Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Government Efficiency
The state has been proven to be one fiftieth as efficient as the free market. Proven in the case of the English state at any rate. Given that the English are generally considered to be an efficitent people, we can reasonably take this lesson to heart in the general case.
One more thing
Go rent the movie Shattered Glass. True story of a TNR journalist who made stuff up and got caught. I was absolutely riveted because I read a lot of the people who were in that movie. Here's a good index of the whole saga.
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....
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
I still have very little affection for my current state of residence, but that doesn't mean there isn't interesting news around here.
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.
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...
I probably shouldn't post this as it is somewhat counterproductive to my wish that the Dems will fall in a ditch. None the less, I am offering liberals a clue. This is from a 1996 speach by Rev. Joe Wright to the Kansas House of Representatives:
"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.
"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
watched bits and pieces of a "Reverend Round Table". Includes liberal and conservative pastors. Overheard Sharpton say Jesus "would not use the power of the state" to further a political agenda. I need to get the transcript to be sure he said this, but it strikes me as pretty hypocritical, considering he tried to gain the highest power the state could offer. My feeling is these guys (including the conservatives) need to focus on their flock and get out of politics - if anything, they're turning people off from Christianity.
Friday, November 26, 2004
Are we better off?
Is this opinion wrong just because Maureen Dowd wrote it? Maybe, but it's worth thinking about. At what cost are we destroying American productivity in the form of extra line waiting? Security doors to the cockpit make 9/11 almost impossible to duplicate (I don't know whether these were ever implimented, probably not as they make too much sense). Allowing pilots to carry pistols will probably be enough to stop 90% of cockpit takeovers. That leaves us with shoe bombers and other want-a-be mass murderers. Of course, I would like to round up all these guys and wrap them in bacon. None the less, having every fourth passenger take off their shoes because of a shoe bomber isn't necessarily sensible. What if the next terrorist has a prosthetic bomb hand, will the TSA proceed with requiring all passengers to sumbit to having blood drawn from their thumb? We're not being smart about this problem. We are Americans, we are supposed to be smart and innovative. I'm sure any one of us could come up with a half dozen better ways to handle airport security. Why do we proceed with much stupidity? Hopefully this issue will stay in the public discourse until it gets better.
Evangelical Outpost
has opened a thread on talk radio - my nerve was one of the many he hit with this post. I'll clarify here that the post below had two main points - first, that talk radio is relevant because it serves as a news outlet to balance the leftward leaning big media, and second, that his post smacked of the sort of intellectual vanity I feel like I'm funding with my tax dollars that go to NPR. To boil it all down, it's really a difference in tastes, and the free market will dictate if your tastes deserve to exist on the radio. It's a mechanism designed for precisely this sort of a problem, so one group of people doesn't grow to resent another.
Thursday, November 25, 2004
Conservative Intellectual Snob
is what I get out of this. I get annoyed at conservatives like this - Jonah Goldberg has expressed similar sentiments at times about talk radio (Jonah likes NPR too). I think this guy doesn't get that talk radio began as an alternative to big left media and is still that because big left media is still around. What would render Rush irrelevant is a centrist news media and that ain't gonna happen when Ivy League snotnose liberal college journalism grads keep getting jobs at CBS so they can "make a difference" as journalists. I also think the internet is making talk radio less relevant, although the radio guys are adapting. Anyway, most heartland people I know could care less about "higher culture", do it, if it's your thing. To me, a culture fetish is just an excuse to make yourself feel superior, but that's just me.
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.
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
Obviously, we need tighter knife-control laws. Of course, that pro-knife lobby is strong in Washington. We need to expose the TRUTH that these knife company CEOs have been suppressing - that knives are responsible for so much blood being shed. The other day I was a victim of an accidental slashing while trying to cut an apple.
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Fun with dialup...
I had a party the day that my cable modem arrived. I had an old 56k modem sitting in a bedroom drawer, just in case, and I used it as a frisbee that afternoon. The honeymoon was over when I realized that it mostly gave me a means to work from home. I grew nostalgic for that time when checking my email took a Saturday afternoon and I could go have a nice lunch waiting for a file to download. Well, I get to revel in the good old days again. I'm back on dialup for my week of vacation. I know I sound sarcastic but I assure you, it's not all that. Although I have given up my dream of reading espn.com's page 2 today, I'm still not at work and nothing could be better than that...
About Time?
In what apparently was a nail-biter, "The final piece in the U.S. election puzzle fell into place on Tuesday when New Mexico became the last state to determine a winner in the Nov. 2 presidential poll". Luckily it came out the way every one thought it would... On November 2nd; "George W. Bush won the sparsely populated state". You have to like the way that Reuters uses 'sparsely' like that's a bad thing. In New Mexico now, I look out the window and I see not much but that's what I was looking forward too when I left the "Big City" last night. Of course, I have to make sure not to look left or else that sparse population is interupted all of a sudden, I guess Reuters has only seen pictures of New Mexico from my right. Reuters also loves to point out, "While most states only took a few hours to count tens of millions of votes to determine the winner in their elections, New Mexico had trouble declaring a winner". Comparisons to 2000 come up; "It took state officials about a month to sort out the winner in 2000, when Democrat Al Gore carried the state by 366 votes -- the closest margin in the country." And to just be sure, Reuters of course reminds the reader that in 2000; "Bush won the presidential election". How Helpful. Reading the whole thing (I'm a glutton for punishment), it seems that the 'News Service' needed X amount of words and can't seem to write X amount of words without being condescending and snobbish. Big surprise there.
Hilarious
From James Taranto's Best of the Web:
Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.
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
when they try to score points like this one. Obviously, this war is just like Vietnam! What's up with the whole "mounting death toll in Iraq" business? Does 1,000 dead (and a friggin' victory!) compare to 60,000? Anyway, someone who applies for West Point without the thought that they might end up in combat shouldn't waste their time anyway. I don't want them there. Particularly annoying is this quote:
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.
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
That would be UNM, after beating Wyoming yesterday. They would have been eligible even with a loss but 7-4 looks better than 6-5. They also put up the toughest fight to Utah so far this year.
Ukrainian Runoff
Runoff in the Ukraine - pretty much a referendum between the US and Russia. This seems pretty important to me, considering how Russia has been reverting back to its dictatorial ways...
Saturday, November 20, 2004
From the Duh file
"Election Day 2004 showed the power of incumbency in American politics. For the fourth time in row, incumbents in the House of Representatives won over 98 percent of their races." Anyone in Tucson watch the AZ 8th congressional district Republican primary? Sounding like a conceited journalist, I seriously did not know anyone who voted for Kolbe, when the Vice President came to town in July there were at least ten Graf bumper stickers for every Kolbe sticker on the cars in the parking lot. Incumbency and name recognition. There is no better advertising in a congressional race.
Another side
Friday, November 19, 2004
A timewaster
Thanks to NRO's "the corner" where I lifted this link. I know you guys will enjoy this.
On a Williams roll
Walter "E" Williams was sitting in for Rush today, and I only caught about 10 minutes since I was wasting away learning about the inversion integral, Cauchy-Riemann conditions, complex variables, singularities, analyticity.......fun. But the part I caught, Dr. Williams brought up a comparison that I've used quite often and is the reason why Christians tend to be conservative. To paraphrase him, the Constitution uses negative phrases towards Congress around 40-50 times. This was intended to establish the idea that government was the enemy of the people and the Constitution is a restraining document. This is because the vision of man from which this document was built upon is a vision of a flawed being that would take advantage of other men, given the power. If we took this document and told God in Heaven, hey pal, this is going to be the governing philosophy, then it would be an affront to God because God is inherently good. So the reason Christians tend to be conservative is they believe man is not inherently good - Christian doctrine begins with the fall of man. The liberal vision basically supplants God with man - and carried to its logical end you have communism, which to quote Chambers, is the vision of man without God. Not saying I believe Christian liberals are godless heathen, just misguided in from where their ideology springs.
Sore Loser
I believe that John Kerry will soon become more like Al Gore, disrespectful and irresponsible in making baseless and accusatory statements, as the election's conclusion becomes further in the past. In a recent statement Kerry said that the American people voted for President Bush because they were "scared" and blamed his loss on "that Usama tape". This statement shows that Kerry had long presumed a win, disregarding the notion that people voted for our President because they believed in him.
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.
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
Jay Leno has a tank engine powered roadster. Proof that money spent on national defense also serves to amuse the citizenry (other than with videos of Warthogs and Flying Fortresses doing their thing).
Dolphin gets an artificial fin
Save the dolphins. You'll notice that the fin was developed and donated by private industry.
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
on taxes (lifted from RightWingNews):
"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
As I read Ann Coulter's latest column this morning I noticed this part, "If liberals think the Bush vote was composed of illiterate homophobes who fear women in the workplace, perhaps the Democrats should start demanding literacy tests to vote." Of course, we all know that no lib will ever request literacy tests for voters, many of the libs are cursing "dumb", "uneducated" folks now but soon enough they will make a play for those people they continue to demean with promises of a socialist utopia. Anyway, the libs assumption that Republicans are afraid of "women's rights" is sad but very true and is pervasive all around. The thing is one just needs to notice any of the liberal articles and cartoons belittling Dr. Rice, new Secretary of State appointee, to see what is really thought of powerful, intelligent women (who choose to be conservative) by those who claim to be "higher/open minded". A while back I was volunteering at a small county fair at the Republican party booth and a self-described "liberal libertarian" (Ugh, writing those words hurts, like two punches to the chest) looked me straight in the eye and accused "I know you, I know that you think that I shouldn't, that women shouldn't have the right to vote, don't you?". I hadn't said two words to this woman prior to the accusation, her presumption based entirely on party affiliation. I told her that she was wrong, very much so and all I got was a condescending nod and all I could do was be thankful for when she left.
Does this infuriate anybody else?
This really makes me angry. Will the Democrats please crawl into a ditch and die so we can get a real opposition party? When the only real opposition to George Bush's fiscal policy is "stop cutting taxes so we can pay our bills" instead of "quit spending money on stupid education bills and giving old people and stupid people free crap" it makes me want to slap someone.
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.
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
This website sure is sorry. I like how on Nov. 12 they seemed to be asking how their readership would react to a little capitalism (selling t-shirts). Then on Nov. 13, I sure after much thought and debate over whether selling stuff would take away from the "message," t-shirts are here.
Funnily enough, I found the sorry website through a blog called "this blog is full of crap," coincidence?
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...
no score in Soccer and now there's this, a program by the name of "Success Equals Effort" at a 'University', Benedict College, in South Carolina. It is a program where students can get a B only getting half their tests correct because "60 percent of their final grade is just showing up and participating in class". A professor was fired from the school because he "didn't think it was right to give a passing grade to a student who tried hard but didn't learn the basics" and he refused to follow the policy. Yeah, I bet that's what every company wants now, a graduate from Benedict College.
Imposing One's Faith?
Eugene Volokh has a good argument on the validity of the argument that you can't impose one's religious dogma. Money quote:
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 most frightening t-shirt on the face of the earth! Timdido beware, for you are the most likely of us to see this in person.
The CIA, Sensitive?
Really, one story in the news lately is about people leaving the CIA as a result of new director, Porter Goss. A lot of the stories I have read infer that it is a bad thing and is causing chaos at the CIA. This leads me to wonder, I remember earlier this year all the stories on the CIA were about how it was in disarray and how it needed to be done over and such. Of course now that the CIA is being cleaned up, all of a sudden its "turmoil" and there's fear that "the drain of talent could spin out of control". I haven't even gotten to the worst part yet, the reasons given for the two people listed as leaving in the article are said to have done so because of the "brusque manner" in which they were addressed by the staff of the new director. Really, I never knew that CIA agents had to be handled with kid gloves..
Funny Stuff
After the election stories all over the web could be found about traumatized liberals seeking therapy due to the result. At first glance, I chuckled. It thought it was a joke, could this really be? Then, it was more widely reported and I began to feel a little disturbed and eventually annoyed. To me it was people who were trying to gain attention for themselves and must be either faking for that purpose or incredibly frail emotionally. Thankfully Rush was there to help me laugh again about it. Then, I read this silly article and I look forward to Rush's show in about 15 minutes....
Monday, November 15, 2004
Ahhhh Justices
This is why I'm sooooo happy Bush was elected (that and the war on terror) - the WSJ gives the short list of who will be nominated. Out of that list I only know Estrada, Luttig, and Brown. I like all of them from what I've read about them, but I think the people at NRO really like Luttig.
Resignations
It's official, Colin Powell has indeed resigned as Secretary of State. Not really the most significant news. It was long rumoured that Secretary Powell had planned to stay for only one term. I bring it up because for a while now Powell has been a poster child for the Presidet's detractors for assumed reasons. These detractors always seem to want to pressume Powell's positions and use him against the President at every point. No doubt that his resignation will be used as fodder for the left.
Carville
broke an egg on his bald pate during Meet the Press yesterday. I find Carville obnoxious but when he does stuff like this he actually seems like he's a guy who you can share a beer with. Maybe it's the influence of Mary.
Sunday, November 14, 2004
And I thought
that I had a lot of free time. Then I find something like this and realize that I'm not even close sometimes.
Celebrate Diversity
Glenn Reynolds on his detractors. This is funny, he mentions the comment threads that the post on his t shirt generates on some liberal blogs:
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
At Tech, I never once encountered any sort of political preaching from any professors. I suspect that half of my professors were liberals but they were committed to filling young skulls with fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, and reactor engineering rather than mush and propaganda. The only time I felt like you can encounter any sort of bias when teaching science is when presented with spurious "proof" of something - like the famous arguments for evolution or global warming.
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.
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 often get the oportunity to disagree with Glenn Reynolds, so I thought I would take this one. From Goldberg's post
," 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.
," 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
Here's an good article. It doesn't contain anything particularly new, but has a well thought out presentation.
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?
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!
The governor of my pink state, Jim McGreevey, is handing over power to the acting governor today, conveniently another Democrat. Jersey sickens me by how the law is flouted - it's even worse than in NM, which I thought was pretty bad but more a "grassroots" kinda thing. Jersey's Democrats have made maintaining power an art. The part that sickens me the most is that there is no outcry! McGreevey used this whole gay thing just to cover his real crime of complete corruption and mismanagement, and it's just sooooo obvious that you'd expect there to be a peep or two out of the local news. The silence is deafening. I think I'm working on getting Bret Schundler in for governor next election, Jersey needs a true reformer, and he's a Republican to boot.
At least McGreevey can say to himself he wasn't the worst.
At least McGreevey can say to himself he wasn't the worst.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Princetonian wonders why Kerry lost
This echoes much of what is being said on the left, and what has comprised many of Vetes' posts. See, the problem is the American people elected someone who is a stupid as they are! We need someone who can talk down to those stupid Americans in middle America!
Keep it up guys, and keep losing elections.
Keep it up guys, and keep losing elections.
Imagine this headline:
Roosevelt paints rosy picture of Belgium - December 1944
I'm really not liking the AP. Their "stories" look more like editorials to me. Almost as bad as Reuters.
I'm really not liking the AP. Their "stories" look more like editorials to me. Almost as bad as Reuters.
And nothing?
Recently, the producer who aired the news of Arafats demise, as if he were a dignitary, pre-emting CBS prime time was fired. This leaves one to ponder, what would be a fitting reponse for someone who aired a "news" story based on completely fake documents charging a serious offense, slandering someone? Apparently nothing, but it is nice that I'm not the only one who thinks otherwise.
Yes Steve,
there is a Santa Claus. Unrelated of course, but anything that has to do with getting me closer to my dream of a fro is worth posting.
Moonbat nonsense
War leaves every child behind?, link is just because I can. I actually saw one of these signs on the corner at UNM (compete with a couple older gentlemen/hippies). The two guys also had a sign which read, "Honk if you like peace." I of course did not honk, as I realized that what their sign really meant is "Honk if you like peace and think George W. Bush eats babies." I thought I would offer some discourse on "War leaves every child behind."
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.
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
My reactors professor likes to give little history lessons on the names behind theories and methods in chemical engineering - Fritz, Haber, Amundsen, Langmuir, etc. Well, the name Edward Teller popped up the other day, and from my professor's description of him as "obnoxious, but extremely productive", I knew I would enjoy reading about Teller and consider him a hero. Teller was a scientist (actually, a chemical engineer!) who fell on the right side of history by promoting a vigorous national defense against the Soviet threat, much to the resentment of his fellow left-wing scientists who believed in capitulation and appeasement (since, as they well knew, Communism was the wave of the future, so why anger the Communist gods?). Teller's scientific achievements were too numerous to count, but the biggest is probably making fusion a reality in development of the H-bomb. His final great contribution was to convince Reagan to work on SDI ("Star Wars"), which hastened the fall of the Soviet empire.
Here's a good quote from this interview:
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
Good post-election analysis from the only liberals who make any sense - The New Republic (Marty Peretz). He states what Rush has stated from the get-go: the problem with John Kerry's campaign, was, well, John Kerry. He is the icon of everything that's wrong with the Democrats. I liked these two quotes, the first on John Kerry:
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
This makes me proud to be an engineer. I remember reading about this and seeing only drawings in Popular Mechanics. Sweet to see it working now.
An honest liberal
Titled "Confessions of a Cultural Elitist", the despicable Ted Rall wrote:
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
Yesterday had a guest lecturer in Thermo who was a dude with a lot of industrial experience with Mobil and spent some time with AIChE as a policy adviser to the government. He gave his take on the hydrogen economy, which as we all know is the magic bullet which will provide energy independence, smogless emissions, and zero CO2 emissions in the future. The Bush administration, either out of wishing to score some points with the Sierra Club or genuine concern, is dumping a lot of money into this research. His take was that in general it is a wash - and the most interesting thing I found was that it's an argument all based on the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
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.
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
I despise Keith Olbermann. He's overly conceited for someone as dumb as he is. Ann Coulter's latest column is about one of the stupid things Olbermann recently stated.
requiem for a terrorist
I can't even bring myself to comment, "UN Secretary General Kofi Annan praised Arafat's struggle to win international recognition for the Palestinian cause, as he ordered flags to fly at half-mast at the United Nations"
Wishful thinking
An article I read this morning starts off like this; "Only two years after Republicans’ colossal 1964 loss to a president from Texas, Lyndon Johnson, the GOP gained 47 seats in the House of Representatives, three in the Senate and eight governorships." and then continues; "Could the Democrats do in 2006 what the Republicans did in 1966?" Reading this I couldn't help but think of the odd things that being a sore loser causes some to say. I think of the other silly things being said now days, from Michael Moore giving "17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists" to Nancy Pelosi working on"saving civilization as we know it today".
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.
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
We all know what is obviously dominating the news this morning. I was pleasantly surprised this morning when I drove in listening to local talk radio and they were having people to call in, veterans, their family and friends telling storys. I will never be a veteran but I deeply appreciate and want to thank those who do serve. In my Family my grandfathers are our veterans. My Grandpa Padilla in WW2 and my Grandpa Vigil in Korea. The one thing that they always told me about it was to not join the service, I guess that's what happens when you're in the pacific theatre or on the ground in the jungles of some foreign land.
A Warning
From Cal Thomas:
Anyway, thought I'd give a little bit of thought to religion and politics.
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
Arafat's dead. I hope the Palestinians will turn to a leader who is not a terrorist or condones terrorist actions. We'll see how it turns out...
Ashcroft
I read this "article" today from that great "news" service, Reuters (who still puts terrorist in scare quotes, when describing Islamist terrorists). What infuriated me was when they said Ashcroft had "once even ordered the robing of two partially nude statues in his department". This is an outright lie. How can we be expected to respect the MSM when this kind of garbage gets passed on as "news"?
Give 'er Zell!
Zell Miller takes on bitter old spinster, I mean MoDo. Favorite quote:
"You can see horns just sprouting up through that Technicolor hair."
Tee hee. I like having Zell on our side.
"You can see horns just sprouting up through that Technicolor hair."
Tee hee. I like having Zell on our side.
Economics
It appears as though the Fed is confident in the economic direction of the country, raising "short-term interest rates a quarter-point for the fourth time in five months". The rate is now at 2%.
Secession?
One of the whinning points of distraught democrats lately has included murmurs of secession. Personally I believe that the divisions in our Country are deepest in their (the dems) own deranged mind. Here is a quote that I liken most to my own view of how "divided" the country is; "if you live in a two-party democracy, then you live in a divided society. That's the way it works. One party wins, the other loses. And just because one party is out of power doesn't inevitably mean that the states who voted for the losing candidate need to start thinking about secession".
The real record
As Attorney General John Ashcroft's resignation has become official there is no doubt that there is rejoicing amongst those who demonize this good man as if he were responsible for all the country's ills. Of course, he was one of the people doing everything that he could to best serve his country and stop many of those ills. John Ashcroft did a fine job as AG and I thank him. Here is a well written article about his record and legacy.
compassionate northerners
Another great opportunity for some single cowboy conservatives to go undercover... Will was nice enough to give me this link...
Marry An American
Marry An American
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
How far off
is this from reality? Not too much I think. More funny stuff. My favorite qoute:
"Everyone here is very well aware that we have a losing streak to protect," said Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe. "We are going to do everything in our power to keep that streak alive."
Re: Why don't you...
In the same article, the author uses Kerry's brother's statements to assert that "it is "conceivable" he will run again in four years". On top of that there are rumours that Al Gore is thinking of running again in 2008. I don't even know how to wrap my head around this.
Why don't you say what you mean?
Kerry's brother and "political confidant" said,"I don't know why that [last week's loss] should necessarily be it. I think it's too early to assess. But I think that he is going to continue to fight on for the values, ideals, and issues this campaign is about." We all know that Kerry's campaign didn't stand for anything except what his advisors told him would play well with the voting public. As such, Kerry must be planning to continue the fight to convince voters (nationwide as opposed to just Massachusetts which I assume he would do anyway) to like him. Why would he do that if he didn't plan to try and run again?
So true
During today's show, Rush has been bringing up his speech from last night at the Ronald Reagan center in Washington D.C. for the heritage foundation. The underlying theme from that speech was that we won. A lot of posts and topics lately have been based on the whinning from democrats in regards to the election. A lot of this whinning goes in the direction of "why we lost".
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.
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
Timdido's link, and a couple others brought an idea to my mind. Maybe we could let some of the blue sections of America split off to form their own sort of nation-sections. We would just collect some slight tax from them to pay for a small amount of oversight to ensure things like commerce continuing across the new border. We would also expect them to follow some limited guidelines since they would still be part of a kind of partnership with the rest of us. In large part though, we would leave each other alone to live as each of us sees fit. Of course, this idea only works well if the top-level government is nice and unobtrusive so that it doesn't mess up the lives of the people who want to live according to the values of their choosen section. What a grand liberal idea this could be...
Monday, November 08, 2004
Yes! Nominate this man...
... he's perfect! "Former presidential candidate Howard Dean is considering a bid to become chairman of the national Democratic Party."
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!
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.....
...one hundred and seventy-six of someone who just doesn't get it. "Bush's campaign of fear has set the stage for another four years of theocratic zealotry." Yet another example of the elitist left demonizing christian values.
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?
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?
Hugh Hewitt supports Arlen Specter. He makes some good points, some I hadn't thought of before - especially how it may impact Santorum's reelection and any hope of gaining Pennsylvania back.
Euro-Muslim relationship
Been following somewhat this story. Now this. Something's up with Europe - I've heard that the influx of Arab immigrants is so high that many fear losing their identity. I'm not sure what will happen - either Europe really will lose its identity and suffer the fate they deserve for tolerating a culture that fosters terrorism, or Europe will have a huge counter-reaction to the influx (seen in the Muslim school bombing). Honestly neither looks very attractive. I don't want to see Europe destroyed, but I know what happens when Europe has a reaction.
Arrrrgh
Double whammy today. Got Thermo midterm back and had a Reactors midterm - very painful. Oh well, on to trying to figure out FDA and LaPlace for math........
Huh?
On why the movie 'Alfie' did not do that well this past weekend during it's release, Paramount spokesman Wayne Llewellyn said "It seems to be the result of the election". He goes on about the conservative nature of the country right now and that people don't want to see a movie about a "guy that slept around". I had to mention this as it is quite possibly the weirdest thing that I will see today.
Really? Most Certainly.
"How set back was the country by the media’s refusal to recognize that we were being ruled by a radical". So this writer's argument is that it's the media's fault for being too soft on President Bush, for not pointing out how much of a radical he was. Sheesh, what if what we witnessed over the last year or so was a Dan Rather, a New York Times in favor of our President. What would they be like if they "recognized"...
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."
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"
Nicolette and I joined another Christian married couple for church yesterday. Asked the pastor about opportunities for ministry, and while describing it he talked about the church band. They signed up to play in a festival in Princeton, but were turned away for being too "Christian". They were allowed to play when he pressed the issue that their festival was named a "Celebration of Diversity". Apparently, "diversity" means anything that's not Christian.
Yet more proof of tolerance.
Yet more proof of tolerance.
Sunday, November 07, 2004
Wow, I guess the world really was affected
The day before the election John Kerry said something to the effect of (paraphrasing) "The world is looking at you to make the right decision....(blah blah blah)" and then he lost. Then the dems lost in congress. And in governor races. And now this:
Donkey deficit saddles Mexico
Re: Their sage...
The Post Techie Conservative
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?
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...
has his say. "Clinton attributed Kerry's loss to the Democrats' failure to combat how they were portrayed by Republicans to small-town America." Hmmmm, I wonder if that's anything like the way that democrats falsely portray Republicans to ANYONE who will listen to them. When I read dribble like this I always think back to Rush's comments about how if you want to know what dems really do and think just listen to what they accuse Republicans of.
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.
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
The Post Techie Conservative
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.
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.
Mandate Caution
I really hate the fact that they say Bush has no mandate so of course I say it's overwhelming...but this suggests not to overplay our hand. I agree. My pessimism tells me that we've got a tenuous hold on this country now so Bush better do a good job leading to bring more into the fold. And get those justices in!
I'm shaking in my boots
Watch out, "Democratic leaders are trying to figure out how to make the party more relevant to mainstream Americans". Essentially yet another article about democrats second guessing themselves and attempting to find a way into tricking the electorate into believing that they have similar ideals. The election though proved once again the folly of poll driven, wishy-washy politics. To keep Republicans on their toes, they need viable competition so it is neccesary that the democrat party figures out a way to "keep it from slipping into perpetual minority-party status."
New Media Heroes
Along Steve's thread, and I know I've mentioned this in an email, but HUGE credit goes to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and the other talk show hosts who steadfastly reminded Americans of what lengths the MSM would go to in order to win one for Kerry. These two in particular (others also, but these are the two I listened to on Election Day) kept on us not to get despondent when exit polls showed Kerry winning big and to get out and vote. In my mind, they are responsible for the huge popular vote margin - the one the MSM took away from us when they called FL early in 2000. Peggy Noonan has a great column describing the victory of our scrappy new media heroes: Rush, Sean, and the pajamahadeen (of which we are now proud members!).
Mandate
A discussion I would like to start is whether or not President Bush has a mandate for his second term as a result of the election. I believe so. Just look at the map. Sure, there is some deep blue in high population areas but you know, birds of a feather... Anyway, President Bush didn't just beat John Kerry, he beat the dnc, moveon.org, Michael Moore, George Soros, Dan Rather, The New York Times, The LA Times, The Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN, Peter Jennings, The Beastie Boys, etc... I could go on like this seemingly forever. Howard Fineman of Newsweek remarked that the MSMs cheerleading for the democrat ticket was worth 15 points. That figure does not shock me one bit.
Call me skeptical
Democrat "Party members say they'll learn from what went wrong in '04 elections". I seriously doubt it. Especially since the first qoute in the article goes like this; "More people tend to agree with Democratic positions pretty much down the line, but voters tend to vote on a broader sense of who shares their values". I think that statement paints the exact picture of why they will never learn. They assume that people vote Republican because they are dumb, in spite of their Democrat beliefs. Not only is this silly, it's irresponsible since the dems target audience are the folks they can manipulate, who buy into their hollow promises and dreams of a socialist utopia. If they continue to think like this, here's to many more years of winning elections.
Friday, November 05, 2004
Nation Divided?
Not sure if this image will work, but...
I thought the Red Sea was in the Middle East...?
I thought the Red Sea was in the Middle East...?
Re: we must....
It is only right since good old Arlen is responsible for the term. Turn about is fair play.
Sorry I'm late...
...with my first blog comments ever...
My favorite (actually it annoys me the most) insight into libs' recent dramatics is their invalidating of the election due to the religious right 'conspiracy.' Mike Medved today read several editorials / letters regarding the 'conspiracy' and our religious 'nut-job' views as the coming down-fall of our society (never mind that it's really the reason this country has lasted this long in the first place). What's most humorous and/or annoying is they really believe that all conservatives are either bible thumping pin-heads, assault rifle-bearing rednecks, or depressed and introverted suburbanites. Perhaps maybe a few greedy, corporate bloodhounds as well.
At least according to their beliefs, I and my family are ear-marked for sub-human intelligence, and should immediately be placed in intensive care complete with secular life-support and intravenous Marxism.
I think I like being ill...
Oh, and yes.. we must 'Bork' Specter
My favorite (actually it annoys me the most) insight into libs' recent dramatics is their invalidating of the election due to the religious right 'conspiracy.' Mike Medved today read several editorials / letters regarding the 'conspiracy' and our religious 'nut-job' views as the coming down-fall of our society (never mind that it's really the reason this country has lasted this long in the first place). What's most humorous and/or annoying is they really believe that all conservatives are either bible thumping pin-heads, assault rifle-bearing rednecks, or depressed and introverted suburbanites. Perhaps maybe a few greedy, corporate bloodhounds as well.
At least according to their beliefs, I and my family are ear-marked for sub-human intelligence, and should immediately be placed in intensive care complete with secular life-support and intravenous Marxism.
I think I like being ill...
Oh, and yes.. we must 'Bork' Specter
Re: More Contacts
Phone: (520) 670-6334
Fax: (520) 670-6637
NM:
Senator Domenici
Phone: (505) 346-6791
Fax: (505) 346-6720
NJ:
John Corzine:
Phone: (973) 645-3030
Fax: (973)645-0502
I mention Corzine because I didn't want Tim to feel left out. Feel free to harass Corzine, he's a jerk.
Fax: (520) 670-6637
NM:
Senator Domenici
Phone: (505) 346-6791
Fax: (505) 346-6720
NJ:
John Corzine:
Phone: (973) 645-3030
Fax: (973)645-0502
I mention Corzine because I didn't want Tim to feel left out. Feel free to harass Corzine, he's a jerk.
Re: Anti-Bush Spew
How about some grad students traipsing about lower Manhattan discovering some anti-war playing cards? It was like they'd discovered buried treasure! And then when they understood why Bush was the four of clubs while Cheney was the ace of spades, oh man. One fella proudly proclaimed his sighting of a "RE-Defeat Bush" sign. He figured out what it meant, and wanted us to be proud of him and welcome him into the Hate-Bush clique. Tell you what, most college students who are lemmings like this are that way to make nice with their teachers. Unless they are conservative, then they are kept sharp from constant debate.
Re: Anti-Bush Spew
My favorites always have to do with the "disenfranchising" of minority voters. No proof, nothing. Doesn't matter. People buy it even though they never see it. The fact that people were complaining about it happening days before the election proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the true liberal definition should be "win at any cost".
Anti-Bush Spew
I thought it might be fun if we recollect some of our favorite invectives witnessed in relation to the election. Some of them might even be clever, if misguided. Most of them are just fun to ridicule due to obvious idiocy.
Given that I'm on campus fairly often, most of the ones I see are of the chalk on the sidewalk form. On the somewhat clever side was a sidewalk chalking between two trees which read, "to save trees, cut Bush." I think the tree one stood out more because after the election I thought of chopping down the trees and writing "Guess you lost." On the dumb side are basically all the rest of the chalkings which almost invariably are some variation of "Bu$h is bad." I even saw one reference to the fourth reich. Seems that the moonbats never get tired of the Bush = Hitler thing.
Given that I'm on campus fairly often, most of the ones I see are of the chalk on the sidewalk form. On the somewhat clever side was a sidewalk chalking between two trees which read, "to save trees, cut Bush." I think the tree one stood out more because after the election I thought of chopping down the trees and writing "Guess you lost." On the dumb side are basically all the rest of the chalkings which almost invariably are some variation of "Bu$h is bad." I even saw one reference to the fourth reich. Seems that the moonbats never get tired of the Bush = Hitler thing.
I'm in too
Third Techie here. While I didn't secure the first or second slot, at least "third techie" is an alliteration...
I'm in.
Second Techie to join. Hullo Steve! I'm the unofficial "Post Techie Conservative Spy" - undercover conservative brother in New Jersey. I also have my undercover, highly attractive associate Nicolette (aka "Brown Sugar") who will also post when she so chooses. To complete my first post - allow me to direct your attention to the news: Bush wins Iowa. This means the electoral college map is more aesthetically pleasing now that those Boston transplants snatched the Granite State from us and thanks to the tireless efforts of my friends and family in the Land of Enchantment. (NM and IA not colored on most maps yet, but they'll get around to it.)
Contacts
Tim had mentioned earlier in an email about National Review's corner urging to write one's senator in order to keep Arlen Spector from taking chairmanship of the judiciary commitee. Here in Arizona, we are fortunate to have a great senator, Jon Kyl, who happens to be a member of the judiciary commitee. While important to contact him because of that fact, it is important to contact each senator as all republican senators have a say in the process.
AZ:
Contact John Kyl:
http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Contact John McCain:
http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.Home
NM:
Contact Pete Domenici:
http://domenici.senate.gov/resources/contactform.cfm
AZ:
Contact John Kyl:
http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Contact John McCain:
http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.Home
NM:
Contact Pete Domenici:
http://domenici.senate.gov/resources/contactform.cfm
Thursday, November 04, 2004
Ain't it fun...
...to witness the collective meltdown of hardcore liberals all around the country? I would ignore it but it's hard to considering that since the mainstream media no longer has anyone to actively support they have settled into group therapy, wallowing in self pity. I glanced at the monitor showing CNN this afternoon at the gym and I happened to catch a "story" about distraught democrats from Manhattan to San Francisco complete with crying. I would feel sorry if not for the fact that many of these people should feel shame.
Of course, there are those that couldn't even give it a little time before continuing the rhetoric. "The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry", "Bush is a very simple man. You may think that makes him a bad president, as I do", "Now that the election's over, can the president admit his mistakes?". Those are just a few examples from Slate. There are plenty more on that site and many others.
Last week I saw the video for the new eminem song, mosh. I was angry.
To the people up top, on the side and the middle,
Come together, let's all bomb and swamp just a little
Just let it gradually build, from the front to the back
All you can see is a sea of people, some white and some black
Don't matter what color, all that matters is we gathered together
...f*** Bush...
It was terrible. How could the level of discourse sink so low? Of course, eminem is nothing but a punk, a loser so it shouldn't matter but it was still disturbing. It was released about a week prior to the election and the end includes a reminder to vote, on November 2nd. Part of the reason why I bring this up is that I saw this video playing on MTV2. I watched it for a moment, this time with a smile on my face. It seemed small and pathetic, silly to be playing it now.
Of course, there are those that couldn't even give it a little time before continuing the rhetoric. "The election results reflect the decision of the right wing to cultivate and exploit ignorance in the citizenry", "Bush is a very simple man. You may think that makes him a bad president, as I do", "Now that the election's over, can the president admit his mistakes?". Those are just a few examples from Slate. There are plenty more on that site and many others.
Last week I saw the video for the new eminem song, mosh. I was angry.
To the people up top, on the side and the middle,
Come together, let's all bomb and swamp just a little
Just let it gradually build, from the front to the back
All you can see is a sea of people, some white and some black
Don't matter what color, all that matters is we gathered together
...f*** Bush...
It was terrible. How could the level of discourse sink so low? Of course, eminem is nothing but a punk, a loser so it shouldn't matter but it was still disturbing. It was released about a week prior to the election and the end includes a reminder to vote, on November 2nd. Part of the reason why I bring this up is that I saw this video playing on MTV2. I watched it for a moment, this time with a smile on my face. It seemed small and pathetic, silly to be playing it now.
First Post!
Yes, I started this blog and I suppose that it is not fair to be gloating since no one has joined yet. The thing is though, facts are facts and technically, I am first. How can I post anything worthwhile in good conscious without starting off with something ridiculous?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)