Wednesday, December 29, 2004
I did not know this
"Xristos is a transliteration of the New Testament Greek word for Christ "criston." The Greek letter Chi 'c' was retained to insure a connection to the roots and original texts, as well as visually represent the centrality of the cross in all. The visual symbol Chi-ro is also employed at various places by Xristos, recalling one of the earliest practices of the Christian community."
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Dan Rathers, Peter Jennings, and a U.S. Marine
Dan Rather and Peter Jennings, along with a U.S. Marine assigned to protect them, were hiking through the Iraqi desert one day when they were captured by terrorists. They were tied up, led to a village, and brought before the Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al Qaeda leader in Iraq.
Zarqawi said, "I am familiar with your western custom of granting the condemned a last wish; so, before we kill and dismember you, do you have any last requests?"
Dan Rather said, "Well, I'm a Texan; so I'd like one last bowlful of hot spicy chili." Zarqawi nodded to an underling who left and returned with the chili. Rather ate it all and said, "Now I can die content."
Peter Jennings said, "I am Canadian, so I'd like to hear the song 'O Canada' one last time." Zarqawi nodded to a terrorist who had studied the Western world and knew the music. He returned with some rag-tag musicians and played the anthem. Jennings sighed and declared he could now die peacefully.
Zarqawi turned and said, "And now, Mr. U.S. Marine, what is your final wish?"
"Kick me in the ass," said the Marine.
"What?" asked Zarqawi. "Will you mock us in your last hour?"
"No, I'm not kidding. I want you to kick me in the ass," insisted the Marine. So the leader shoved him into the open, and kicked him in the ass.
The Marine went sprawling, but rolled to his knees, pulled out a 9mm pistol hidden in his cammies, and shot Zarqawi dead.
In the resulting confusion, he leapt to his knapsack, pulled out his M4 carbine, and sprayed the remaining terrorists with gunfire. In a flash, they were either dead or fleeing for their lives.
As the Marine was untying Rather and Jennings, they asked him, "Why didn't you just shoot them? Why did you ask them to kick you in the ass?"
"What," replied the Marine, "and have you assholes call me the aggressor?"
Monday, December 27, 2004
Libruls n Jesus
For Pete's sake, they weren't homeless - they couldn't get a hotel room. They had to sleep in a stable only because Dad had to schlep halfway across the country to pay his taxes in the town of his birth, which sounds like the kind of cockamamie bureaucratic nightmare only a blue state could dream up. Except that in Massachusetts, it's no doubt illegal to rent out your stable without applying for a Livestock Shelter Maternity Ward for Non-Insured Transients License, so Mary would have been giving birth under a bridge on I-95.
Heh heh, good rebuttal. And one rarely mentioned, even by conservatives.
Crichton rocks
I found the info via this article which gives the "that isn't cool" side of the argument.
I just saw that movie, The Day After Tomorrow over the holiday. Kind of an interesting movie. The basic premise of the movie, that we are on the verge of the occurance of an instant ice age, is almost certainly completely scientifically insane. Yet the movie goes into a fair amount of detail of how an instant freeze could happen. Like if I claimed that the moon is made of cheese then provided a detailed documentation of how the moon reflects the same spectra as a specific kind of cheese.
Thursday, December 23, 2004
Happy Festivus!
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
The real McCain
Although McCain considers himself a "straight talker", I believe that his opposition is purely a political consideration. This consideration is that after two terms the public will grow weary of the Republican party and be looking towards that mythical 'moderation'. McCain has played the media like a maestro, obviously knowing that a 'Rebublican' who always opposes Republicans will be portrayed as a hero in the press. He has played this line and now everything said by him is quoted in any newspaper as being beyond reproach.
The simple truth is that before everything, McCain is a politician first. Certainly he has his own political leanings and a right to those but he seems to be more reactionary and more than willing to play to the media and Republican hostile crowds. I bring this all up because of a part of an article that I read this morning with the following line, "...said Marshall Wittmann, who served as McCain's spokesman until last month, when he joined the Democratic Leadership Council."
The reason this line piqued my interest is that I remember in May, at the Arizona Republican Party convention, how lonely the volunteer collecting signatures for Senator McCain's reelection was. He has alienated a lot of Republicans in his quest for media legitimacy and his former spokesman now taking post at a democrat think tank just shows another reason why. Obviously this spokesman has had either democrat leanings or has always been a democrat. McCain's choice is his but it's of questionable judgment to assign such a prestigious post to someone of the opposing party if you want to be taken seriously as a Republican by Republicans.
This is why I think that the Senator's presidential aspirations will once again not likely make it past the primaries. While basking in the bright lights of political celebrity he has simply forgotten the party of which he proclaims himself a member and will pay for that oversight when that party votes for it's candidate.
Monday, December 20, 2004
Flag Ranking
Sunday, December 19, 2004
Jersey Bashing
Pull into gas station. There is a backup of about 3 cars on the left side stations, and one on each right side station. Of course, there is a left side car at the right side stations (mine being one of them) unable to pump because a right side car is filling up and no room to get our tanks close enough to the pump. Waste 5 minutes waiting.
Right side car leaves, and I am able to pull forward to the pump he just left. I pull up, pop the tank door, and wait a couple minutes for the attendant to get to the car.
Attendant runs over, and I voice my standard request: "fillup on 93 octane". This "professional" gives me a blank stare and asks me "re-goo-lar?" in a foreign accent. I say, "93 octane". He points to the pump and gives me a quizzical look. He then asks, "soo-per?" I point at the 93 octane button. The "professional" then points at the 93 octane button and in a lecturing tone says "soo-per". Whatever man, just fill it up, so I nod. "Cash or credit card?" I give him my Visa, and he asks "fill?". YES, you !@%$!@!!! By this time, another 3 or 4 minutes have been wasted. He goes through the rigmarole and gas begins flowing into my car. He conveniently places my Visa in the pump card slot for everyone to see and leaves.
Waiting....waiting.....after 5 minutes elapse, I look at the pump display. The gas is pumping at an extremely slow rate, I'm only at 5 gallons. In the meantime, my window is open and rain is coming in, so I close it and wait some more.
Check again 3 minutes later, and the pump has stopped! At only 5.5 gallons! "Professional" runs over and pulls the lever to get gas flowing again. It flows at the same slow rate.
5 more minutes pass, I'm at 11 gallons. I glance over and a New Yorker gets out of his car and begins pumping his own gas. The "professional" runs over and tells him he's not allowed. New Yorker gives look of unbelief.
"Professional" then runs over and discovers something when I'm at 15 gallons. The pump dispenser was not in the tank all the way. Hmmmm, as an experienced self-server, I figured out that this would decrease pumping rate in high school. I'm paying higher prices for this crap service?
In the meantime, a backlog has piled up in front of me as more frustrated drivers wait their turn to get gas pumped on the left side station. After the "professional" gives me my credit card back and tells me "thank yoo" I wait another 2-3 minutes for an opening in this line so I can get out of the gas station. The ordeal is over.
This is a perfect example of how idiot FDR type liberalism makes things worse. A similar tirade was published on NRO a year ago. Wanna show a liberal why their economic views are stupid? Make them take a trip down the Turnpike and see government regulation at its finest.
Friday, December 17, 2004
Europeans
Job hunting
1. I'm an engineer
2. I too have studied frosted pop tarts
This must have been like the day that Mozart first stepped to the Piano!
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Sick.....
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Another Diversion
Something to do on an ariplane
Perhaps
Super Size Me
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Monday, December 13, 2004
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Cold War Memories
I comment on this because I started reading a book about the history of Fluid Mechanics and in the beginning, the author is explaining the importance of water as a fluid. He is describing a Soviet plan to use solar energy to distill water when he says:
Even in the USSR, which has a planned economy and therefore cannot be regarded as the most wasteful country in the world, each year some 3,000,000 tons of acids, 2,000,000 tons of oil products, 1,000,000 tons of fats, and hundreds of thousands of tons of salt, fibres and metal are dumped into rivers.Those parenthesis are not my editorial comments. Those were his thoughts. He clearly believed that Communism was superior. This book was published in 1971, when this sort of thought reached a fever pitch (culminating in sissy boy Jimmah!'s stern rebuke of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan by boycotting the Olympics). This was a typical attitude among academics and the left in general during this time period. Never forget that. Whenever you argue with a liberal about the Cold War, never cease to remind them of this.
In the United States (undoubtedly the most wasteful country) whole rivers and lakes are being polluted to such an extent that they can no longer be used for drinking or swimming purposes.
Eeeeexcellent
Friday, December 10, 2004
Moveon to Dems: We own you
Thursday, December 09, 2004
How appropriate
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
Poll madness
Anyway, to make an actual point, I was an annoyed Steve by the time the election finally came to. And I was more than relieved, and of course happy, when it was over. A big cause of my headache were the endless polls. That's why I had to bring up the complete waste that I linked above. The beginning tells the reader all that they need to know; "It seems that even Republican respondents to a Zogby poll understood that being Republican is not the same as being kind". Ugh. "plurality of likely voters say that longtime Christmas fixture Santa Claus is a Democrat" and "Ebenezer Scrooge and the Grinch are likely Republicans".
The only thing that I get from this poll is something that I've known for ever anyway . That democrats have been very good, for a very long time, at demonizing Republicans. If Santa Claus were really a democrat, he would take half the toys of the kids who have them and then keep most of them for himself, leaving a single plastic soldier for the needy children while exploiting them and presuming their allegiance.
A tad bit oveboard you say. That's probably right, but you know what? Stupid polls like this really put me in a sour mood. Ugh.
Again....
Sunday, December 05, 2004
General fights back
Saturday, December 04, 2004
Another good movie
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Government Efficiency
One more thing
One thing that I thought was telling was how his stories (at least the ones I saw on the movie and the ones I could get to online) had a huge left wing slant and yet they still didn't raise any questions amongst the fact-checkers. In particular, one about a bunch of Young Republicans who committed felonies during a convention. Bias, anyone? Of course TNR isn't exactly WaPo, but hey, Charles Lane works at WaPo now....
Garden State Roundup
Looks like Bret Schundler is running for Gov. again - I've been a fan of Bret since the last NJ election. He's a true Reagan Democrat (now Republican) who's proven he can pick up Dem votes, since he managed to get reelected by landslide margins in Jersey City as mayor - not exactly a Republican stronghold. I've heard commercials for the others but right now Bret's got the name recognition so I think he's got the best shot. More'n likely he'll face Jon Corzine.
Nasty oil spill wreaking havoc on the lower Delaware. Environmentalist wackos will have a field day, I'm sure. Accidents happen....
This article on Oppenheimer seems a bit harsh towards him. He was a good guy but I think he got a little squishy with the rest of them scientists once the Cold War started heating up.
One thing I noticed about this place is how many freakin' deer I see. I see at least 2 or 3 a week running across the road in front of me. And I always see a dead one by the side of the road every week. From what I hear, it's the number one cause of accidents here. So, what do the luminaries in Princeton do? Call for more hunting? No...they come up with a plan to catch does with nets and shoot them full of birth control. People around here have lost their minds.
I probably shouldn't do this...
"Heavenly Father, we come before you to ask your forgiveness. We seek your direction and your guidance. We know your word says, "Woe to those who call evil good." But that's what we've done.
We've lost our spiritual equilibrium. We have inverted our values. We have ridiculed the absolute truth of your word in the name of moral pluralism. We have worshiped other gods and called it multiculturalism.
We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle.
We've exploited the poor and called it a lottery. We've neglected the needy and called it self-preservation. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare. In the name of choice, we have killed our unborn. In the name of right to life, we have killed abortionists.
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem. We have abused power and called it political savvy. We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it taxes. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.
Search us, oh, God, and know our hearts today. Try us. Show us any wickedness within us. Cleanse us from every sin and set us free. Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of the State of Kansas, and that they have been ordained by you to govern this great state.
Grant them your wisdom to rule. May their decisions direct us to the center of your will. And, as we continue our prayer and as we come in out of the fog, give us clear minds to accomplish our goals as we begin this Legislature. For we pray in Jesus' name, Amen."
If you liberals really want to be able to communicate with "red America" then you need to be able to understand this speech. You don't have to agree with everything, but if you read any of this and beleive it to be uterly incomprehensible that a person would think this way, you don't stand a chance. I don't really believe that you want to have true morals, but since you are beginning to say that you do have them and/or do want them, herein lies some guidance. If you continue in any way to espouse "liberal values" and try to equate them to conservative morals but don't deal with the issues above, you're still headed for the ditch.
Sunday, November 28, 2004
On Meet the Press
Friday, November 26, 2004
Are we better off?
Evangelical Outpost
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Conservative Intellectual Snob
Although I do agree with his take on pop radio. But all you have to do is turn it off and listen to what you want. If there's a market for it, it'll be on the air. I guess there's just not a market for snobs like him so he has to rely on my tax dollars to fund his daily dose of cultural superiority. I better actually start listening to NPR though so I can better attack arguments like this. My stomach just gets all tied up in knots though whenever I realize that my forcibly removed resources are funding tripe like NPR and PBS.
Finally - Rush, Sean, Hugh, Laura, etc. ARE great men (and women)....thank them for GW Bush's reelection. NRO and the other snobs in DC and NYC do their thing to translate conservatism to liberals but these guys deserve the credit.
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
School stabbing
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Fun with dialup...
About Time?
Hilarious
Reuters quotes Ron Artest, the Indiana Pacers forward who's been suspended
from basketball for fighting with fans in Detroit, as telling People magazine:
"I'm trying to be positive. I'm a big fan of the Nobel Peace Prize."
Well, Ron, we admire you for setting your sights high. But if you want a
Nobel Peace Prize, throwing a few punches is woefully inadequate. You're at
least going to have to start blowing people up or something.
Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.
Not a big fan of the AP
Of two recent West Point dropouts who spoke on the condition of anonymity, one
cited disenchantment with Army life and the other said Iraq was a major factor
in his decision. "I didn't want to be deployed in a war I didn't believe
in," he said.
Uh, you're supposed to follow orders, moron. You signed away your right to dissent when you got your free education and invitation into manhood by entering the Academy. I hope they make that SOB pay big time - especially since he got something many people would give their left nut for.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Bowl Eligible
Ukrainian Runoff
Saturday, November 20, 2004
From the Duh file
Another side
Friday, November 19, 2004
A timewaster
On a Williams roll
Sore Loser
Like Gore before him, Kerry thought of George W. Bush as an unworthy opponent. Wrapped up in their own arrogance they both wondered how they could lose to someone like him. Gore did win the popular vote, narrowly but also narrowly lost the electoral college and according to our country's election laws lost the election. Because of the popular vote I think that Gore, and many democrats, never truly conceded the election and harbored bitterness from it. The proof is in the many speeches and statements by Gore since which has made him irrelevant and a joke.
In "that Usama tape" and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth Kerry has built himself excuses for losing the election and has already shown bitterness. His statements in the future will no doubt grow more irrational and silly. It is disturbing and will annoy many people but there is a silver lining. At the very least this kind of behavior will invalidate another presidential run in 2008 by the Senator.
Your great-grandparents' tax dollars at work
Dolphin gets an artificial fin
I'm Tim
You are Tim the Enchanter! Sure you can blow up
small objects, but no-one really respects you.
But you'll have the last
laugh...MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Which Monty Python & the Holy Grail Character are you REALLY?
brought to you by Quizilla
Thursday, November 18, 2004
Walter Williams
"If I see a person in need of food, what if I walk up to another person and, through threats, intimidation and coercion, take his money and give it to the needy person? I believe and hope that most Americans would see such an act as theft. Would the conclusion differ if we collectively agreed to take one person's money to feed the needy person? It'd still be theft. Immoral acts such as theft, rape and murder don't become moral when done collectively through a majority decision."Thoughts, anyone? I agree with this statement, but taxation is a necessary evil to maintain a national defense and provide for the public safety. Williams addresses this argument by exchanging "moral" with "constitutional". I think I like that argument better anyway.
More Narcissist liberal thought
Does this infuriate anybody else?
The other day I was watching CSpan and some idiot Democrat rep. was giving his schpiel on how Bush's fiscal policy was rendering SocSec insolvent. I wanted to put my fist through his face on tv. "I THOUGHT SOCSEC WAS AN INSURANCE POLICY! THAT MEANS YOU DON'T SPEND THE MONEY, YOU INVEST IT, YOU FATHEADED IDIOT! AND 'INVESTING' IS NOT GIVING IT AWAY FOR FREE SCHOOL LUNCHES!"
Sorry for all caps. Some venting is needed, especially when my OWN party is incapable of combating such moronic programs because they don't want to scare away old people. I just can't stand being taxed before even being born because of dictator-for-life, I mean FDR's, unconstitutional ideas.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Speak for yourself
Funnily enough, I found the sorry website through a blog called "this blog is full of crap," coincidence?
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
First, there was...
Imposing One's Faith?
My sense is that the critics of the Religious Right would very rarely levy the same charges at the Religious Left. Rather, they'd acknowledge that religious people are entitled to try to enact their moral views (which stem from their religious views) into law, just as secular people are entitled to try to enact their moral views (which stem from their secular, but generally equally unprovable, moral axioms) into law.Mmmmhmmm.
Perhaps...
The CIA, Sensitive?
Funny Stuff
Monday, November 15, 2004
Ahhhh Justices
Resignations
Carville
Sunday, November 14, 2004
And I thought
Celebrate Diversity
Actually, they've fallen victim to Karl Rove's insidiously clever "Blogpaper" strategy, in which vast reserves of potential activism are siphoned off into pointless hatred toward an obscure law professor who maintains a personal website. I think he has provocateurs over there keeping them stirred up.That Karl, he's devious.
RE: Groupthink vis-a-vis Academia
Princeton, on the other hand, is a bit more liberal and the profs more outspoken, but that again doesn't change what they're teaching. For example my reactors prof. practically spat Edward Teller's name when mentioning him. I also had a math prof. who mentioned his email from georgesoros.com, and made a couple snide remarks towards President Bush. But these were minor asides in otherwise solid engineering lectures. I agree with Engicon that engineers should be biased to the right, because of a reality-based thinking. But my explanation for the vast majority of academics (even in engineering) who are liberal has to do with the fact that they rely on the government as the primary source of their employment; also, a real job forces you to suffer the consequences of your bad decisions, whereas tenure precludes this condition for an academic.
Disagreeing with the Instapundit
," I don't mean to say that such pretend anguish doesn't capture a certain reality, and a very sad one. But at the end of the day -- or often at the end of sweeps week -- the woman always says "it's my choice, I'm keeping the baby." Or, they'll have a scene where the woman gets a sonogram and she realizes she loves the baby and again she'll say "it's my choice. I'm having this baby."
And, the moment the women decide to have the baby, the fetus is automatically discussed as if it were a complete person worth talking to, reading to, singing to etc. The implication here, of course, is that if Rachel or whoever had simply chosen not to have the baby, that choice and that choice alone would have been enough of an abracadabra to metaphysically transform the fetus into nothing more than a lump of cells or the inconvenient consequence of a one-night-stand not worth reading to at all."
Glenn submits the counterexample of, "I realize I'm not quite addressing Jonah's argument here, but it's not so shocking that a single decision like that might change, if not a person's moral status, at least the constellation of duties that someone has in regard to them. A classic example (and one that I've always meant to write a law review article about, but never gotten around to) has to do with abortion and the duty to rescue.
At common law -- and still, pretty much, the law generally -- there's no duty to rescue. The classic example, in fact, involves a man walking down the sidewalk and observing a baby drowning in a half-inch of water. Even if the man could rescue the baby with no risk and minimal inconvenience to himself, he's under no duty to take any action at all, and can simply keep walking without facing any penalty beyond moral condemnation.
But if he decides to help, and takes action, then he becomes obligated to follow through and must exert all reasonable effort (short of risking death or serious bodily harm; inconvenience doesn't generally count) to save the baby's life and leave it in a position of reasonable safety. The analogy should be obvious here."
The problem with Glenn's counterexample is that the man would have had to place the baby in the puddle for the situation to apply. A woman does not just walk down the sidewalk and find a baby in her womb. You could make a very strong case for Glenn's analogy if you started it with the man playing some game of chance where if he loses, the baby ends up face down in a puddle next to him.
Groupthink vis-a-vis Academia
Given that I'm trudging back into the world of academia, I feel rather lucky to be an engineer. It's a little hard to bias the presentation of Lyapunov stability to either the right or the left politically.
Although, were I feeling argumentative, I would point out that engineering is inherently biased toward the right. The reason being that liberal notions often must ignore reality, while conservative notions are generally based there in.
Unfortunatelly, I guess Timdido has found that while the science can't be biased, the scientists sure can. Has anyone encountered political bias in a classroom, (or maybe workshop for our industry friends) manifested in the delivery of what should be a cut and dry subject?
McG Ain't All Bad!
At least McGreevey can say to himself he wasn't the worst.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Princetonian wonders why Kerry lost
Keep it up guys, and keep losing elections.
Imagine this headline:
I'm really not liking the AP. Their "stories" look more like editorials to me. Almost as bad as Reuters.
And nothing?
Yes Steve,
Moonbat nonsense
Did WWII leave all the jewish children, who are now not dead, behind? What about the Iraqi children who now have a chance to grow up in a free country? What about those young Iraqi soccer players who can now hope to make the national team without worrying about their family being tortured if they loose a game? What about the young Iraqi girls who can now hope to go to college?
What an inelegant way to slander Bush. Take a noble sentiment of Bush's, "No child left behind" and twist it. Twist the sentiment in a false and illogical way no less. Kind of makes me sick to my stomach.
Edward Teller
Here's a good quote from this interview:
"I am a pacifist, and you my friends are pacifists, but I am telling you, if you are not going to work on the instruments of war, freedom will be lost everywhere."As the inimitable Glenn Reynolds would say: indeed.
Smart Liberal
But the people did know that he was embarrassed by a certain muscular patriotism, by the historic place of Nature's God in the wider American community, by the simple and unadorned lives that most families live, from which his own new and unimaginably lavish lifestyle sets him apart.And the second on liberals in general:
But the problem is that many Democrats have a downright hostile attitude to the flag, to patriotism itself, which is thought by some in the party to be a retrograde sentiment. And they have, at best, a queasy disposition towards religion. To tell the truth, it gives many of them the creeps. You can't really do much with that, can you?Nope.
Friday, November 12, 2004
Missile Defense Laser Test Successful
An honest liberal
So our guy lost the election. Why shouldn't those of us on the coasts feel superior? We eat better, travel more, dress better, watch cooler movies, earn better salaries, meet more interesting people, listen to better music and know more about what's going on in the world. If you voted for Bush, we accept that we have to share the country with you. We're adjusting to the possibility that there may be more of you than there are of us. But don't demand our respect. You lost it on November 2.Speaks for itself. Finally, the liberals are being honest about their ideology: an intelligent elite pushes its superior wisdom on the uneducated proles and hicks populating middle America. I hope jerks like him do flee to Canada or Europe.
The Hydrogen Economy
I tried to find a post to CEP (AIChE publication) but you must register there, so I'll search for one. Meantime, here's the gist of it.
Economists (and, ahem, engineers with an economist's mind) know the biggest problem with the 'hydrogen economy' is that we have no proven reserves of H. It's all locked up in water or hydrocarbons. To recover it (by hydrolosis or steam reforming) we have to burn fossil fuels. So much for zero emissions and energy independence. But fuel cells are more efficient, right, so we use less? Wrong - the combined steps in recovering H create about as efficient a process as the current fossil-fuel smokin IC engine - nature's "tax" due to the second law (and the current state of the technologies) makes it unfeasible. In fact, the lecturer showed that diesel (as opposed to today's standard IC engine) is so efficient that it rivals the fuel cell in total emissions! On top of that, we have the added costs of building the infrastructure of an H economy as well as the unknown costs (safety, storage, etc.) that are ultimately not worth the benefit. His take, and I think this sounds about right, is that as oil becomes more expensive to recover (and prices go up) consumers in America will turn to diesel, just as Europeans have with their highly taxed gas. And the most efficient means of transport is probably going to be a diesel hybrid w/regenerative braking. But I love this argument because the policy proposal is so nice, so sensible, so conservative - do nothing! The market will best dictate our direction. The Bush Administration is pumping a lot of money into a pipe dream. Just like everything the government directs (the idiotic ethanol subsidies come to mind, and of course the vile Social Security pyramid scheme) the net result is wasting our money.
There is some worthwhile research in this area though. I certainly think fuel cells are "a" (maybe not "the") way of the future, so we shouldn't pull all funding. But ultimately we need a way to recover H that is net cost positive, and not dependent on fossil fuels - and this is where we should direct our resources. Alternative energy sources, and viable ones, not stupid gigantic windmills. Honestly I think nuclear energy is where it's at, we just need people not to get their nuclear energy education from The China Syndrome - and when's Mikey gonna develop cold fusion? There was some talk of solar energy options, and I think that's also a viable option (it will make NM more important, certainly). Also crazy talk of biomass or biological systems, but again, second law makes it tough to implement fully. So, nuclear energy is my guess on where we go, barring some unforeseen breakthrough. It was so interesting to me because I rejected my one nuclear engineering school (TAMU) that I applied to because nuclear engineering seemed on its way out and it was too much of a gamble since it's so dependent on the political winds. But if we keep electing sensible (read: Republican) administrations I think nuclear's the way to go. Big time. Zero dependence on foreign energy sources, zero emissions. Plants are extremely safe today. Just that nasty little problem of waste storage, but out of selfish self interest (my WERC minor) I say we begin putting some resources into how to store this stuff....
I'll keep searching for that editorial from CEP. It's pretty interesting.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Thank you Ann
requiem for a terrorist
Wishful thinking
It shows that people like these have no regard whatsoever for whomever disagrees with them. They fail to recognize the fact that they are primarily resposible for the so called "divisions" in this country. The reason why I read the first article was because of it's headline, "Is Democrats’ solution on the menu at Applebee’s?" I saw that and I though to myself, huh? The article is about how "Democratic leaders are out of touch with the American people". The problem being (italics mine) "We can’t figure out a better way to sell to those people — we’ve got to be more like them."
I was stunned by the audacity, the arrogance of that statement. What must the speaker be thinking? Do they not even entertain the possibility for a moment that 'those people' might read those comments and possibly be offended? How can the dems not expect to marginalize themselves when they continue to demean people? Do they not realize that they already have voters that eat at Applebee's? Do they even worry about offending them, 'those people' who vote for them?
So long as they insist on this manner of thinking the democrats will never be able to solve their problems. It's not that they can't relate, it's that the leadership continues to belittle people, in the process unwittingly condescending to many people who are already part of their base. This ostentatious behavior is disturbing and will only lead to their enduring irrelevance.
Veterans Day
A Warning
In the Book of Revelation, there is more than apocalyptic prophecy concerning the end of the age. There is also a critique by Jesus of the churches. Of one he charges, "You have left your first love," meaning Himself.
That is an indictment that can be handed down to many in the contemporary evangelical church. Focusing too much on politics, they are neglecting their "first love." Or as a writer once put it about the early church fathers: "Aiming for Heaven, they got earth 'thrown in.' Aiming for earth, they got neither."
I get the same feeling. Those on the "Christian Right" should not focus on fixing America more than furthering God's Kingdom. I don't really think God cares one whit whether you voted against gay marriage. He cares more about the souls you've won by showing His love. (Don't get confused here, I'm not saying to vote for gay marriage. Just that it's not as important as winning the lost.) As a Christian, it's nice to see political involvement and rah-rah our "team", but the way to win hearts and minds is through God's love. And, as my father reminded me, they're gonna hate us (Christians) anyway. By showing God's love, you are "heaping burning coals upon their head", hopefully convicting them to the point of trying to find that love you are showing.
Anyway, thought I'd give a little bit of thought to religion and politics.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
It's official
Ashcroft
Give 'er Zell!
"You can see horns just sprouting up through that Technicolor hair."
Tee hee. I like having Zell on our side.
Economics
Secession?
The real record
compassionate northerners
Marry An American
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
How far off
Re: Why don't you...
Why don't you say what you mean?
So true
What Rush had to say about this is that they have it all wrong. It's not that "they lost", that's not the story. It's that we won. Damn straight. One issue that I have neglected to mention is that of the sheer egotism of the democrats who think that it's all about them. We're too dumb, too inept to win on our own. It was them in their deficiencies that cost them their rightful perch. Bull plop.
Our ideas beat their scare tactics and victim targeting. Our side won, deservedly so, against stacked odds and it is a testament to the hard work of many people and is a testament to how genuine conservative ideals are. We have an opportunity as a result of this election to further educate on conservatism. Only good things can come of this.
Dividing up America
Monday, November 08, 2004
Yes! Nominate this man...
Now, that's what I'm talking about. In a dream I thought that they might nominate Tom Dashle to the post, he's not doing anything and he would be great. But, the second that I saw the headline announcing this bit of news I was ecstatic. Engicon had wished for the DNC to marginalize themselves and if Dean's Presidental campaign is any indication I think we've found our man!
Exhibit six billion.....
Of course, there are always those who do get it; "Evangelicals and conservative Catholics who turned out in great numbers and voted their moral values were not doing so in order to “get something” from the administration. Most were doing it because they’ve agreed with Bush for years and identify with who he is."
One interesting thing is that the writer of the first piece is not Christian. The second writer is. Hmmm, I wonder who has a better understanding of real Christian values?
Support Specter?
Euro-Muslim relationship
Arrrrgh
Huh?
Really? Most Certainly.
Exhibit six billion and twenty seven that certain people just don't get it. Some do though; "Republicans full of love, or at least affection, for George W. Bush turned out steadily later in the day or sent in their ballots days before. They have watched "old media" -- The New York Times, the broadcast networks CBS, ABC and NBC -- beat up on Bush for the past year, and they have listened to the sneers and slurs directed at him by coastal elites for a long time. Now they had their chance to speak. They did so loudly and clearly, giving Bush the first popular-vote majority for president in 16 years."
"Diversity"
Yet more proof of tolerance.
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Wow, I guess the world really was affected
Re: Their sage...
Also in Clinton's speech, he says," Reminded of terrorism by the bin Laden tape, voters decided they didn't want to "change horses" during a time of heightened concern over national security..."
Are you serious? What tape? I only even remembered that there was a tape after reading that. The news media really gave a lot of airtime to that tape didn't they?
It's a good thing, for Bush, that there was a tape, or else the American people might have forgotten all about 9/11. Is that what Clinton is trying to say?
Their sage...
Bill Clinton does essentially lie in anything he says anyway. And I don't think that anything he says is really all that substantial. Justin, Matt, remember the time when we were all into fruit snacks and were getting like the 50 packs from Costco and we had that discussion about how how much better modern fruit snacks were than the ones we enjoyed as children? I consider that conversation to be more consequential than anything Clinton says.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
I withdraw my prior wish
On Nov. 3, I said something to the effect of wanting the Dems to reinvent themselves. I wanted this so that our country could grow stonger through rational opposing dialog. I no longer think that is anywhere near likely to happen in the next 4 years.
I saw two random Dems on TV. One Dem (I think he was a govenor) said that the Dems needed to get out the message that they believe in family values also becuase after school programs for children of single moms is family values... The other Dem (some lady who helped get the women's vote for the Clinton campaign) refused to concede that some American women might actually want fiscally sound, socially stable, conservative values to be supported in Washington.
What I have changed my wish to is that the DNC will completely marginalize itself. Then the RNC will split, possibly into small governmnet is most important vs. some other likely conservative value is most important. The two conservative sides will hopefully work together better than the RNC and DNC do, yet still differ enough to be a balance on each other.