaries, I'll vote for whoever I think best matches my position on the general issues.

When it comes to the main event - I'll vote for who I think can lead best, and will put the country ahead of Party affiliation, or personal aggrandizement.

We have three potential candidates for President.

Hillary, I believe, is running because she thinks she's owed the Presidency, and she's got enough followers in the Democratic Party to shove her to the top of the heap for consideration. The good of the country concerns her not, neither does the good of the Democratic Party. What's important is that SHE become President - not what happens afterwards. (Personally, I think she'll declare herself Queen for Life - but I'm likely wrong about the probability. After all, look at how the left fringe has been insisting that Bush will establish himself as President for Life, when he shows no sign of that.)

I don't like the woman. I don't like her, or trust her - and I sure wouldn't vote to turn the country over to her.

Obama is a black Jimmy Carter. His voting record is such it appears he has difficulty actually 'leading' - and if he isn't capable of actually deciding on issues when pressed - why should he be considered for a position where he would HAVE to make decisions and lead the nation?

McCain? I don't think much of McCain. I respect his service, his time as a POW - but do I think he's the best possible candidate on the Republican side? No. Did I vote for him in the primaries? No. WOULD I vote for him if there was another Republican candidate (aside from Ron Paul, that is)? It's pretty unlikely.

However - he's what the Republican Party is putting forth.

Do I believe he can lead? Yes.

Do I believe he can make hard decisions, and stick to them? Yes - even if I don't agree with some of his policies and decisions, the man will make them.

Do I believe he'll put the country ahead of Party and Self? Yes. I've got no doubt about that.

In the end, the three questions above pretty much sum things up for me. Can they lead? Look at Gore, look at Kerry. Gore had no real-world leadership experience. Kerry was a joke as a leader. Bugging out on your crew shows little determination, persistance, or loyalty. Kerry's main quality was that he was a sock puppet for Kennedy.

Look at Hillary and Obama. Hillary has little actual leadership experience, and has integrity issues. (Oh, hell. She tells tall tales to make herself look better. If she were a Republican, she'd be a liar.) Obama is a blank screen that people project their political fantasies on. His record is uninspiring, his integrity is questionable, and his judgement is marginal - if the Wright flap is any indication.

They are the best the Democratic Party has seen fit to offer. I wish like anything we had a 'None of the Above' option - but we don't.

I will likely end up voting for McCain - barring a sudden Miller-Lieberman ticket turning up on the Democratic side. But it's unlikely to happen - the Democrats have changed from a party of principle and integrity (if, indeed, it ever was) to a party of political expediency, willing to do whatever it takes to get elected. And yes, I'm still pissed they tossed out hundreds of military absentee ballots in 2000. Every vote must count. Yeah. Right.

How Gore Cheated American Troops Serving Overseas

A full 19 hours after it began, the nightmarish battle over Duval´s military ballots came to an end. When the canvassing board announced that the ballots of 149 soldiers, sailors and airmen had been disqualified, a pair of jubilant Gore lawyers actually exchanged high-fives for their victory against America's service personnel.

"A Republican, visibly shaken by this sight, demanded to know how they could celebrate the disenfranchisement of U.S. military personnel risking their lives around the world. One of the Gore lawyers glibly replied: 'A win´s a win.'" Statewide, Gore's henchmen had been able to disqualify 1,420 ballots statewide - or more than 40 percent of the 3,500 cast.

J.

Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood Daily » '21' Holds Winning Hand At Box Office; 'Superhero' Is Superflop; 'Stop-Loss' DOA

I'm told #7 Stop-Loss opened to only $1.6 million Friday from just 1,291 plays and should eke out $4 M. Although the drama from MTV Films was the best-reviewed movie opening this weekend, Paramount wasn't expecting much because no Iraq war-themed movie has yet to perform at the box office. "It's not looking good," a studio source told me before the weekend. "No one wants to see Iraq war movies. No matter what we put out there in terms of great cast or trailers, people were completely turned off. It's a function of the marketplace not being ready to address this conflict in a dramatic way because the war itself is something that's unresolved yet. It's a shame because it's a good movie that's just ahead of its time."

"Marketplace not being ready to address the confilct in a dramatic way" - how about this simple plot summary? (The form and some content of which I'm shamelessly cribbing from Instapundit's post on the same matter...)

1. We're the good guys.
2. Saddam was a bad guy.
3. The Iraqi people were caught in the middle.
4. We took out Saddam, and started reconstruction.
5. More bad guys cropped up (the Islamofascist Jihadis.) who started killing the locals.
6. We're trying desperately to get the Iraqi people up to a point where THEY can fight their own battles, while protecting them.

Yeah, it's nowhere near as much fun as massive Halliburton-oriented conspiracy theories, but that's reality for ya...

Alternatively, the folks in Hollywood can try reading this...

Hollywood’s Lost War By Jay Reding - Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

If anyone wants to make a truly great war movie, here’s what they need to do. Don’t try to give us a “message.” Don’t try to push an agenda. Just tell a story. You know, the thing that Hollywood is supposed to do well? You don’t have to create some scathing indictment of war—if you just show war it indicts itself. Saving Private Ryan is one of the greatest war movies ever made because it never flinches from showing the horrors of war. It’s not a “pro-war” movie, nor is it an “anti-war” movie. It’s just a movie about war. You don’t need to create the character of Col. Evil McHitler who secretly sells the organs of Iraqi children to Halliburton to be used to grease oil drills to expose the horrors of war. War is itself horrible, and by creating all these silly little contrivances Hollywood doesn’t add to their message, they detract from it.

I swear, it's like they're stuck doing old single-reel melodramas, where the villain wears a black top hat, black coat, and curls his black mustache.

Maybe they'll wise up. But Snidely Whiplash never did, I'm not seeing any signs of it so far from Hollywood.

J.

As detailed a while back, I got the little guy "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel", and "Tunnel In The Sky".

He made it through two chapters of the first, and has yet to pick up the second.

Sigh.

And I've been thinking about that, trying to figure out why they haven't sparked his imagination like they have mine. While waiting on brake work today, I wandered next door to a drugstore and browsed the magazine rack, wandered through the consumer electronics stuff (essentially throwaway goods) and came across the answer. In retrospect, I should have seen it coming.

The sparks that HSS,WT and TITS (Hmm, ain't THAT a great acronym... *blush*) struck had ready fuel when I read them because of the times I was living in. It was the mid-60s, the middle of the Space Race, with new wonders coming from NASA on a near-weekly basis. The astronauts were lionized as true heroes, and the future was going to be a VERY interesting place.

But today?

Nada. Space is... boring. Yes, we're notching up extra-solar planetary discoveries fast - 277 as of 29 March 2008. Yes, we've got rovers on Mars. We've got civilian comanies trying to privatize space travel - and this is incredibly exciting!

Well, to the boy I was in the '60s it is. But it's not in the news constantly. To the average person, it's pretty much non-existant and certainly not relevant. They might remember the Shuttle and the ISS - but aside from disasters when was the last time something space-related was in the news?

As far as technology goes - the machine I'm writing this on has more computing power than the world complement of mainframes in the '60s. We have digital cameras that have incredible resolution, and massively cheap digital storage. Film? Hah. We have game consoles that make the CRAYs of the 80's look sick. We have the internet. We have light bulbs that never (essentially) burn out. Microwave ovens. MP3 players, IPods, DVDs. We have medical discoveries that would make for fantastic stories... and it's taken for granted. We're actually living in a SF novel - and the bits and pieces that I find amazing in passing, people take for granted.

So why should the SF that I liked be any different?

I'm starting to feel like I'm living the old joke about the parent who chides his child for not learning history. "Why, when I was a kid it was my favorite subject!" The kid replies "Yeah, but there wasn't so much of it then!"

We live in truely amazing times - which we will likely not appreciate until they're gone.

J.

Man, I kind of hate it when phrases like that run through my mind - because it signifies I've been in the South too long. But then again - I could have moved here or moved to Albuquerque when I got out of the Air Force in '84. All in all, I'm glad I'm here.

Anyhow - it's starting to become more and more apparent (at least to me - and seemingly to other people as well, judging by this article) that Hillary's got some rather significant, um, 'issues' when it comes to honesty. This last couple of weeks - when she said she landed in Bosnia under sniper fire... and CBS put out the tape showing nothing of the sort, Sinbad the comedian (who was on the same flight) said it didn't happen, and the pilot of the plane that was flying her took severe exception to her story is sufficient evidence that Hillary ... well, I'll have my conclusion after this.

Declarations - WSJ.com

I think we've reached a signal point in the campaign. This is the point where, with Hillary Clinton, either you get it or you don't. There's no dodging now. You either understand the problem with her candidacy, or you don't. You either understand who she is, or not. And if you don't, after 16 years of watching Clintonian dramas, you probably never will.

That's what the Bosnia story was about. Her fictions about dodging bullets on the tarmac -- and we have to hope they were lies, because if they weren't, if she thought what she was saying was true, we are in worse trouble than we thought -- either confirmed what you already knew (she lies as a matter of strategy, or, as William Safire said in 1996, by nature) or revealed in an unforgettable way (videotape! Smiling girl in pigtails offering flowers!) what you feared (that she lies more than is humanly usual, even politically usual).

But either you get it now or you never will. That's the importance of the Bosnia tape.

I realize that honesty is a rather negotiable quality in a politician. A certain amount of 'imaginative fabrication' is expected during the campaign. You have to be able to trust, however, that the politician will NOT lie to you about major stuff, and that you'll be able to believe them if there's a real need to do so.

Hillary, however, has been showing clearly that her personal integrity and honesty is non-existant. Perhaps that doesn't matter to some voters, or some supporters - but there's a lot of folks that are going to find the idea of a President who either is a congenital, compulsive liar or so delusional that she cannot tell reality from her imagination something they really can't stand.

I know I sure don't like it.

J.

Cash-strapped Clinton fails to pay bills - Kenneth P. Vogel - Politico.com

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months — freeing up cash for critical media buys, but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small business circles.

A pair of Ohio companies owed more than $25,000 by Clinton for staging events for her campaign are warning others in the tight-knit event production community — and anyone else who will listen — to get their cash upfront when doing business with her. Her campaign, say representatives of the two companies, has stopped returning phone calls and e-mails seeking payment of outstanding invoices. One even got no response from a certified letter.

As they deal with the small stuff, so will they with the large. We've got Obama the waffler, who won't commit on anything but sounds swooningly wonderful while doing so. We've got Hillary the Spendthrift - who won't pay the bills. People actually depending on the money from her campaign better not hold their breath for it. After all, she is the Queen - and you don't ask royalty to pay - you should be glad she deigned to offer your company the chance to contriubte to her reign!

“We worked very hard to put together these events on a moment’s notice and do absolutely everything to a ‘t’ to make it look perfect on television for her and for her campaign,” said the employee. “Sen. Clinton talks about helping working families, people in unions and small businesses. But when it comes down to actually doing something that shows that she can back up her words with action, she fails.”

My experience over the last 30 years - Democrats make promises, and don't keep them.

But they'll be good Presidents. TRUST them.

Right.

Can we have a Do-Over of the last 2-3 years?

(Republicans? Another matter - not covered here. Maybe later. I HAVE noticed that Republicans don't promise near so much...)

J.

My Way News - Al-Sadr Pulls Fighters Off Iraq Streets

BAGHDAD (AP) - Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said Sunday that he was pulling his fighters off the streets nationwide and called on the government to stop raids against his followers and free them from prison.

The Iraqi government quickly welcomed al-Sadr's apparent move to resolve a widening conflict with his movement, sparked Tuesday by operations against his backers in the oil-rich southern city of Basra.

Al-Sadr's nine-point statement was issued by his headquarters in the holy city of Najaf and broadcast through loudspeakers on Shiite mosques. It said the first point was: "taking gunmen off the streets in Basra and elsewhere."

Hate to say it - but hasn't he and his Mahdi militia caused enough problems for Iraq? Seems like things start to settle down, reconstruction proceeds - and then he does what he can to get stuff going again.

At what point does he become enough of an enemy to actually kill?

J.

Well, after my screed on Hillary - I figure it's only fair to toss out this little bit about Obama from Liberal Rapture.

Sunday, March 23, 2008
The poisonous campaign of Barack Obama

If I ever reflect on how it is that I went from being a huge fan of Obama's, to a person who was excited about him and waiting to hear his plans, to wondering why I was not hearing anything tangible, to coming to terms with that fact he had no intention of clarifying anything, to coming to understand that he was a shallow pretender, to loathing everything his campaign represents - I will look no further than this email I received today from an Obamite:

let me guess with all respect,
-- you are below college education. thats for sure. right?
-- you have a working class background. thats also for sure. right?
-- you are not interested in politics. thats possible. right?
-- you prefer to eat cheese stakes at geno's. thats also possible. right?
-- your are just a bad bad-boy who likes to play mind games. maybe. right?
have a nice day

I loath these people. I will vote for McCain or no one if Obama gets the nomination. Not because every one of these assumptions is wrong about me. I have a BFA, come from a middle class background, am obsessed with politics, and am a bad boy but not a "bad bad" boy. (A cheese "stake" would be a bizarre and pointless item so I have no use for it, but I do like a cheese steak every now and again).

I will vote for McCain or not at all because of the dripping, oozing condescension that Obamites have for those without college degrees. Because of the high end, fraudulent contempt Obamites have for the working class. Because I do not want to sit through another 4 years of an administration populated by those who think "cheese steak" consumers are less than equal partners in a democracy.

She doesn't seem to have figured it out yet that Hillary's as bad - the gloss of having a woman as a Presidential Candidate (probationary) has her blinded still... but I think that time will come. And she's gonna be pissed. There's few who are as angry as those who have been disabused of their illusions.

J.

May I point out to all and sundry that no matter how damnably heated our political rhetoric gets, no matter the angry fights breaking out in the blogosphere over this and that and something else, no matter the "My guy is better than your (fill in the expletive) guy!" anger -

That we do not burn down each other's houses when we disagree.
We do not imprison those who disagree with the other side.
We do not randomly kill at political rallies for the opponent.
We do not confiscate goods going to an area where the political sentiment is against the government.

When our politicians lose - they leave the position.
They do not ignore the will of the people. (Well, any more than normal...)
They do not declare the vote invalid.
They do not delcare themselves 'President For Life', and dissolve the mechanisms of an orderly succession.
They do not slaughter those they believe didn't vote for them.

Our handovers are extraordinarily peaceful. The closest thing to an attempted coup was the Democratic 'recount' of Florida - and our laws prevailed, succession was accomplished - and all was (more or less) peaceful in the land.

We have dodged the bullet many times in the past. Each election, we could have gotten a megalomanic dictator into office - and the closest we got with THAT was Nixon, who stepped down when opposed.

I attribute our good fortune to poltical parties that play by the established rules - who actually HONOR them even if they lose. They may chafe at them, but the rules exist to protect all the voters - not give one party an advantage over the other. That way lies resentment, (well, more than usual...) and anger, and hate - and flames and the destruction of the progress we've made.

Our system works. That doesn't mean we can't screw it up - but it works. Whenever someone suggests throwing a wrench into it (like abolishing the electoral college, making arbitrary changes and the like) you might want to take a look at Zimbabwe and reflect on what might happen if the power-hungry REALLY got control...

I have a strong hunch that it would not work out well at all.

J.

Thick ice hinders controversial seal hunt - Yahoo! News

CHARLOTTETOWN, Prince Edward Island (Reuters) - Canada's annual seal hunt, which the government promised would be more humane this year, cranked up slowly on Friday because of thick ice.

The government is allowing hunters to kill up to 275,000 young harp seals on the ice floes off Eastern Canada, but only three had been reported killed on the first morning of the hunt in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

"It's a very slow start," said Phil Jenkins, spokesman for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, noting that sealing boats were finding it difficult to get to the herds because of thick ice.

A) Colder than normal?
B) Warmer than normal?
C) Normal?

(Don't ask AlGore. He cheats - and likely isn't right anyway..)

J.

Okay - not 'really' trashed - just 'slightly' trashed and inaccessable.

I'm having difficulty, after popping up to MT 4.1 and then rolling back, in accessing my templates. That contains all the good stuff that's in the sidebar - links, ads and such... Normally I can just pop in, change things, save, rebuild and be done with it.

But when I DO try now - I get the following message.

maketext doesn't know how to say:
_SYSTEM_TEMPLATE_SEARCH_RESULTS
as needed at lib/MT.pm line 917

I've tried restoring several complete backups - which makes me think the problem is in the MySQL database the comments are stored in, and which I'm going to pretty much refuse to mess with. What I know about MySQL fits neatly between | and | - I was able to figure out how to set it up for MT, but that's it.

I'm currently at MT 3.3. I'm thinking (oh, ghod) I might be able to bump it up to 3.6 and iron out the kink. Wish me luck.

Update - Nope, that didn't do it. Dang.

But things are still operational - guess I can't kick too much at that. Wish I could figure out some way I could easily export everything (looks like the export function in MT doesn't export EVERYTHING - instead, it's lopping off roughly the last year or two of posts and comments...) and then I'd shift to something else.

Heh. Maybe I could try bumping up to 4 again, export all my posts and then do a clean install of 3.6 and import things again.

Well - enough on this for now...

J.

Do you get it too, after reading something like this?

Pajamas Media ｻ Blog Archive ｻ Is Al Gore About to Make His Move?

In recent weeks, talk of the potential emergence of former Vice President Al Gore as a consensus candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for President has increased in volume. Newsweek columnist Eleanor Clift and Time columnist Joe Klein have both noted that Gore could provide the Democrats a winning exit strategy from the protracted Obama-Clinton primary battle, a fight that promises to get bloodier in the weeks ahead.

One Democrat Congressman and Super Delegate, Tim Mahoney of Florida, has openly spoken of Gore as a potential compromise candidate if Obama and Clinton remain deadlocked when the Democrats convene for their Convention in Denver in late August.

So what does Gore say about this speculation? Nothing, other than that he thinks the nomination may “resolve itself” prior to the Convention. It would be very easy for him to put the “Al Gore scenario” to rest by simply making it clear he has absolutely no interest in the Presidency in 2008. He could end all the discussion and conjecture IF he would simply endorse either Hillary or Barack. But instead, for now, Al is simply sitting back and waiting to see if the situation really does “resolve itself” — or not.

Or, is he just “sitting back”? In subtle ways he seems to be increasing his visibility, perhaps suggesting that he is not just an innocent bystander in the political drama that continues to unfold.

Now Mr. "Global Warming Carbon Offsets" may be trying to leap into the race. Oh, joy. Be still, my stomach.

J.

Hot Air ｻ Blog Archive ｻ Quote of the day

So says Joe Lieberman...

Very odd - but I sure get his point about the Democratic Party being hijacked by the protectionist, isolationist far left...

J.