July 24, 2016

How I see the election shaping up this year

It's been a while, so I'm not sure where to start...

Okay, I'll start with the Republican convention:

I rarely watch the convention, except for the nominee's speech. The dog and pony show aspect gets on my nerves. This year, though, I watched a bit more and some things stood out:

1) Trump's children are very good spokesmen for him. Eric, Donald Jr., Ivanka: all turned in strong performances. You will likely see a lot more of them on the campaign trail

2) I though Trump's acceptance speech was workmanlike. He seems less comfortable with the teleprompter than our current "needs teleprompter to take a dump" president, but the delivery was okay. If you hate Trump, you'll have hated it. If you were already a Trump supporter, you probably thought it was the best thing ever. What's important is how it will play with everyone else. My mostly apolitical wife caught and she, in general, liked it. If I had to score it, I'd call it a net positive for Trump.

3) I saw many complaining about Trump's delivery. Let's be clear here: he appeared far more human that Hillary will likely appear next week. I know that she studies well, but her attempts to appear lifelike are usually dismal failures.

The Democrat convention is this week. Looking at the list of scheduled speakers makes me glad I don't have to watch that stuff for a living. An unindicted, corrupt felon will accept the nomination from a major party for the first time every, so there's that bit of history in the offing.

Now on to my crystal ball for this election. This prediction is based solely on how I see the Electoral College shaking out. National polls are more or less meaningless. Hillary will win CA by a gazillion votes, but there's no carryover to other states.

Virginia: I live there and have watched it change over the last few decades. The most dramatic changed has occurred within the last 10 years. The number of federal teat suckers living in NOVA has exploded. The odds of them voting to shrink the government (and their paychecks) is pretty much zero. This has nothing to do with Trump. I had projected Virginia staying blue long before the primary season began. So Virginia goes blue.

North Carolina: Yes, the state has changed a lot, but Hillary is strongly disliked by what I suspect is still a thin majority in the state. Put NC in the GOP column. For the record, if NC goes blue, you might as well go to bed because I think the race is effectively over at that point.

Colorado and Nevada: I could go into the details, but I think both of them go blue.

Pennsylvania and Ohio: Here's where it gets interesting. Trump is polling very well among the disaffected working class, notably the union members, due in large part to Hillary's desire to end coal and cheap energy forever. She will, of course, lie to their faces and some of them will buy it. This time, though, I don't think it will be enough. I suspect that PA and OH go red this year. I will offer one caveat: if the GOP doesn't have lots of poll watchers and armed guards protecting the ballots, the Democrat machine in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia will go into overdrive. Expect lots of counties with >100% of registered voters voting, with ALL of those votes going-surprise-to Hillary. They are going to pull out all of the stops here to make sure those states stay blue. If Trump and the GOP doesn't have enough boots on the ground to prevent it, those states could be stolen.

Florida: I've gone back and forth on this one, but I think Trump is going to win the Sunshine State this year. All that stuff I said about protecting the integrity of the ballots in PA and OH applies here as well. Florida has a history of...interesting vote tallies in some of its counties.

New York and New Jersey: write them both off. Clinton carries both easily.

Entire left coast: crazy Democrat strongholds. I see nothing that changes that this year. No matter how rightfully angry Bernie's voters are, the Democrats have proven time and time again that they will vote in lockstep to prevent the eeeevviiillll RethugliKKKans from winning.

Iowa: I've been waffling on this state for a while. I could make a case either way. But I'm going to lean GOP here.

Illinois: Home to Obama and home to what is possibly the crookedest political machine on the face of the Earth. I see no way that IL goes anything but blue.

Michigan: You'd think that Trump's message to the lower and middle class there and how much of their state has been destroyed by Democrat policies over the last few decades would resonate. It might, but as of right now, I'm still picking MI to stay blue.

Wisconsin: This is a goofy state. Blue in population, but with a successful governor who has won reelection. The state's economy is doing well and you'd think that this would have some effect on how the state will vote. But presidential elections are not the same as gubernatorial elections. If they were, Maryland would go red this year. It won't. Wisconsin could go red, but for right now, I'm putting it in the Democrat column.

New Hampshire: the MA infection is fatal. It goes blue.

Maine's 2nd congressional district: This is where the fun begins. I say it goes red which leads to what you'll see below:

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:48 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 07, 2014

So this is winning?

If so, I really don't want to know what losing looks like. Sadly, we're likely to find out under this regime. In any event, check out the labor force participation rate throughout this disaster of a presidency via Doug Ross. It's a continuous and unprecedented decline.

Update: I currently don't have permission to upload files to this blog. I've just lit the BatPixy Signal.

Update: Pixy is, if you didn't already know, the greatest.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

So this is winning?

If so, I really don't want to know what losing looks like. Sadly, we're likely to find out under this regime. In any event, check out the labor force participation rate throughout this disaster of a presidency via Doug Ross. It's a continuous and unprecedented decline.

Update: I currently don't have permission to upload files to this blog. I've just lit the BatPixy Signal.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 18, 2014

There are lies, damned lies and Paul Krugman

Via Ace comes this epic bitchslapping of Krugman. I will grant you that that is not a difficult task; my five year old could accomplish it. He wouldn't, of course, because he's very sweet unlike, say, me. Excerpt:

A person displays ideologically motivated cognition when, instead of weighing evidence based on criteria related to its connection to the truth, he or she credits or dismisses it based on its conformity to his or her ideological predispositions.

Thus, if we want to use public opinion on some issue -- say, climate change -- to assess the symmetry of ideologically motivated reasoning, we can't just say, "hey, liberals are right, so they must be better reasoners."

Rather we must determine whether "liberals" who "believe" in climate change differ from "conservatives" who "don't believe" in how impartially they weigh evidence supprotive of & contrary to their respective positions.

How might we do that?

Well, one way would be to conduct an experiment in which we manipulate the ideological motivation people with "liberal" & "conservative" values have to credit or dismiss one and the same piece of valid evidence on climate change.

If "liberals" (it makes me shudder to participate in the flattening of this term in contemporary political discourse) adjust the weight they give this evidence depending on its ideological congeniality, that would support the inference that they are assessing evidence in a politically motivated fashion.

If in aggregate, in the real world, they happen to "get the right" answer, then they aren't to be commended for the high quality of their reasoning.

Rather, they are to be congratulated for being lucky that a position they unreasoningly subscribe to happens to be true.

I highly recommend reading it, and not just because it makes Krugman look like a drooling imbecile because, hey, low bar and all. Rather, you should read it because it's excellent. Confirmation bias is something everyone should be on guard against. And one should especially be on guard against agreeing with someone simply because they have the same political likes and dislikes as you.

Update: Had to look this up so that I could put up the best bitchslapping of Paul Krugman ever. Who does the dirty work? Why, Paul Krugman himself. Excerpt:

Former Enron adviser Paul Krugman takes note in his New York Times column of what he calls "the incredible gap that has opened up between the parties":
Today, Democrats and Republicans live in different universes, both intellectually and morally.

"What Democrats believe," he says "is what textbook economics says":

But that's not how Republicans see it. Here's what Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, had to say when defending Mr. Bunning's position (although not joining his blockade): unemployment relief "doesn't create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work."

Krugman scoffs: "To me, that's a bizarre point of view--but then, I don't live in Mr. Kyl's universe."

What does textbook economics have to say about this question? Here is a passage from a textbook called "Macroeconomics":

Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect. . . . In other countries, particularly in Europe, benefits are more generous and last longer. The drawback to this generosity is that it reduces a worker's incentive to quickly find a new job. Generous unemployment benefits in some European countries are widely believed to be one of the main causes of "Eurosclerosis," the persistent high unemployment that affects a number of European countries.

So it turns out that what Krugman calls Sen. Kyl's "bizarre point of view" is, in fact, textbook economics. The authors of that textbook are Paul Krugman and Robin Wells. Miss Wells is also known as Mrs. Paul Krugman.

Jonah Goldberg is correct: You cannot hold pre-NYT Economist Paul Krugman up to the current version. Youll just go mad.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 07, 2014

There's a new moon arising

So with Mozilla's latest decision to force out Eich for the crime of double plus ungood groupthink, I've decided to move on from Firefox to Pale Moon. However, the handy dandy migration tool doesn't work if you're currently using the portable version of Firefox, as I am. Here's how to go about manually migrating everything:

If you just want a one-shot copy, you can do it manually:


  1. On your desktop install, go to help > troubleshooting information
  2. Click the "Open folder" button under profile. This opens an explorer window in your profile.
  3. Close Pale Moon. !!IMPORTANT!!
  4. Select all files and folders (Ctrl+A) and copy (Ctrl+C)
  5. Browse your explorer to the user profile folder of Pale Moon Portable. {portable install folder}\User\Palemoon\Profiles\Default\
  6. Paste everything there (Ctrl+V)

It worked like a charm for me, moving all of my bookmarks, cookies and add-ons. Have fun stormin' the castle.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:32 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 11, 2013

Your costs will do down and if you like your doctor, you can keep him

Of course, then you wake up. Anyway, here's an excerpt from Powerline detailing the actual changes that Obamacare will make in your medical future. They're aren't... they're don't... they're not... good. They suck.

One of the things Obamacare is doing is forcing Medicares CMS to cut back on quite a lot of rehabilitation services. CMS, even though it is officially for Medicare and Medicaid, is something that governs reimbursement for all insurance. It sets prices for every single medical procedure and device, etc., etc. Hospitals ability to seek reimbursement for something, regardless of whether the insurance is private or not, is set by CMS. It is the Big Brother of healthcare. Even though CMS has been in place for a very long time it is the whip hand for Obamacare rationing.

One of the things that changed for new stroke patients was limiting reimbursable therapy visits of all kinds for stroke patients to ten total (because my stokes had happened before the change I was grandfathered in, so to speak). Ten!

I have had well north of 200 visits. At upwards of $250/visit for most therapy not many folks could sustain that for long without insurance (and remember, jobs go away when youre in the hospital as long as I was). Had I been restricted to ten visits my best case scenario would have involved a home nurse. I wouldnt have been able to find work. And had I been single (as many stroke patients are because theyre elderly and their spouse has passed) I would have become destitute, thus likely landing in the Medicaid system, eventually.

But hey, omelette, eggs, your death.

Update: And this is when you believe that your Divine Shit ™ does not stink at all.

Now whats true, Ed, is that in a normal political environment, it would have been easier for me to simply call up the speaker and say, you know what? This is a tweak that doesnt go to the essence of the law. It has to do with, for example, are we able to simplify the attestation of employers as to whether theyre already providing health insurance or not. It looks like there may be some better ways to do this. Lets make a technical change of the law.

That would be the normal thing that I would prefer to do, but were not in a normal atmosphere around here when it comes to, quote- unquote, Obamacare.

We did have the executive authority to do so, and we did so. But this doesnt go to the core of implementation.

It's good to be king. Or a malignantly narcissistic fuckwad. Your choice.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 10, 2013

This is your brain on, crikey, I have no idea

Denial of reality: it's what's for dinner. Check out this statement from Landrieu:

I was stunned to then hear my Louisiana senator defend the massive U.S. debt saying: That is not true, sir! We do not have an increasing national debt! For the past six to seven years we have been continuously driving that debt down and reducing it and it is NOT increasing.

Frankly, I couldn't make that statement without doubling over in laughter. I spent more than a decade in theater and that is one line I simply could not have pulled off with a straight face.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Well, this is cheery

But I find it impossible to disagree with the conclusion in this article.

bama is merely a name, a speck in history. If it were not him now it would be some other soon. Whether Mr. Obama dreams of dictatorship or not, he will not likely achieve this. He is too early in the death of a nation.

Mr. Obama will likely be remembered as a political form of John the Baptist, one who was significant and abetted what comes next. Some unknown successor will be the real thing. He may be Democrat or Republican. He may come next election or ten elections from now. But he or she will come. Such is the nature of men, power and history.

At some point a ruthless politician will gain total control. He will have the power and control of a Stalin, Hitler or Mao. How that power will be used is moot, but power gained is never not used. Hoping for a benevolent dictator is worse than trying to draw to an inside straight. Even if you get lucky, you will lose with his successor.

America is now run by political sociopaths, unrestricted by laws, ethics or tradition. That characterizes both political parties. It does not matter whether we elect a good man next. No country survives dependent on the masses electing the right man.

Countries survive with systems that protect them against the wrong man. We have lost that protection.

Hat tip to Doug Ross.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 11, 2013

From our cold dead hands

Dethguild is spot on here. Excerpt that looks identical to what Bill Quick posted, because it is:

There is only one real question here Prog-Nazi: How many of us gun-owners are you willing to kill to get our firearms?

We wont surrender one more inch except over our cooling corpses and make no mistake there are millions that feel as we do. Your hoplophobia is no justification for stripping citizens of their God-given, constitutionally enumerated civil rights. (No matter how many poor dead childrens graves your mercilessly play your totalitarian siren song from).

Ruminate on exactly how many of us you and your kind will have to massacre. Ponder it long and hard before you and your ilk start an Afghanistan style 4th generation civil-war stateside.

Lets get 100% hypothetical here and I will explain how the civil war you think you want will play out:

Update: Mike Hendrix offers similar thoughts:


Wanna know what the real overriding factor is? We will not comply with any new gun-grabbing legislation. If you persist, we will fight you. Holding people who havent killed anybody responsible for some random lunatics murders is a grave injustice. Stripping them of their single most important Constitutional right under false pretenses is a far graver one. When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.

We know what you people are. We know what you really want. You are not going to get it. Not without a fight.

Come and take them, motherfuckers.

Word.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 16, 2013

Quote of the day

And it comes from Rush Limbaugh via Neo-Neocon:

So Obama is not at all connected to the tragic destruction of this country. He is seen as somebody who wants to fix it. It's the same thing as people seeing Colonel Sanders as a guy running a hospital to save chickens.

I've said it before and I will repeat it now:

There are days when I despair and think that a humanity-ending meteor would be the best thing. Those are my optimistic days.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 09, 2013

If only

Required viewing.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 04, 2012

A narcissistic little man-child

Emphasis on the child part. I swear that things like this that I posted over at Rachel's place make me want to slam my head in a car door to make me forget. Excerpt:

Now comes a fresh sample of the man with a hat size surely at least 11.

Last weekend contained an historic day in the calendar of American civil rights.

It was the anniversary of that day in Montgomery, Alabama when an NAACP worker, a black woman named Rosa Parks, refused a city bus driver's orders to give up her seat in the colored section to a white.

Parks was not the first black to do that. But her arrest for civil disobedience that day became the rallying focus for a bus boycott and widespread demonstrations. Parks said simply she grew "tired of giving in."

...

Last Saturday was the 57th anniversary of the woman's catalytic act of defiance aboard Montgomery public transportation.

To honor the historic memory of civil rights leader Rosa Parks, Obama's White House website posted a photo -- not of Rosa Parks, but of Barack Obama.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:26 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 24, 2012

Required watching

From my friend Rachel Lucas comes this stirring speech by Bill Whittle. enjoy.

Wouldn't it be nice...

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:56 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 20, 2012

He's a witch! Burn him!

Ace has the lowdown from Slate on Marc Rubio, anti-science zealot extraordinaire.

Holy crap, there's no way Rubio can win in 2016. In fact, the only reason he won the last time out was because no one knew about his insanely stupid views. More below the fold.

The twist is that that isn't Senator Marco Rubio talking in 2012, that's Senator (and presidential candidate) Barack Obama talking in 2008.
Posted by Physics Geek at 08:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 10, 2012

Anyone surprised by this? And is there anything we can do to prevent it in the future?

It's who counts the votes that matters. A lot. Excerpt:

Out of 175,554 registered voters, 247,713 vote cards were cast in St. Lucie County, Florida on Tuesday. Barack Obama won the county.

So a little over 72k extra votes appeared in one county in Florida. What was Barry's margin over Romney in the state again? Oh well, it's a good thing Florida and Ohio aren't important in the electoral scheme of things, huh?

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:59 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

This is what I fear most

Now that the election has been decided, it's time for people to honestly examine the fiscal future of this country. Short analysis: we're boned. For a more thorough analysis, and the birth of an ulcer, check out this deeper analysis from den Beste. Excerpt:

I think the dollar is going to crash.

There's a story told about a man who fell out of a window on top of a skyscraper. As he passed the 20th floor he was heard to mutter, "Well, I'm OK so far." This country is falling, but hasn't hit the ground yet. When it does, things get very ugly, very fast.

The problem is the deficit. Three kinds of deficits, in fact. There's our cumulative national debt. No nation in history has ever owed $16 trillion. The second is the budget deficit, which has been over $1 trillion per year for the last four years. The third is our trade deficit.

The only reason that debt service on that $16 trillion hasn't destroyed us already is that the Fed is holding interest rates down. The reason the annual deficit hasn't destroyed us yet is that the Fed is "running the printing presses" (only they call it "quantitative easing") to cover it. But neither of those is sustainable in the long run. The ground is still waiting for us, and we'll know we've hit it when a T-bill auction ends up with a lot higher interest rate than we've been paying so far.

It'll be a cascading failure, once it begins. When T-bill interest rates begin to rise, confidence will begin to fail. The rise will accelerate as bond purchasers begin to price in increasing degrees of risk.

Read the rest. Currently, I'm going long on Maalox futures. And dried beans and rice. And ammo. Lots of it.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 27, 2012

Political action (repost)

Actually, I originally posted this about feeling stressed at work. In any event, it seems awfully appropriate during this heated election cycle.
===============================================

How to handle political conflicts.

fight.gif

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:58 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 09, 2012

Interesting

Wanna see a possible trend? Check out the last week or so over at Intrade, specifically the charts for Romney and/or Obama. The trading has been heavy for about 4 days and the trend is down more than $1.50 for Obama and up around $2.00 for Romney. The market, she appears to be moving. Pass it on and do NOT fall victim to despair.

Update: Even more interesting is that even though the polls have moved into a dead heat since the Dem convention, Intrade is trending up for Obama.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 30, 2012

Let's get ready to rumble

Four years ago I was in the Mitt Romney camp because, well, McCain. This time around, I was hoping for something more in a candidate. To give Mitt his due, though, he's really punched back hard. Unlike McCain, it appears as though he actually wants to win this thing. And last night he unleashed the boyish, smiling, cold-blooded assassin named Paul Ryan on the Democrats. I think that Chris Matthews spent the night wetting his bed. Not that that would be anything different, mind. In any event, I really enjoyed the speech.

What's next? Well, after the balloons drop tonight, Romney will finally be able to start spending the huge pile of cash on hand, plus any more that might drop in due to, you know, Ryan. Are there any states where a bunch of TV, print and radio ads might prove helpful? Survey says... "duh".

And now back to thinking about the upcoming Vice-Presidential debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden. And smiling. A lot.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:53 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

So. Paul Ryan's speech

Pretty good stuff, huh?

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:43 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 25, 2012

Required reading: Patterico discusses convicted felon Brett Kimberlin

Patrick Frey relates his harrowing experience brought about by unrepentant asshole Brett Kimberlin.

Update: Glenn Reynolds drops the hammer and some rare profanity towards Kos. It is, of course, well deserved.

POINTING OUT BULLSHIT FROM MARKOS MOULITSAS. I remember when he sort of mattered. But its not surprising that he resurfaces to defend Brett Kimberlin.
Posted by Physics Geek at 11:40 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 26, 2011

Worth 1000 words

Spending 1980-2011.jpg


Spending II 2000-2011.jpg

Read the rest here.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 07, 2011

Profound ignorance on display

I've watched, with both horror and interest, the debate over America's current insolvency problem. Excuse, the "raising the debt ceiling" debate. Interest because I want to see if we as a country as actually willing to tackle this issue and horror because I cannot believe the numerical illiteracy on display.

1) Those so called punitive cuts were not cuts. When you add 7 trillion in debt over 10 years instead of only 10 trillion, that's not a cut. You can argue all you want but we as a country are currently projected to spend 7-8 trillion more than we have over the next decade, raising our country's debt to more than 21 trillion.

2) Moody's and S&P both wanted at least 4 trillion in cuts in DC's deal, regardless of the cuts being fraudulent DC cuts or not. The current deal did NOT reach that point. Ergo, the downgrade.

3) All you increase revenue people keep ignoring history and reality. History shows that regardless of taxation levels, the revenue always-always- comes back to around 19% of GDP. History shows that increasing taxes is a drag on the economy. And the reality is that no matter what level of revenue comes into DC, the dimwits on Capitol Hill will find a way to spend more. Those blowjobs your unicorn is giving you doesn't change any of those points.

4) Increasing taxes on businesses? No such thing. Taxes and fees are a cost of doing business and that cost is passed onto to all of the consumers, meaning that "tax increases on the rich" are actually taxes on everyone. Feel free to ask the former carpenters, electricians and shipwrights who used to work in the northeast how that yacht building business is going these days. Oh right, you can't: the "taxes on the rich" kill that industry here and moved it permanently overseas.

5) The phrase "allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire" is complete and utter horseshit. Those rate adjustments have been law for a decade. Repealing them is a tax increase. And to those idiots who say "we're simply reverting to a previous level of taxation", I say that going back to the maximum 2% envisioned when the income tax was codified would be awesome. Somehow, I don't think that that's exactly what they mean.

You know how to increase revenues? Get more people employed, which broadens the tax bases. To do so, our government would have to do things it has intention of doing: reducing onerous and costly regulations and taxes on businesses. But hey, why try what's always worked instead of what's always failed?

Oh yeah: I plan on blogging semi-regularly again. I used to do it on my lunch hour or at home. The first one can't happen anymore because work blocks my ability to do so and the second one was made a lot tougher when child #3 came along. But he's old enough now for me to get a few minutes to myself now and again.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:51 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 10, 2011

Listen up, douchebags

I don't blame Al Gore and his tiresome screed for the Unabomber. Please don't waste your breath trying to convince me that Sarah Palin was behind the Tuscon shooting. While I know for a fact that the Unabomber read Gore (there was a well worn copy of Bullshit In the Balance in his shack) and have to date not seen anything that verifies the Tuscon shooter read anything Palin every wrote, I'll simply state that the Unabomber was an evil whacko. I'd appreciate it if you'd kindly pull your collective heads out of your asses and do me the same favor.

Assholes.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:53 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 03, 2010

My only post election comment will be a picture

And it's worth a thousand words, courtesy of Ace:

donkey.jpg

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:15 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 25, 2010

Political prognostication

I try to make predictions on electoral season chances, although I do tend to be somewhat more accurate than Dick Morris. However, I have a few things to say about this year:

1) I think that Peter Beagle is a fine author, but I don't believe in unicorns. Therefore, I think that the Democrats vision of how to fix the financial situation in this country is beyond belief

2) I also think that the majority of Republicans in office are more interested in holding onto power and sucking at the public teat than trying to do anything useful

3) And I think that watching Pelosi give up the Speaker's gavel on national TV might be the most beautiful thing that I'll see on 1/20/2011

I'm looking forward to watching the election returns on November 2. I expect to enjoy them. My Democrat friends will likely be somewhat less enthralled with the results.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:22 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 04, 2010

I cannot believe that this is a serious question

So our would be terrorist is not only-thankfully- a moron, he's also a naturalized U.S. citizen. People keep asking whether or not he should be Mirandized like it's a legitimate question. It isn't. He's a citizen of the USA and deserves the full protection that the law allows. The fact that he's clearly murderous scum is beside the point.

Update: Looks like I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:40 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 22, 2010

I can see November from my house!



Posted by Physics Geek at 11:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 30, 2010

Stupid snowbilly

I noticed that the MSM is making a fuss out of something stupid and simplistic that Sarah Palin said:

"America. Do you love your freedom?!"

Good grief, why do people think that Palin isn't an imbecile? Her comment is so stupid that I can't resist sharing her followup.

I would always cringe when I'd see a clip of Sarah Palin shouting "America. Do you love your freedom?!" at a Tea Party event. I don't think it is fair to assume that the other side doesn't love their freedom, and it's just an awkward, clunky line.

Well, I attended the Searchlight event on Saturday. She began with that line, and I was in mid eye-roll as she continued; she asked if there were any veterans in the crowd, and as they raised their hands, she said, "Well, if you love your freedom, thank a Vet" to enormous applause.

See?! Not only is she stupid, she thinks we should actually thank our resident baby killers! SHE'S THE ANTICHRIST!!!

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 27, 2010

Be afraid. Very afraid.

I'll be honest: as a student of both physics and engineering, I was more or less insulated from the type of bullshit that Jeff Goldstein discusses here. Professor Kiteley should be stripped of tenure and forced into a job better suited to his temperament. I hear that the guy who cleans the bathrooms in Grand Central Station with his tongue is about to retire, so, you know, win.

Seriously though, the answer to bad speech is ALWAYS more speech, not censorship. If you think otherwise, you are to be pitied.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 24, 2010

An allegory for Obamacare

It's Charlie the Unicorn!

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 22, 2010

Must be something in the water

I've been a long time reader over at Dean's World/ Dean Esmay. A long time commenter as well, although not too much the last couple of years; Dean didn't post anywhere near as much because of personal issues. Now he's back posting frequently-and that's a good thing IMO. However, I cannot for the life of my understand his point of view here.

I read through all of the comments and all of Dean's replies and I simply do not see any connection to reality in his comments. Why do I say such a thing? Because I can read and have waded through much of the current abominable HCR bill, which doesn't reform health care at all. Instead, it does screwed up things with insurance costs.

Increasing the demand to an almost infinite level of a product which has a limited demand leads to one of two things (or both): rationing or increased costs. And since the federal government can simply undercut ALL private insurance companies, the federal government will eventually be the final arbiter of everything related to my medical care.

Let me extend a little cold-heartedness to people: I don't get the pre-existing conditions part of the law. It makes no freaking sense at all. Are their companies that abuse the former system by claiming that pretty much every thing wrong with you is a pre-existing condition? Of course. Those companies deserve a kick in the teeth, and since the medical and insurance industries are heavily regulated, it should be easy to fix. But preventing insurance companies from declining everyone with pre-existing conditions is (a) stupid and (b) a recipe for fiscal disaster. I work with some young guys who don't pay for health insurance. They're pretty healthy and figure they'll just play the health lottery in return for a lot more take home pay. So now they'll just pay the fine for not buying health insurance until they're really hurt or sick, at which point they'll sign up for health care because they can no longer be denied.

Maybe I should wait until my house burns down and then take out homeowner's insurance. The burned out shell is a pre-existing condition, but hey, they can't turn me down, right? There's no fiscal difference between that and forcing insurance companies to accept everyone. You can try to make it a moral difference, but I fail to see how you forcing me to pay for your coverage is moral. At all.

People who believe the claptrap about how great this bill is are deluded. It's like the people who thought that Obama a moderate-to-conservative candidate back in 2008. They projected their hopes and dreams onto an empty vessel. Essentially, they all mimicked Obama and voted "present". Now the same people want us to believe how great the House/Senate bill is.

I'll give you Dean's words from one of his comments to the post linked above:

In this particular case, I fully expect to be looking back in 10 years and sort of regretting not being able to say I voted for Obama...

I opine that Dean will be in a very small minority who will hold that particular view ten years hence.

Related update: Hey Democrats! Want to see what you've done? This:


If Obamacare passes, I think Im going to make it official. Im not sure. Its a huge step. I have never registered with a political party before.

But I think, if Obamacare passes, I am going to register as a Republican.

Thats how far away the Democrats have pushed me.

And remember, I voted for Carter, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, and Gore before voting for Bush and McCain.

I used to vote, as they said in New Jersey, Line A all the way. I voted the straight Republican ticket in November.

The Democrats have become the party of the statists. Worse still, the nanny-statists. Im afraid we are about to become, more than ever, the United Socialist States of America.

That isnt the America I want for future generations. I will likely never vote for a Democrat again. Theyve turned too far to the left.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:46 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 10, 2010

Water is wet

And Lindsay Graham and John McCain are still self-aggrandizing idiots. Everyone knew-everyone- that the only reason that the Democrats agreed to this was because they were in the minority at the time, and that there was no possible way that they'd agree to it when they became the majority party again. Everyone, that is, except for McCain and Graham.

Honestly guys, you were dupes, fools, rubes. They rode you hard and put you away wet. You didn't get $20 on the nightstand even. In other words, you fucked up: you trusted them. Why, I don't know. Oh wait a minute, I do: you're stupid. And despite the pain that your idiocy has cost this country, I can still take some small solace at the look of dawning realization on your faces as you -finally- realize that you've been had.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 06, 2010

Quote of the day

From the resurrected Goldberg File:

Or take John Edwards. I've written some very harsh things about John Edwards over the years because I, like countless other conservatives, could tell that he is what social scientists call "full of sh*t" and an awful person. I once wrote something to the effect of: "No serious person I know thinks Edward would have ever gotten into politics if he'd been burnt by acid as a teenager." I remember some idjit left-wing blogs went beserk about what an idiot I was. Not only did they not get the joke, they insisted that John Edwards is the most sincere, caring, decent, honest, wonderful, shiny-happy-neato-peachy-keen, pretty person this side of a Teen Beat centerfold (I'm quoting from memory). Now, it's clear that John Edwards is to decent politics what crack whores are to nunnery.

You want The New Goldberg File? Go sign up, as it's email only distribution now.

Update: From a later Goldberg File comes this gem: implantable permanent bras. Really.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 05, 2010

Quote of the day

From the fertile mind and keyboard of Jerry Pournelle:

There are people in this world who want to control others. They tend to become public employees.

I don't really have anything to add to that statement.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 03, 2010

I can't quite figure out what he's saying here

Dan Riehl is trying to make a point but I'll be darned if I can tell what it is. Excerpt:

This neophyte, this joke we have in the White House has absolutely no idea of the force and the rage he is about to unleash on him and his entire political party. If there are not enough responsible adults left within his party to rein in this accidental, affirmative action jerk, this self-styled, extremely flawed little man, then his party is worthless to America. It deserves to be marginalized electorally and, ultimately, utterly destroyed, before being relegated to the dung heap of history with the rest of the marxist, socialist clowns Americans have dispatched before.

Sigh. I wish he'd stop beating around the bush and get to point, which is by the way, what?

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 25, 2010

Rrequired reading

Orson Scott Card takes on the education establishment. Excerpt:

As long as a single child grows up to vote Republican, these educators feel that they have failed.

So, here in the great state of North Carolina, they have come up with the perfect solution: Secede from the United States of America, and teach only the history of Politically Correct America.

The way they plan to do this is to stop teaching our 11th-graders any American history prior to 1877. This is not a joke. This is a real proposal from our state Department of Public Instruction.

Let's see ... what does that leave out?

The colonizing of America. The Revolutionary War. George Washington and the creation of a republic that doesn't lead to "presidents-for-life."

The ideas and compromises leading up to the Constitution.

Alexander Hamilton and the creation of our economic system.

The Monroe Doctrine, Andrew Jackson's populism, Manifest Destiny, the Mexican War and the nation's growth to the west coast.

The political struggles over slavery leading up to the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln and the freeing of the slaves. The Reconstruction of the South, with the Republican Party forcing the South to accept black voters and office holders.

Yeah, that's all they're cutting out.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:50 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 19, 2010

Quote of the day

He may enjoy a Rottweiler smoothy on occasion, but Glenn Reynolds does know how to turn a phrase:

To me, peoples reactions to Palin particularly the extreme hatred shes inspired in the left are more interesting than Palin herself. She may, someday, be ready to be President, but she isnt now. Heck, shes barely more ready than Barack Obama was when he was elected. . . .

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go dry off my keyboard.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:51 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 18, 2010

This country is in the best of hands

From the Puppy Blender:

HOMELAND SECURITY AT WORK: Homeland Security reports losing guns. The nations Homeland Security officers lost nearly 200 guns in bowling alleys, public restrooms, unlocked cars and other unsecure areas, with some ending up in the hands of felons.

If I leave my entry badge on my seat to get a glass of water, I can get written up for a breach of security. What do these jackasses get? Probably a raise and promotion.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:41 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 01, 2010

Economics made simple

Misha types slowly and uses small words to illustrate his point.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 13, 2010

Worth 1000 words

Scott Brown isn't running for Ted Kennedy's seat. THIS was- or should have been- Ted Kennedy's seat.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 15, 2009

The biggest steaming pile you will read today

Unless Maureen Down or Paul Krugman have columns out. Even then, it will be hard to top this bit of horse squeeze from Kirsten Powers passed off as, well, who know what:

What will health-care reform cost?

This question has become the obsession distracting us from the moral imperative to provide health care to all Americans.

I believe that the phrase you're looking for is non sequitur or, more accurately in this case, balderdash.

Q: Why am I not married to Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Connely?

A: This question has become the obsession distracting us from the moral imperative of wearing purple underwear on our heads.

In point of fact, my non sequitur is less nonsensical than Kirsten's.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 19, 2009

What he said

From the fertile keyboard of Instapunk:

But here's what I don't get. Hating Sarah Palin. That's my whole point here. Think about it. Who do you have to be to hate Sarah Palin?

And through my general skittishness and protectiveness, I'm perceiving this as a major-league, big-time question. If you're a woman, you hate her because she's beautiful, famous, happily married, a devoted mother, and strong enough to endure an unending media assault indistinguishable for all intents and purposes from gang rape? Really? You hate her? WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU? What I know for sure: I don't ever want to be in your bed or have you in any part of my life. You're a cunt.

If you're a man, you hate her because she's beautiful, famous, happily married, a devoted mother, and strong enough to endure an unending media assault indistinguishable for all intents and purposes from gang rape? Really? You hate her? WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU? What I know for sure: I don't want you as a friend, an in-law, a colleague, a business acquaintance, or even the stranger sitting next to me on a barstool. If I knew you felt that way, I would never return even a business phone call, let alone shake your hand in a corporate conference room or play you a game of 8-ball in a local tavern. You're a worthless prick and probably a violent mysogynist suffering from -- what do they call it now? -- erectile dysfunction. No wonder we're all about 'texting' now. ED = PC. But a limp dick is a limp dick and infinitely more pitiful for being a partisan cause.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 21, 2009

From your keyboard to God's eyes

TMQ, as is its wont, slides into topics other than football and Gregg Easterbrook makes the following observation:

Seniors as a group are the best-off segment of American society. Multimillion-dollar bonuses to bungling bankers are more outrageous than a $250 check, but the total expense of the latter is greater, while in both cases, government is taxing the less-well-off, or borrowing from the young, to hand a giveaway to a politically connected lobbying block. Our new president must learn to pronounce the word "no," or liberalism will be discredited for a generation.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Required reading

So life is keeping busy right now, but I had to pass this along. Excerpt:

"I've been in the media for a long time, I signed up because I hate this right-wing, knuckle-dragging, imperialist system, and I would gladly sacrifice any number of my fellow Americans to advance my agenda - but this is a dumb war and a rash war," Keith Olbermann of MSNBC told The People's Cube outside a congressional office he visited to demand a government crackdown on dissidents. "Why must we in the field put our reputations on the line when this Congress has the power to simply confiscate Rupert Murdoch's assets and put Beck, Hannity, and Coulter in jail?" he demanded.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 02, 2009

Uh oh

Blame Smitty. I know that I do:

palinangry.jpg

Update: Whoops. Forgot to link to Troglopundit as the instigator.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:03 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 01, 2009

Quote of the day

And it's from the fertile mind of Moxie regarding the charisma that Pawlenty exudes:

He has all the impact of dust landing on a down comforter.

Pawlenty strikes me as a decent guy and a reasonably conservative fellow. And I find the possibility of him beating Obama to be somewhat where in the neighborhood of zero. Okay, maybe next door to zero. Okay, in the same house AND sleeping in the same bed.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:44 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 30, 2009

Worth 1000 words

Courtesy of Neal Boortz:

obamacare_pills1_o.jpg

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:13 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 22, 2009

What a kidder

Andy McCarthy makes the following statement which, I assume, has got to be a joke:

There are so many funky things going on with Obama and the people he surrounds himself with that it's hard to keep up. But the administration's transparent effort to squeeze artists dependent on NEA grants for support in pushing Obama's agenda is one to watch. At Powerline, John Hinderaker has a superb analysis, including consideration of the question whether criminal statutes (such as the Hatch Act) have been violated.

Needless to say, if something like this happened during the Bush administration, there would already be congressional hearings and screams for the appointment of a special prosecutor. We're about to see (yet again) how serious the Pelosi/Reid Democrats are about all that "rule of law" stuff they spout.

::snorfle:; Stop it! You're killing me!

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:19 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 09, 2009

Required reading

From the inestimable Camille Paglia:

Why has the Democratic Party become so arrogantly detached from ordinary Americans? Though they claim to speak for the poor and dispossessed, Democrats have increasingly become the party of an upper-middle-class professional elite, top-heavy with journalists, academics and lawyers (one reason for the hypocritical absence of tort reform in the healthcare bills). Weirdly, given their worship of highly individualistic, secularized self-actualization, such professionals are as a whole amazingly credulous these days about big-government solutions to every social problem. They see no danger in expanding government authority and intrusive, wasteful bureaucracy. This is, I submit, a stunning turn away from the anti-authority and anti-establishment principles of authentic 1960s leftism.

How has "liberty" become the inspirational code word of conservatives rather than liberals?
...
But affluent middle-class Democrats now seem to be complacently servile toward authority and automatically believe everything party leaders tell them. Why? Is it because the new professional class is a glossy product of generically institutionalized learning? Independent thought and logical analysis of argument are no longer taught. Elite education in the U.S. has become a frenetic assembly line of competitive college application to schools where ideological brainwashing is so pandemic that it's invisible. The top schools, from the Ivy League on down, promote "critical thinking," which sounds good but is in fact just a style of rote regurgitation of hackneyed approved terms ("racism, sexism, homophobia") when confronted with any social issue. The Democratic brain has been marinating so long in those clichs that it's positively pickled.

She also adds some withering fire into the side of the GOP, which it well deserves.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 20, 2009

He's got a way...

With words. I give you Ace:

As I have noted with footnotes and authoritative citations previously, Contessa Brewer is a dirty, lying, pus-mouthed whore.

A cheap, sore-riddled nasty bit of gutterscrunge who'll rent you her mouth for the change in your pocket.

A tawdry wallow-trollop oozing with syphilitic fester who raises her filthy skirts at the scent of crack-smoke.

A disease-dripping pincushion, the media's vile mattress of last resort, a pathogen in garish vinyl high heels, a loose-toothed croup-breathed nightcrawler reeking of bathtub gin, fungicide, and the genetic stink of human desperation.

A skanky bit of mung-trash sloughing off diseased skin like a leprous snake. (A leprous snake who whores out her verminous cloaca for two bits a pop, I mean.)

This sad clown of a whore, oozing with foul custard and slack and sloppy as an over-used trash bag, is too stupid to know how to lie judiciously, and so lies promiscuously and wantonly, demonstrating all the discretion she once showed in junior high when her nickname was "Automatic" Brewer.

By the way: No, I don't think Contessa Brewer really "did" this. She's too stupid. She doesn't have that kind of responsibility. Her job is to wear a wonderbra, eat rice pudding with a "safety spoon," blow the line producer, and read the phonetically-spelled questions someone else writes for her.

It's beautiful. ::sniff::

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 07, 2009

What he said

I dunno who Doctor Zero is, but the guy/gal writes what I'm thinking a lot of the time, only much more clearly. This time, he has a message for our political opponents that I believe sums up what most of us on the center-right are thinking. Excerpt:

There seems to be a bit of confusion among Democrats about the nature of the opposition to their plans. Maybe I can help clear things up, by telling them a few things about us. ... Our support for a massive government program does not increase when you tell us were not allowed to ask questions about it. ... We dont like having to fight desperate battles to save our freedom and future from socialist politicians every ten or twenty years. We dont like having our time wasted with trillion-dollar statist fantasies, when our government is already trillions of dollars in the red. Were tired of checking the papers each day, to see which group of us has been targeted as enemies of the State. Were growing impatient waiting for the Democrats to come up with ideas that dont require their supporters to hate someone. Weve had our fill of progressives who act as if were living in 1909, and none of their diseased policies have ever been tried before. ... We dont blame people for showing up to grab their share of a government handout. We blame the people who stole the money from the rest of us, and put it on the table for them. We dont think respect for private property ends at a certain income level, or that only some people should be applauded for doing their best to get ahead in life. We believe in the power and righteousness of capitalism, the exchange of goods and services between free people acting in their own best interests. There is no moral substitute for it. Every other scheme for governing human affairs amounts to a few dominating some, to the applause of others. Our freedom is not for sale, and we reserve the right to defend it from theft.

You know the drill.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:45 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 29, 2009

What he said

Whenever I hear the "40+ million people don't have health insurance", I want to punch whoever said it in the mouth. Hard. Because it's balderdash. Daylight's Mark explains:

On the 47 million people without health insurance point, that too is a statistic where there is less than meets the eye. First, health insurance does not equal health care (there are not just emergency rooms but cash-based clinics, and conversely, a lot of people with insurance dont get good health care). Second, of that 47 million, 14 million are already eligible for existing programs (Medicare, Medicaid, veterans benefits, SCHIP) yet have not enrolled, 9.7 million are not citizens, 9.1 million have household incomes over $75,000 and could but choose not to purchase insurance, and somewhere between 3 and 5 million are uninsured briefly(<2 months) between jobs. That leaves about 10 million Americans who are chronically without insurance. Needless to say, extending the blanket of coverage to this group should not cost $1.5 trillion and require a wholesale overhaul of all of medicine.

I can already hear the "But-but-but YOU WANT PEOPLE TO DIE!!!" emanating from the overused pieholes of some our less lucid citizens. Be aware that if I wanted any more shit out of you, I'd squeeze your head.

Thanks to Megan for the link.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:03 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Barf

Remember when I decried the messianic nature of Barry's campaign last fall? Apparently some people thought that he didn't go far enough. I give you the following special carrying case:

obama_bible_bag_o.jpg

You can actually buy one; you don't even need a Bible. This cover will warm your heart, pay your mortgage and make you a sexual machine.

Thanks, I guess, go to Neal Boortz for providing a link to this piece of Barry worship.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 23, 2009

Dare to dream

Iowahawk has a vision for the nation, something far more historic than JFK's smallish plan to put a man on the Moon.

If America wants to get back on the right track, scientific space mission-wise, we need to once again pick an inspiring, audacious goal, and man it with the kind of inspirational crew to make it happen. At long last, let us realize mankind's most cherished dream -- sending the entire United States Congress to the Moon by 2010.

When I mention this proposal to my space engineering friends at Meier's Tap, they are often skeptical. They'll argue it's impossible, that even NASA's most powerful booster rockets never anticipated a payload of 535 people including Charlie Rangel and Jerrold Nadler. Look man, I'm just the idea guy, and I'm sure those details can be worked out. When John F. Kennedy first proposed going to the Moon in 1961, did you people expect him to already have a formula for Tang? The beauty of my proposal is that our Astro-Congress is already on payroll -- and chock full of crisis tested problem-solving engineers. If they can take over the entire US auto industry and re-engineer the American heath care system in two weeks, surviving a Moon mission will be a snap!

Now that's a plan to put my tax dollars to good use. In fact, probably the best use to which they could be put.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:01 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Blackstone was wrong

There's a sucker born every second.

So 25% of the people polled think that the stimulus has helped. I wonder: what color is the sky in their world? Or can they simply not see it because their lips are planted the president's ass?

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

I assume that the question is entirely rhetorical

Excerpt from today's Nealz Nuze:

The Michigan Democratic Party is considering asking voters to raise the state's minimum wage to $10 an hour. That'll work out real well for their economy. My God. Are these people really that stupid?

Survey says...

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:44 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 22, 2009

Quote of the day

From The Troglopundit:

Do you ever think to yourself: yknow what, self? Maybe the Left really isnt as ludicrously self-absorbed and non-intellectual as Ive been thinking they are. Maybe their positions really are rationally constructed, even though I might disagree.

Of course you havent. Why would you? Its clearly nonsense.

That is some weapons grade snark right there. Read the rest.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:45 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 10, 2009

Time to water the trees of freedom

Pamela links to an abomination called HR 1966, which would make you a felony if you offend someone electronically. So if I said that Nancy Pelosi was an intellectually incurious incompetent whose Botox riddled gray matter functions on a lower level than that of a slime mold, and said incompetent moron takes offense, I face time in jail. Seriously. Bill Quick adds some commentary, none of which I disagree with.:

This is the very definition of totalitarianism.

Folks, we are no longer governed by men and women who believe in, and honor, the American dream of liberty. We are ruled by power-crazed tyrants of a sort that would have made the Founders reach for their muskets and their torches.

I would simply add that if the contents of this bill do not make you think that this is an appropriate time to "spit upon your hands, hoist the black flag and begin slitting throats", then you and I have nothing to discuss, except for how I'm going to defeat, destroy and ruin you.

Update: Mike has more:

Every word he says is true. We are not in danger of losing our country; we have lost it, and the all-powerful government we are subjects of, whose greasy tentacles now reach into every corner of our lives, is nothing the Founders would either recognize or honor. Yes, these outrageous bills havent actually passed, and may not yet. Thats not the problem. The problem is that we are ruled, as Bill has said, by people for whom the Constitution is not a sacred document to be revered and strictly adhered to, but merely an obstacle to be circumvented or ignored. And if these autocratic bastards dont succeed now, you can be assured theyll try again later, and will keep right on trying, until theyre removed from office or dead.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:00 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 02, 2009

Now that you ask, no, it doesn't seem like a good idea to have voted for Obama

Okay, I didn't vote for Obama, but 52% or so of you did. Neal Boortz has a few thoughts for all of you: STILL GOT THAT OBAMA BUMPER STICKER ON YOUR CAR?

I know, it's hard to admit that you were wrong, isn't it? I mean, after all, how in the world can you admit that voting for someone with absolutely no experience at all - a former ACORN street organizer - someone who gravitated to Marxist professors and communist student groups in college - someone with no record of significant accomplishment at any endeavor - and someone who ran for office on the basis of focus-group slogans - how can you ever admit that such a vote might have been a mistake?

Do you see our economy improving? Have you noticed the improving employment figures?

Are you impressed by the burgeoning national debt that your children are going to have to pay back?

Are you looking forward to seeing your health care rationed?

How about the nationalization of General Motors, Citigroup and others? That's why you put that bumper sticker on your car, isn't it? So Obama could use some of his immense business experience to run some of our major industries. You do know he will nationalize the banks soon, don't you? Is that the change you had in mind?

Don't you see how smart this "sort-of" God really is? He's raising taxes while other nations are lowering business and personal taxes to fight the economic downturn. You knew that he knew something that the other world leaders didn't know ... didn't you?

How about our shows of determination and strength to North Korea and Iran? Obama really has the Gargoyle and Shorty in a tizzy, doesn't he? And I'm sure you're very impressed by Obama's instantaneous backing of that wannabe dictator and Chavez acolyte from Honduras.

So ... still got that Obama bumper sticker on your car? It's one thing to have been so profoundly ignorant in the last election. It's quite another to advertise it.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:24 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Time to stock up on big ass light bulbs

Well, our duly elected officials in DC weren't allowed to read the C&T monstrosity, or its retarded cousin, the 300+ page amendment. However, someone HAS taken the time to wade through the economy destroying piece of shit and reports the following:

And how will this bill affect you? It has regulations on every single aspect of your daily life. There are light bulb restrictions (no more than 60 watts in your candelabra); in fact theres a whole section that deals with lamps. If you decide to build a new home, it must meet new and specific energy requirements. If you decide to sell your existing home, a federal inspector must inspect your home, determine its energy rating, and if your home is found to be unacceptable then you must retrofit and make changes before you will be able to sell.

Hmm. I think the proper response to that bit of nonsense is to reply "blow me", and in a none too polite tone of voice.

But hey, it's not all a loss: I hear that Congress will give m $750 for my seven year old car, which will give me a nifty down payment on a new car, sure to cost upwards of $25,000. So I've got that goin' for me, too. Heck, that sounds almost as pleasant as shoving a red hot poker up the inside of my penis. Let's go!

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:14 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 25, 2009

What he said

People asked me what I thought of Gov. Sanford's recent epic asshole-ish stupidy. I believe that John Scalzi sums it up quite eloquently here:

Before people start gloating in the comments about the GOP having a spate of high-profile stupid adulterous politicians, two names for you: John Edwards. Elliot Spitzer. Yes, people, thinking with your dick is a bipartisan activity.


Posted by Physics Geek at 10:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 15, 2009

Break out the tar and feathers

I find ideas like this one to be so inherently bereft of logic and common sense that only someone in DC could think it's a great idea. Excerpt:

With federal spending in 2009 at 28% of the economy and deficits heading north, Democrats are eyeing tax increases on everything from soft drinks to electricity to health benefits to charitable contributions. But the palm for creativity goes to the Internal Revenue Service, which is contemplating a new tax on the use of business cellphones.

The IRS believes that some percentage of the costs incurred by employees using company-provided wireless devices should count as a "fringe benefit" and thus be subject to taxation. Since workers inevitably end up taking personal calls or emails, the thinking goes, it's only fair that they pay for the privilege. What's next? Maybe a per-cup tax on office coffee, or targeting furtive visits to ESPN or Hulu on the office PC? As one wag put it on the Journal's Web site, "It's like charging for the use of the company washroom."

Hey now, let's not give them any ideas. All that I can say is that if this idea gets more than floated, i.e. a new H.R. gets introduced, numbers at Tea Parties will explode more than they already have.

There a couple of ideas that are so simple that everyone should grok them. Apparently, though, some people have to have it spelled out for them. Ergo:

1) The elected officials in DC and elsewhere? They are the servants of the voting public, not the other way around.

2) Citizens do not exist solely for the purpose of providing a revenue stream to said elected officials.

If you keep those two points firmly embedded in your brain, you'll be fine. To believe otherwise is stupid and misguided. Sadly, there are large number of people who fall into one or both of those categories.

Anyway, hat tip to the Corner.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 11, 2009

New National Symbol

Received via email:


The government today announced that is is changing the national symbol to a condom because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

It just doesn't get more accurate than that.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:29 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 08, 2009

This is parody?

Rob Long usually writes some funny stuff, but this is way too close to reality to be considered funny.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 24, 2009

What he said

Bill Quick offers the perfect analysis of Colin Powell's latest utterings:

I agree. I think the GOP needs to reach out to and welcome many more small-government conservatives, hard-core libertarians, white folks who are tired of the explicit racism of the entitled, affirmative action society, legal immigrants who are opposed to having their own hard work and honesty degraded by a flood of illegals who share their ethnic backgrounds, and middle-class blacks who hate the false assumptions under which they must explain that their success came from their own labors and intellects, not some free affirmative action handout of one kind or another.

What? This isnt what he means?

In the immortal words of that puppy blending fool: Heh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 12, 2009

What he said

You should read the whole thing, but I especially like this excerpt:

The Obama administration has emphasized repeatedly that health-care reform is the key to their deficit reductions goals. But as the Washington Post points out the White House is backing a plan to expand coverage that would cost taxpayers between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion over 10 years, while it has proposed health-care savings of only $309 billion. And no one even believes those $309 billion in savings will ever materialize. So where will Obama find the money to pay for his lavish health care dreams? He doesnt know either.

Hat tip to that Puppy Blending Monster.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 11, 2009

Surprise, surprise, surprise

To one person, anyway:

If you know me on this issue, you know that I am very, very upset.

I don't know what Megan thought was going to happen when Obama won. The fact that this action was entirely predictable is beside the point. Or not. Really, really not.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:51 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 05, 2009

All your stupid are belong to us

Every now and then, I stop by Batshit Crazy Balloon Juice to see if Cole has posted anything based on facts or reason. There was a time not long ago when, even when I disagreed with him, I could expect something based on reality. Not anymore, though. It's like someone mixed together the stupidest elements of KOS, the DU and Indymedia to create some raving psychotic lunatic and then Cole sprang fully formed from the brow of said nutjob. Some of his recent ravings deal with economic policy. Let's just say that his ideas are... inadequate. But hey, the possibility exists that entire jungles of monkeys might crawl out of my ass and he could be proven right. That day isn't today, however, and tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 28, 2009

So Hugh, is it still tasty now?

I actually like Hugh Hewitt, his relentless GOP boosterism notwithstanding. However, since he was the biggest Specter supporter back in 2004 due to the "R" after his name, despite Specter being a socially and fiscally liberal douchebag, I feel obligated to resurrect this post from Hubris. See below the fold.

Shit Sandwich Suprisingly Tasty; I Give It A B+

Hughby Hugh Hewitt

I know what you're thinking:  "Why should I try a shit sandwich?"  I might have felt the same way a few days ago, but now I'm a believer.

I was chatting with an administration insider over the weekend.  During a sidebar in the conversation, it was intimated to me that President Bush's favorite late-night snack was a "shit sandwich" with tartar sauce on the side.  That encouraged me to give it a shot with an open mind.  I know the president is intuitive yet discriminating  in his choices, and isn't afraid to go against the conventional wisdom.   He also needs a lot of energy to get up early and fight the GWOT each day.

So I tried it.  The verdict?  Earthy, no-nonsense flavor.  The tangy contrast of the tartar sauce is initially off-putting, but like Bush, I'm in this game for the long term.  I'll give it some time to grow on me.  It's easily a B+ snack.

UPDATE:  My insider friend just called me again; apparently I misheard his end of the conversation, it was a fish sandwich.  Well, that shouldn't surprise me.  In addition to introducing bold new ideas, Bush has always shown an appreciation for the traditional eating values that made this country great in the first place.

Those of you who think that I'm being too tough on Mr. Hewitt need to acquaint or reacquaint yourselves with his archives on this subject.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 22, 2009

Required reading

Jonathan Rauch types a thoughtful essay on the subject of gay marriage. Unlike most proponents, he doesn't engage in strident attacks on his opponents, but rather seeks to understand them while simultaneously presenting his rebuttal. Excerpt:

Meanwhile, the national consensus has moved in the direction of civil unions for gay couples. Civil unions confer all or most of the legal incidents of marriage, but they withhold the word marriage and are treated as a formally distinct status. Gay opinion regards them as second-class citizenship, but they are a lot better than nothing, and they have the advantage of conferring most of the state-level protections and prerogatives of marriage with little or none of the controversy. ... But the quintessence of Burkeanism is that we do not live in an ideal world, and we should be thankful that we do not. On the whole, the path the country is taking is a grand vindication of the virtue of muddling through. Localizing gay marriage has taken the edge of hysteria off the issue and bought the country the time it needs to deliberate. Experimentation offers the opportunity to learn from experience, which is the only way social learning happens. Civil unions provide a way to give gay couples at least some of what they need and could easily be converted into marriages if society evolves in that direction. When all is said and done, the country adapts to a changing reality without rushing ahead of it.

Kudos to Gay Patriot for the link.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:26 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 21, 2009

Sign the petition

If you're a liberty minded individual who thinks that the Bush-Obama presidencies are spending this country into oblivion, I urge you to consider signing the Petition of the People of Virginia.

PETITION OF THE PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA

To the Governor and
Duly Elected Representatives of the Commonwealth

We the people of Virginia, stand in awe at your duplicity and absolute fiscal irresponsibility.

You were elected to stand watch as diligent stewards over our future, but instead you have bellied up to the trough of government waste. You have auctioned off our futures and our liberty for the sake of political convenience and we are not amused.

Rather than consult your constituents to determine your course, you holed yourselves away in the corridors of power and made decisions based on the corrupt sway of political pull.

We demand better servants...we deserve better men.

It is our resolution to stand united against your wasteful governance. The signatories of this document agree that theft is not the solution for debt, and graft is no substitution for leadership.

We advise you to proceed carefully as you waste our hard-earned money on your frivolity, because we are watching and you will be held accountable.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 17, 2009

Don't make him angry

You wouldn't like him when he's angry. Nick Gillespie, that is. Excerpt:

Mega-props to our President Obama for yesterday's speechifying about simplifying and fair-izing the Infernal Revenue Service and all that.

Except for one small nitpicky thing: He's full of shit on this topic. How precisely is he or his Slugger's Row of policy mavens (you know, the idjits who can't even use Turbo Tax) gonna make the income tax more fair? As it stands, the top 1 percent of filers pay 40 percent of all income taxes; the top 5 percent pay 60 percent; and the top 10 percent pay fully 70 percent of all income taxes. The bottom 50 percent (5-0, Dano!) pay a whopping 3 percent of all income tax.
...
And now this morning, Obama was on the tube again, yapping about traffic jams. What the hell is going on here? The president of the freaking United States is talking about traffic jams? Then again, in grammar school we did all learn that part of George Washinton's Farewell Address where he warned against entangling alliances and the dread menace of highway jughandles and traffic circles. That Obama's big solution is, ta-da!, "high-speed rail" is simply one more sign that he is simply not serious about anything other than paying off 19th and 20th century legacy special interests. I look forward to tomorrow's press conference, when Obama trains his laser-beam brain on the question of whether Razzles is a candy or a gum.

Let me clear: I think we'd be in pretty much the same financial situation if McCain had been elected. But at as much as I disagree with Mac, at least I'd know he was in over his head.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:20 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 16, 2009

Heard at yesterday's Tea Party

A small group re-enacted the following speech.

There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extentuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Some words are timeless. And while this is not an armed struggle, it is no less a struggle for the very future of this country.

I've seen some DC apologists say, "But hey, you got a tax cut." Well sure, that $500/year is nice and all, but somehow that doesn't balance the scales when measured against bankrupting this country and saddling my children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt. If I'm going to be paid off like a whore, you're going to have to pay me a lot more than that. Frankly, DC cannot print enough. All of you who are content to have your bread and circuses while the country crumbles around you, have at it. The rest of us will try to save your asses as well.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:07 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 15, 2009

Good advice

Cynthia Yockey has some pretty good thoughts here. I think that I'll take her advice in just a little while.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 09, 2009

Required reading

Robert Stacy McCain waxes eloquent. Take the time to read his post in its entirety.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:39 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

What he said

Ezra Levant links to a letter to the editor of the Southern Utah University newspaper. It is so good that I'm reprinting it in its entirety:

In light of SUU officials plan to designate "Free Speech Zones" on campus, I thought I'd offer my assistance. Grab a map. OK, ready?

All right, you see that big area between Canada and Mexico, surrounded by lots of blue ink on the East and West? You see it?

There's your bloody Free Speech Zone.

Jeffrey Wilbur

Senior communication major from Bountiful

The best hope for this country is that there are a lot more Jeffrey Wilburs out there.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 03, 2009

"What is thy bidding, my master?" [/Darth Vader]

If you had told me that I'd see this happen, I'd have said you were dreaming. Sadly, I'd have been wrong:

bowing to Saudi King.jpg

Bill links to the story/picture from American Thinker and posts this little quote:

This is one of the most nauseating things Ive ever seen. I excoriated G.W. Bush for kissing and holding hands with this Oilbag S.O.B., but this is the fucking President of the United States symbolically prostrating his nation and its honor before a loathsome barbarian savage.

Words fail me.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 30, 2009

Interesting

And by interesting I mean complete bullshit. From Neal Boortz:

Last week Barack Obama met with top executives of US banks. This was his message to the banks: bonuses are not acceptable.

That's right. Not just "excessive" bonuses or bonuses paid with bailout money. But bonuses. Period. They are unacceptable while other Americans are struggling to make ends meet.

Really? Well this American, while no longer employed by a US bank, put his bonus to good use, paying off some accumulated debt and stashing some more into savings.

You know what I find unacceptable? A POTUS who sees fit to dictate actions to individuals and businesses in this country.

What about the banks who took the TARP money, you say? Shouldn't the government be given oversight into their operation? Normally I'd say that you have a point, except that banks who wanted to decline acceptance of said funds were told that that was not an option. Here's how it goes:

1) Government "offers" some money to banks who made stupid loan decisions.

2) Bank decides that its balance sheets are already leveling out and therefore declines the money from the government.

3) Government strong arms bank into taking the money, saying that it is not allowed to decline the money.

4) Government then claims ability to tell bank how to run its business owing to the bank's acceptance of money.

All I can say is that it's good work if you can get it. I hear that some neighborhood lending institutions** work in pretty much the same way.

** If I have to explain that phrase to you, you really need to get out more.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:34 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 20, 2009

Asshole

I see that Eric Cantor voted FOR the unconstitutional bill of attainder retroactive tax on the AIG bonuses. He is now dead to me. Mrs. Hill at Rachel Lucas' place is looking for a needle of rationale in this haystack of bullshit. However, there isn't one. As much as I oppose pretty much all the Democrats are doing, I will offer my money and my time to Cantor's Democratic opponent in 2010.

He's my representative in Congress, but he won't be come 1/20/2011 if I have my way. Fucker.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:47 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 19, 2009

Dog bites man (again)

I don't feel obligated to link to the cesspool of insanity it has become, but John Cole is full of the righteousness of his position on the Democrats essentially ending the filibuster for legislation. My comment, awaiting moderation, may or may not slip through. I'll post it below, after I reach into the wayback machine to show things were different back in the day.

Update: Obviously, John Cole and I disagree over the whole filibuster thing. Excerpt:
As for the filibuster bullshit, we slit our own damned throats with that. I would like an up or down vote on nominees, but I just don't have it in me to lie about the situation.

We changed the rules of the game, and then acted all shocked when the Democrats (who are in no way without sin) got pissed. We stopped the blue slips and other options once we became the majority. The Constitutional issue is nothing more than nonsense to sell the naked power grab, and that is what it was. Bush never expected for all of his judges to get confirmed- no reasonable President would.

See, here's where I think that John might not be seeing the big picture. Does he really think that the next time the Democrats hold the power in the Senate that they won't change the Senate rules to suit their purposes? After all, Robert Byrd did it in the not so distant past, reducing the number of votes for cloture from 67 down to 60.

Let's go all out in this example. Hillary becomes president in 2008 and the Dem's sweep to power in the Senate riding on her coattails. Now imagine that she nominates some left-wing ideologue who believes that it's okey-dokey to legislate from the bench. Now the Republicans decide to filisbuster this unreasonable candidate. Does John actually believe that the Democrats will spend more than a few minutes trying to find some sort of compromise to get an up-or-down vote in the Senate? I don't think so. After some public appearances decrying the Republicans' stonewalling, the Senate Democrats will change the filibuster rule so that cloture can be invoked with only 51 votes for judges. Once the judicial filibuster is broken, those same 51 Democrats will then vote en masse for whomever Hillary nominated. Count on it.

Now I will grant you that a couple of things are off: Hillary didn't win. However, another committed leftist did, along with a legion of congressional Democrats. Also, the Dems are talking about ending -more or less- the filibuster for legislative items, not judicial nominations. I guess that even I wasn't cynical enough to expect that. Silly me.

Anyway. It's now a few years later and John thinks that the Dems idea is just fine and dandy. Here's the response that I left in the comments:

Hmm. I remember a certain Mr. Cole pissing and moaning when the GOP mentioned possibly changing the Senate rules to allow cloture votes on judicial nominations by simple majority vote, rather than a 2/3 majority. When I mentioned that the Democrats were certain to do the same when they retook Congress, John made some comment about shoving a red hot poker or such up his ass worrying about what "might" happen. Funny thing is, now that it actually is possible that the Democrats would change the cloture rules (again) to their benefit to pass legislation, rather than bring simply to bring judicial nominee votes to the floor, the same Mr. Cole is saying "Serves you right, fuckers!"

I'm not surprised at the blatant hypocrisy. In fact, I expected it. I'd been waiting to see how John would weigh in on this issue and-surprise- he acted like a hack. Then again, the sun did rise in the east this morning, so it's good to know some things never change.

Being hyperpartisan is one thing. Being stupidly, predictable, hypocritically hyperpartisan hacks is quite another. Unfortunately, the hacks don't get it, probably because they're stupid and hypocritical. But hey, everyone's got their faults.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:47 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 11, 2009

What she said

From the keyboard of Ms. Paglia:

If Rush's presence looms too large for the political landscape, it's because of the total vacuity of the Republican leadership, which seems to be in a dithering funk. Rush isn't responsible for the feebleness of Republican voices or the thinness of Republican ideas. Only ignoramuses believe that Rush speaks for the Republican Party. On the contrary, Rush as a proponent of heartland conservatism has waged open warfare with the Washington party establishment for years. ... President Obama should yank the reins and get his staff's noses out of slash-and-burn petty politics. His own dignity and prestige are on the line. If he wants a second term, he needs to project a calmer perspective about the eternal reality of vociferous opposition, which is built into our democratic system. Right now, the White House is starting to look like Raphael's scathing portrait of a pampered, passive Pope Leo X and his materialistic cardinals -- one of the first examples of an artist sending a secret, sardonic message to posterity. Do those shifty, beady-eyed guys needing a shave remind you of anyone? Yes, it's bare-knuckles Chicago pugilism, transplanted to Washington. The charitably well-meaning but hopelessly extravagant Leo X, by the way, managed to mishandle the birth of the Protestant Reformation, which permanently split Christianity.

Word.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 25, 2009

Required reading

Found the following via Neal Boortz.

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country.

However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests.

First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a back story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last years Christmas party. I'm sure; all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life.

However, what you don't see is the back story.

I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.

My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business -- hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.

Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the 70's. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.

So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I eat, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden -- the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... You never realize the back story and the sacrifices I've made.

Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for.

Yes, business ownership has is benefits but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds.

Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why:

I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country.

The fact is, if I deducted (Read: Stole) 50% of your paycheck you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy.

Here is what many of you don't understand ... to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now.

When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep.

So where am I going with all this?

It's quite simple.

If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem any more.

Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship.

If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about....

Signed,

Your boss

Those of you who believe that I exist solely as a source of tax revenue for the government can quickly disabuse yourself of that notion. Keep on sucking me dry and I will eventually quit producing. At the current rate of monetary extraction, I'd say that that time isn't too far off.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:06 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 24, 2009

What's that I smell?

Must be bullshit.

Yeah. Good thing we not step in it.

Yeah. Good thing.

If only. I had to convince my mother-in-law that things were much worse in the late 1970s and early 1980s than they are now. She should check out the graph found here.

Hmm. Bill Clinton said that the economy was the worst in 50 years. The Won says that it's the worst in 60 years (now it's 60 or so). I lived and worked through the late 1970s and early 1980s. Things were a buttload worse then than they are now. However, keep repeating that big fucking lie often enough and loud enough and soon, this nation of drooling halfwits spending fifty cents a call to vote for American Idol contestants will start to believe it.

Not all of the people are halfwits, of course. For many, that intellectual mark will remain forever out of reach.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:55 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 17, 2009

What he said

WFB, quoted by Jonah at The Corner:

...The question that hotly follows is why. Why does the Opposition Party refuse to offer a genuine opposition? At this juncture the Statists leap to their most favorite answer to the query. They tell us that the anarchistic, uncivilized, uncharitable rugged individualism associated with the pre-Roosevelt era is forever discredited by the American people. The social revolution of the New Deal is a fait accompli and no political party could rally any enthusiasm in 1952 for a genuinely anti-Statist program.

My own diagnosis does not totally contradict this one. To begin with, I see the issue primarily as one of freedom or non-freedom. To the extent that a fraction of the individual's time, which we will for convenience equate with his earnings, is a priori mortgaged to the government and against this will, then he is to that same extent not free. Since there is no money except the individual's money, and since his money represents his labor or his savings or the produce of his tools, the assessment of that money by the State represents a direct levy on that individual's freedom. Now, if it is true, as the Liberals would have it, that the Repubitican Party could not evoke any support for a program that calls for extracting from the individual only that money necessary to carry on the minimum functions of government (loosely, defense, courts, and conservation), then it must follow that the American people no longer value maximum individual freedom.

Now this may well be the case. Most human beings respond to education, and freedom has been depreciated in the nation 's schools for some years now. The responsibility of the State to regulate and nourish individual lives is not only acknowledged, but eloquently and insistently affirmed by an increasing number of the most efficacious of influence-molders: the teachers.

And yet, there has been no dramatic showdown. There is no tangible proof that the Republican Party would indeed fail to win over the people to a platform of freedom. And even if it should fail, it would have succeeded in alerting the people to the fact that there still exists, in theory at least, an alternative to State Paternalism. And this would seem to be a noble enough and a traditional service for a political party whose birth and early success grew out of its refusal to condone human slavery.

One thing we know: in the past we have temporized with collectivism, and we have lost. And after 'the campaigns were over, we were left not with the exhilaration and pride of having done our best to restore freedom, but with the sickening humiliation of having failed to seduce the American people because we were pitted against a more glib, a more extravagant, a more experienced gigolo.

Thanks to Bill for the link.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 11, 2009

Quote of the day

From Iowahawk, weiging in over at Ace:

Atlas shrugged, bent over, and goatse'd.

A few of points:

1) This is not Monopoly. Real debt is being incurred.

2) Pay as you go, a promise of the Obama campaign, has been staked, had it's head lopped off, burned, buried, and then had the ground salted around it before dropping a 50-megaton nuke onto it. To be fair, I knew that the promise was bullshit, but I didn't expect a steaming pile of this size.

3) Welcome to the AU (American Union), a nice collection of socialist states whose sole purpose in life is to suck-suck-suck at the taxpayer teat.

4) America is the richest, most productive country in the world, but that wealth and productivity are not limitless.

Nice republic we had here. I guess we don't get to keep it.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 11, 2008

Worth 1000 words

Auto Bailout Ad Dec 2008.gif


Any questions?

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 13, 2008

Quote of the day

From Dan Riehl:

America knows a loser when she sees one and that's why he lost against a too-liberal black man. He couldn't even manage to display the basic competence someone wants in a President throughout his pathetic campaign that was bad chiefly because he's the worst candidate Republicans have ever put up.

Word.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:52 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Well, this was predictable

From Glenn Reynolds comes this:

ED KOCH ON THE BAILOUT: We've Been Had.

I believe that the correct response to such a statement is No Shit. All of us who opposed the bailout don't look so freaking stupid now, I guess.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

I respectfully disagree

Michele has a PJM article up. As usual, it's thoughtful and well written. However, I could not disagree more with her conclusions. So I will reply to each point she makes with which I disagree. Don't call it a fisking, because I like and respect Michele. And you will be hard pressed to find anything rude or insulting in the following post.

Yeah, I know: I just saw a pig fly past my window, too.

Anyway, on with my rebuttal.

Is community service synonymous with slavery? Whether that service is mandated or suggested, could it in any way be construed as enslaving citizens?

You have two questions which, on the surface, appear related. I would suggest, however, that you're performing a rhetorical slight of hand with the first to prevent one from actually looking at the second. Community service is quite obviously not slavery. Just this past weekend, I and 100+ members of my church worked all around Virginia, performing many community service tasks, the details of which are unimportant for purposes of this discussion. We did all such service voluntarily, and quite happily I might add. Now make that service mandatory. Although the work is still the same, you've completely removed any and all semblance of altruism. Instead of feeling joy doing the task at hand, you've added a undercurrent of resentment, which will lead to poorer quality work being done. There's a reason that our military is all voluntary right now, and another reason that members of the military prefer it that way.

Let me be clear: compulsory service and voluntary service are not in any way, shape, or form, the same thing. Is compulsory service therefore servitude? Look up compulsory in the dictionary. See if you don't find the word coercion in one of the definitions. Then tell me again why forced "volunteerism" is not servitude.

This week, an acquaintance noted the irony that college students would be required by a black president to do community service. She then pointed out the 13th Amendment.

There were two things wrong with this statement. First, by the time she wrote it, it was already old news that Obama had backtracked on his mandatory community service requirement for students.

Interesting thing about this news: the compulsory requirement had been part of Obama's campaign platform since he started running for president 2 years ago. The only reason, I believe, that this requirement has been changed from mandatory is because of the political fallout right now, post-election. While I could be wrong, I fully believe that this requirement will be changed back to a mandatory requirement. After all, Charles Rangel and others in his party have been pushing for reinstatement of the draft. For some reason, compulsory service seems to be something that that party believes in. And since all such bills would start in the House or Senate, and not on the desk of the President, I do not doubt that the mandatory language will be inserted at that point. I also do not doubt that President Obama would sign such a bill.

Sure, I could be wrong in my opinion. If so, I would cheerfully eat me words. However, I'm a pretty politically aware kind of a guy, and I don't make such pronouncements lightly, or without thought.

On to my next reply. Here is the next part of Michele's post:

The other thing wrong with the womans quote and the contention of some bloggers is the equivalence of community service to slavery. One of these things is not like the other.

Again, the rhetorical slight of hand. No one is equating community service to slavery. However, calling forced, compulsory service anything other than involuntary servitude, or slavery, is comparing two things that are, in my opinion, more than a little alike.

There are thousands upon thousands of high school and college students, as well as adults, doing some form of community service right now. Service to your community is an altruistic thing; it is a way of perhaps giving back to a community that has given to you. It is a way to reach out to a community, to help others who may not be as fortunate as you, to teach young adults about sharing, caring, and helping others, to do something out of the goodness of your heart that will benefit your community. This is not slavery. This is not forced labor. This is outreach.

Why yes, giving back to the community is a wonderful, fulfilling exercise, one which people enjoy doing voluntarily. Once you REQUIRE such an activity, it becomes forced labor. I remind you once again of the coercive element of compulsory service, which I cannot rightly call volunteerism without smoke coming out of my ears like the robots in I, Mudd. The logic does not compute.

It represents values. Slavery is an act that benefits no one but the person who owns the slave; community service benefits both the giver and receiver and helps make the world a better place and leaves a general good feeling for everyone involved. It is not comparable to slavery.

Whinnyyy! Well okay, the horse is quite dead yet. Voluntary community service is a wonderful thing. Not to pay myself on the back, but I've done more than a fair amount in my lifetime. But I cannot make this any clearer: required service is by definition servitude. Touchy-feely platitudes about the good feelings generated do not apply when the coercive power of the state is involved in forcing said labor. And it is, in fact, a form of slavery. The government is telling you that you do not, in effect, belong to yourself, but rather, at least in part, to the government. As a liberty loving citizen of this country, I cannot find any statement with which I disagree more thoroughly.

Onward and downward, I guess.

There are already many high schools in the United States which require community service credit for graduation. Some schools require seniors to complete a project that includes some form of community outreach.

Yeah, and most of those high schools should have their officials publicly flogged. Why? Because they, in their actions as surrogates for the government (local, state, federal) get to pick and choose which projects and/or actions constitute actual credit. For example, there was a case in Maryland a few years back, in which an Eagle Scout's numerous activities of community service were disallowed. They weren't on the approved list, apparently, although if I remember correctly, this wasn't exactly known beforehand. I would hazard a guess that the many hours which I, and other members of my church, have cheerfully given to many needy people in the community would also not be allowed, because it originates from a place of worship, rather than a government office. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'm calling shenanigans on such a viewpoint.

Obama would encourage a goal of 50 hours of community service for high school students. Thats 50 hours over the course of a year, hours that could be spent cleaning up a park, reading to the elderly, working in a soup kitchen, assisting developmentally disabled children, delivering meals, collecting clothing for shelters, or working with local community programs like Kiwanis.

That's 50 hours a year that the students could use to work a part-time job, to visit their grandparents, to spend with their friends, or to read some good books. However, now they lose that 50 hours because that time no longer belongs to them. Instead, it belongs to the government.

Its interesting how many right-leaning blogs are frowning upon the community service idea, though some are being thoughtful about it. Generally, people on the political right tend to belong to churches, and churches are big proponents of community service. So why the negativity?

Because the service that we do in/from my church is voluntary. No one is forced to participate. Those of us who do feel good about it. Suffice it to say that were the church to require such activities of us, the membership in our church would rapidly decline to zero. Unfortunately, there is no such relief from similar demands from our elected officials.

This is not socialism. This is not Marxism. This is the mark of a country that knows it needs to rely on those who can to help those who cant. Its the mark of a country that knows it needs to depend on its citizens to make their communities flourish. Its taking the ask not what your country can do for you attitude and transforming it into smaller clusters, where we ask what we can do for those we live with and around, instead of waiting for people to do for us. Its how communities become stronger, how they grow, and how a strong, giving community makes for a strong, giving nation.

Community service is not a dirty word; nor is it an idea to be tossed aside because you dont like who is delivering the message about it. Encouraging our youth to take part in something selfless is encouraging them to be better human beings. What could be better for this country?

I believe that I've responded at length as to why I think VOLUNTARY community service is a great thing, a belief that I'm sure most people share with me. When that service becomes mandatory, it becomes servitude. There simply is no other word for it. Michele responds to that point thusly:

Right-leaning blogs are jumping on the Obama staff for so quickly going back on the wording of the community service statement and some are still maintaining the forced service part. Its interesting to see that instead of remarking on how the staff reacted quickly to negativity toward the requirement part of the service, people are claiming that he went back on a promise or broke his word. Not really. He heard criticism and responded to it. He would still like to see students entering into community service voluntarily but he rightfully took back the idea of service being mandatory.

Since that mandatory requirement of service was in Obama's campaign plank, I would say that, based on the current makeup in Congress, any such backtracking is temporary at best. Obama's track record as a legislator has been to go along with what the leaders of his party want. And enough of a public record exists for the current members of his party to make me believe that the compulsory requirement will be reinserted. Don't get me wrong, it might be done so stealthily, like reducing the funding to public schools that do not "voluntarily" change their graduation requirements to force students to take part. Much like the federal drinking age of 21 was instituted by withholding highway funds to states which refused to kowtow to the feds. And should such language be inserted into a bill, I'm convinced, based on his track record, that a President Obama would gladly sign it.

One final point to rebut:

On the college level, Obamas plan would ensure a $4,000 tuition credit to students who complete 100 hours of community service a year. With the cost of college education soaring, that $4,000 is like a windfall to a college student.

Giving "free" money to colleges only exacerbates the rise of the cost of college. Cost containment is not even an afterthought. Pouring more money from the federal coffers into universities will not in any way reduce the the cost to students. Rather, it will make the cost of an education even more expensive. I used to work for a state-funded university, so I know something of which I speak.

So what do I think? I think that people in this country belong to themselves, and not to the government or the community. I think that the compulsory component of the proposed "volunteerism" will become a fact, whether overtly, or by stealth. The mandatory requirement was a part of Obama's platform for the last couple of years and I see no reason to think that it will not become part of the final law that's implemented; any current backtracking is, I believe, temporary. And I think that, if implemented, you will see massive resistance to such a law. Our elected officials in DC are not our leaders, but rather our servants. They need to be reminded of that on occasion.

I've read Michele's stuff for a long time. She's a great writer and decent person. I'm certain that she believes every word of her article. However, and I cannot stress this enough, I disagree strenuously with her conclusions. There's no question in my mind that she'll read this and think that I'm misguided, much like I believe that she is on this issue. But hey, my sister thinks I'm nuts sometimes too, so why should Michele be any different?

Update: Jeff Goldstein weighs in:

Some people want to retire alone and tend their gardens. That is their right. Or at least, it is supposed to be.

Instead, the new moral majority has come along to tell us how we need to serve our communities, and will even provide the bureaucracy to ensure that it is done.

For our own good.

Thats not how a country built around the idea of individual freedom and choice is built to operate. In fact, the old line, the only thing I have to do is live, die, and pay taxes, should be recycled as the new outlaw motto with the bit about taxes amended to include something about those taxes being both fair and not punitive.

Community service is not a dirty word; nor is it an idea to be tossed aside because you dont like who is delivering the message about it. Encouraging our youth to take part in something selfless is encouraging them to be better human beings. What could be better for this country?
Howsabout choice. Freedom. Self-determination. The ability to resist what the government thinks is in our best interests in terms of shaping our values.

And a vast public uprising that lets Obama, and Rahm, Catalano, and those like her know that, as Americans, we can decide for ourselves when and how it is appropriate if ever to give back to the community.

Because frankly, it aint their call, and it never should be.

Update: From this comment:

We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not all mean the same thing. With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other mens labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name - liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names - liberty and tyranny.
Posted by Physics Geek at 09:16 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 04, 2008

From my cold dead hands

Community Organizer Obama, I would like to take this moment to thank you and your goons for trying to suppress free speech as election day draws near. While I think that it's admirable that like to associate with unrepentant terrorists, bomb-throwing racist preachers and other persons of ill repute (you little Lightworker you), I think that's even more of a plus that you think any criticism of you is out of bounds. God knows that your friends like Ohio's governor are doing their part to defy state and federal laws to bring in a whole bunch of fraudulent votes in swing states. However, since you know that you cannot count on illegal activities to guarantee your victory, I think that suppressing the people's First Amendment right to free speech is a novel and entertaining concept. Frankly, I'm a little tired of having to explain away my positions and statements when people use my words in context, so I commend you on the use of lawyers and government thugs to force the issue.

To show my support, I'm embedding the video here on my blog. It will stay sticky posted at the top through November 4, along with any others that you decide, rightfully, to try and ban. Video below the fold.


Oh, I'm sorry: I can see that I've confused you. Apparently I chose my words poorly. What I meant to say above was FUCK YOU!

I was serious about the sticky post, though. Please don't be confused about that.

Link via Dan Riehl.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:59 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Congratulations

Barack Obama is the President-elect of the U.S.A.. Quite a change from the days of segregation and "whites only" water fountains.

Congratulations on your historic victory, Mr. President-elect. I look forward to opposing most of your policies over the next 4 years, but wish you well otherwise, as you will be our country's leader in these troubling times which, despite the Kos Kidz beliefs, will not end when Bush leaves office.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:31 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 03, 2008

Public service announcement

From the Virginia State Board of Elections:

Polls are open from 6:00 AM until 7:00 PM Tuesday November 4, 2008.

Go to the polls. Do your civic duty, no matter how you choose to vote.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:18 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 31, 2008

Herewith is my rebuttal

Over at HotAir, Allah links to another bit of excretion by Kathleen Parker. My response to her and her like-minded cohorts is worth 1000 words:

dead horseposter.jpg

Update: Looking at my referrer logs, I've apparently been the recipient of a Rachellanche. Very cool. And thanks to all who've shown up. Hopefully you won't permanently ban my site from your browser.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:22 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 20, 2008

So this never happened, right?

Via Treacher:

Thursday, January 27, 2005 Get to know Barack Obama

When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the livingroom of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him--introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread. His "bright eyes and easy smile" struck me as contrived and calculated--maybe because I was supporting another candidate. Since then, I've never heard him say anything new or earthshaking, or support anything that would require the courage of his convictions. I only voted for him in this last race--because his opponent was a pinhead. And I've been mostly alone in my views. But maybe that's changing.

Thanks, Barack. By voting to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State you confirmed my opinion of you as someone who will not come through when it counts. You voted with the entire Republican membership rather than your compadre, Dick Durbin, and the man you supported for president, John Kerry. Your sense of collegiality is ridiculous under the circumstances.

What are all those people who thought you walked on water thinking now? I'm just wondering who's going to whisper in President CandyAss's ear when Condo's busy playing Secretary of State.

And here's a quote from Treacher:

You need to decide, Obama fans: Either this stuff didn't happen, or it happened but I'm not supposed to care. You need to pick one or the other and stick with it.

Check out the archived post.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

One more thing

Well, I resisted political blogging for a few minutes. So that's something. It tells me that I can quit any time I want to. Sure I can.

Anyway. Read this article by Orson Scott Card: Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?. Excerpt:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.
...
Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards's own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

Assuming that those last 3 questions weren't entirely rhetorical, the answers are No, No and Hell Yes!.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 18, 2008

I AM JOE

I left the following as a comment over at Rachel's place:

Some Obama douche (but I repeat myself) was on Fox this afternoon saying that McCain had not vetted Joe the Plumber. Vetted. It was like I had taken the red pill, fallen down the rabbit hole, stepped through the looking glass and fallen into a 1960s era Jefferson Airplane acid-amplified video.

WTF? Im serious: WTfuckingF?! Do you vet everyone in this entire country who MIGHT have opinions, or ask questions, that make the One look like a fucking jackass?

Vet the plumber? I feel like vetting someones head with a nail-studded 24.

Oh, and if youve checked Ace lately, you know that Team Barry is filing suit against Palin and McCain for trying to prevent fraudulent votes. I dont know what the next step beyond batshit and bugfuck crazy is, but were there now.

Right now, Stalin is crying in his glass coffin because he sees now that he didnt go as far as he could.

Iowahawk takes a break from his usual uproarious stuff to post something dead serious. Excerpt:

Politicians -- Sarah Palin, Bill Clinton, et al. -- obviously have to put up with some rude, nasty shit, but it's right there in the jobs description. Joe the Plumber is different. He was a guy tossing a football with his kid in the front yard of his $125,000 house when a politician picked him out as a prop for a 30 second newsbite for the cable news cameras. Joe simply had the temerity to speak truth (or, if you prefer, an uninformed opinion) to power, for which the politico-media axis apparently determined that he must be humiliated, harassed, smashed, destroyed. The viciousness and glee with which they set about the task ought to concern anyone who still cares about citizen participation, and freedom of speech, and all that old crap they taught in Civics class before politics turned into Narrative Deathrace 3000, and Web 2.0 turned into Berlin 1932.0.

Godwin's Law! you say? if the jackboot fits, wear it.

And here's an image that everyone should stick on their websites. Everyone, that is, who wants to show solidarity with Joe:


2951062466_672d7aff37.jpg

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:36 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 16, 2008

I didn't know he had it in him

McCain is funny in this speech. Very, very funny.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Food for thought part 3

Check out this essay at Zombietime. Excerpt:

The real-world campaign involves speeches and proposals and facts and scandals and political positions and news events. These details, however, are becoming increasingly irrelevant, and have become subsumed by the meta-campaign, which consists of perceptions, polls, reactions, analyses and summations. Until very recently, elections were decided by real-world facts -- but not anymore. Facts and events in and of themselves are no longer important; what's important is how everyone reacts to them. And how do we find out the public's mood concerning this or that incident? Why, the media tells us, that's how.

Or so we've been led to believe.

We're all part of the campaign now. Every single one of us. Our opinions, our actions, are bundled together as a group and used as weapons in the race for the White House. When the media reports on what people think, either through public-opinion polling or reportage about anecdotal incidents, it becomes an endless feedback loop, in which the media's representation of most people's purported thoughts is supposed to influence everyone else's thoughts. And then they take another poll to determine how effective the first poll was in influencing public opinion, and the cycle starts all over again. Since everyone now knows that any public expression of their political opinions might be reported by the media, even the most innocent activity becomes a calculated campaign action. Saying how you intend to vote is not simply an expression of how you intend to vote, but rather a component of the public barometer of how the majority intends to vote, which is then used by the media and the blogs to influence everyone else. Nothing is done in all innocence anymore.
...
One odd thing about public-opinion polls is that there's no way to know if they're accurate or not. Except for a poll taken on the very last day of the campaign, when it can be later compared to the actual vote totals, a poll is a self-supporting statement of "fact" that can only be confirmed or disproven by taking yet another poll -- which is just as unreliable as the first one. We do not have access to some secret hyper-accurate invasion of privacy enabling us to peer into voters' hearts to see how they actually intend to vote, and to use that information to assess the accuracy of a poll. So, if a poll is taken a month ahead of time showing a candidate with a five-point lead, and then a month later he in fact wins the election by five points, we have no way of knowing whether or not the poll was simply accurate, or whether it was originally inaccurate, but fed a public perception that the candidate was in the lead, causing many voters to switch allegiances to him out of a desire to "be on the winning team." Do polls reflect reality, or do they create reality?

The entire Democratic strategy in 2008 revolves around the unproven theory that polls do create reality. Otherwise, there would be no point in continuously striving to inflate Obama's perceived public support.

The real question at the end of the day is this: Are people telling pollsters they're supporting Obama due to normative conformity (which is what I suspect) or due to informational conformity (which is what the Left is banking on)? We won't know until November 4. You can lie to a pollster. But you cannot lie to a ballot.

I hope that Zombie will forgive my taking such an extended entry, but I wanted to make certain that you clicked over to his site.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:30 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 15, 2008

Food for thought part 2

Time to provide an update to this post. I was reminded of that post due to this one over at Patterico's place. Excerpt:

What Im about to say will, if it works out to be true, cause Lawrence ODonnell to have a coronary on Nov. 5. In the immediate aftermath of Kerrys loss to Bush in 2004, ODonnell called for blue states to secede from the Union. So, we will need a volunteer in the blogosphere to stay with ODonnell on election night with a portable defibrillator in order to zap him back to life.

ASSUMING that the pre-election polling is close to accurate, if Obama is leading in the national polls coming out of the final weekend by 52% or less, hes going to lose. If hes at 53% itll probably be very close, but he may still lose. If its 54% or above, he will win. And its not the Bradley Effect.

Why does he have to be that high? Its the revenge of the small-states-on-steroids in the electoral college. The math is actually pretty simple, although some assumptions have to be made about turnout and victory margin in specific states (i.e., that current polls in those states are close to being accurate).

Anyway, time to update my picks:

1) Virgina: I continue to predict that McCain will carry the state, albeit by a 2%-5% margin.

2) Colorado: I still have it in the One's win column. I also stand my prediction that if Obama loses CO, he's done.

3) Florida: McCain wins. Very, very close.

4) Ohio: McCain hangs in an wins by a smaller margin than Bush over Kerry.

5) New Hampshire: I think that I might have been wrong last time. NH will probably stay blue. In fact, I think that NH flipping red would be a sign that Obama should start working on his re-election plans for the Senate. As it stands now, I don't think that will be the case.

6) Pennsylvania: This one has gotten a lot tougher. Polls show a consistent small edge for Obama, but, for some reason, he's spending a lot of time and money there, more than I would think is necessary if the race were already sewn up. And Murtha just called western PA a bunch of racists, which I'm sure will play well in that part of the state. Anyway, I think that Obama probably carries the state by the slimmest of margins, at least right now.

7) The rest of the states remain their election day 2004 color, except for New Mexico, which will flip back to blue.

Oh yeah, those one or two precincts in Nebraska and Maine which cast electoral votes in a non-winner take all manner are probably up for grabs. It would be more than interesting if those two districts actually determined the electoral vote winner.

Where does that leave us as far as electoral votes? I could look it up, but I'm lazy. I will make a final prediction the day before the election. In the interim, I plan to try and ignore politics here just so that I can retain my sanity.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Quote of the day

And it comes from Jonah Goldberg:

I have always said (even in my more anti-libertarian days) that it always pays to have a libertarian in the room to ask the question "Why, and by what right, should government do this at all?"

That question is asked far too infrequently these days. Pity.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Debate pre-cap

The first presidential debate and the only veep debate were both entertaining to watch. The second presidential debate bored me to tears when it wasn't pissing me off, because town hall style debates devolve into panderfests, as each candidate tries to spend more of my hard-earned money than the other guy. Anyway, I followed each of the 3 previous debates on C-Span while simultaneously participating in the live blog at Ace's place. It was fun, but I think that I'm gonna pass tonight. After I finally get my children to sleep, I"m going to go for a 5-6 mile run to clear my head. I'll check out the analysis later, but I'll take a stab at how I think things will go:

Chris Matthew: OMG, I think that I just came in my pants!

Keith Olbermann: Much like during the vice-presidential debate, I touched myself repeatedly whenever our country's savior spoke.

CNN focus group: Obama's so pretty. And he's going to give me a free pony!

FNC focus group: McCain sounded like a patriot, but looked like a cancer victim. And Barry's going to give me a pony!

Brit Hume: Well, neither candidate made any gross errors. McCain had the edge on facts, but, in this television age, Obama's visual appeal might have swayed the overall score in his favor.

Chris Matthews: I don't understand what he just said because I came again while watching the tape!

Brit Hume: Uh, Chris? Maybe you could go back to MSNBC and help out your co-anchor Keith. He seems to be in some sort of physical distress.

::Keith Olbermann performing homoerotic asphyxiation while watching tape of the debate::

=======================================

Barring one of the candidates mowing down the audience with a flamethrower, I don't think we'll get much out of the debate.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 08, 2008

Worth 1000 words

A friend sent me the email link to today's Woot item, along with this comment:

Check out today's www.woot.com product description. sounds almost exactly like what I heard last night :)

And here is the image.

woot.jpg

Alex, I'll take "Screwing the Taxpayers to Buy Votes" for $100 billion, please.

And, because this will go down the memory hole tomorrow, I'm lifting the entire product description, which seems appropriate:

Debatable Assertions

Tom: From Belmont Park Racecourse, welcome to the second lap of the 2008 Sierra Mist/Pennzoil Xtreme Race for the Presidency. Two weeks ago, the candidates completed the swimsuit portion of the competition, and are now ready to take questions from the American people. From millions of questions posted on the Internet, there were only maybe two good ones. So we brought in a bunch of undecided voters to ask the same questions that were asked in the last debate, since they all missed it. Well start with a question for you, Senator Mac, from Paris London of Rome, Texas.

Paris London, voter: My question is about the economy. Oh my God, what the hell are we going to do? What the hell, man? Somebody, for Gods sake, do something!

Senator Mac: My friend, a lot of Americans are angry, confused, and fearful right now. I should know. Im one of them. People are hurting, and not just those people who deserve it. Why, just the other day, I paid $6.99 for the very same buffet I used to pay $6.49 for. And that was the early bird special. Its clear that something, anything, needs to be done, no matter how feckless or ineffectual. So I am instructing my subordinates to suspend my campaign until the next question in this debate. Its time to get serious, my friends.

Senator Bam: While theyve been living the high life on Wall Street, all the lowlifes are living on Main Street. Things have been positively 4th Street, but a nightmare on Elm Street. Weve seen 221 Baker Street turn into 21 Jump Street. But look: the thing we have to do is cut the strings on these golden parachutes. I pledge to you that within two years, I will eliminate not only golden parachutes, but every color of parachute besides the red, white, and blue.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: Ill provide convenient, safe space heating at a reasonable price. Also, all money will be given away free. I mean, were the government, right? We can always print more.

Tom: And for our next question, over there in section F, Brad Nair of Bald Mountain, Wyoming.

Brad Nair, voter: Hoo hoo hoo! Section F rules! All right! Listen, Senator Bam, I do a lot of funnycar racing, I run the electric in my house off a gasoline generator, and I drive my SUV from my front door to the garage where I keep my bigger SUV. So the high price of gasoline is really hitting me in the wallet. What are you going to do for me so I dont have to change my own behavior in any way?

Senator Bam: Weve got to end our dependence on foreign oil. Every dollar we send to Alberta, Saskatchewan, and other foreign powers gets turned against us in international amateur hockey competition. But look, its not going to happen overnight. Thats why we have got to invest in alternative energy sources right now, because weve got to recognize that the sun is not going to be there forever. We need to grab that solar power while we can.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: The greatest energy resource in America is right under our noses: electricity. I mean, come on: it just comes out of holes in the wall! You dont need to mine anything or burn anything or whatever. And when it runs out, you just go flip the circuit breaker back. As an electrical appliance myself, let me come out and say that Im a very strong supporter of electricity. If that makes me unpopular, so be it.

Senator Mac: My friends, let me tell you what my friends not you guys in the audience, my other friends up here on stage have really done beyond their fancy rhetoric and correct pronunciations of foreign words. Senator Bam voted 38 no, 125 no, 497 times to raise the price of gasoline. Approximately every four seconds, Senator Bam votes to raise the price of gasoline. There, he just did it again. And DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater has a secret of his own: hell raise taxes on 119% of Americans by an average of 900%, and require each household to offer up two goats and three pecks of turnips. Dont bother looking in his platform for this. Its not in there. Fortunately, I overheard him talking about it in the mens room.

Tom: The next question is to you, DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater, and it comes from Dale Glenn of Glendale, California.

Dale Glenn, voter: How can you the American people trust any of the candidates given the varying positions youve all adopted over the years?

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: Thank you for the question, Dale, and thanks for just being you. Dale, Im proud of my ability to take multiple positions if the situation demands it, Dale. When the American people need a floor heater, I can be a floor heater. But Dale, in times of great crisis that can somehow be helped by me being a tower heater, well, Im your man, too. Either way, Dale, I provide 1500 watts of radiant, room-filling heat. I dont think any of the other candidates can say that, Dale.

Senator Mac: My friends, this one talks a good game. But when the time came to stand up for America, he voted for a budget festooned with goodies. And if theres one thing I hate, its goodies. In my day, when we wanted a treat, we soaked a piece of stale bread in castor oil and sprinkled nutmeg on it, with a glass of beet juice on the side. If that was good enough for me, its good enough for America. And when Im in the White House, it will be.

Senator Bam: Ive never wavered in my commitment to the American people to remain fully committed to the American people. Thats the kind of commitment Im committed to. But look: we dont need more of the same policies weve seen these last eight years. Reality is not a Choose Your Own Adventure novel, where you can go back and see what would have happened if youd investigated the sound coming from the crash-landed UFO instead of following the mysterious light into the woods. Its time for a president with the judgment to choose the right adventure the first time.

Tom: Heres another question from section F, on the subject of healthcare. Lets hear from Heather Gray of Pantone, Louisiana.

Heather Gray, voter: I am currently spending all of my income on health insurance for myself and my eight cats. Do you have anything really petty and irrelevant to say about lowering health care costs?

Senator Bam: Youre right, health insurance is too expensive. But look: what I would do is, put your health records online.

Senator Mac: Ive heard of this online, my friends, and it sounds like a great place to store your most confidential, personal information.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: I have to agree. Put everybodys health records on the Internet. To those who object on the grounds of possible breaches of security and privacy, Ill just say this: ever heard of a little thing called a password?

Tom: Id like to ask the viewers at home to please, if youre playing a drinking game, to stop drinking when you hear my friend or but look, for your own sake and that of your loved ones. Now well turn to foreign affairs. Our next question comes from the Internet, and has to do with Pakistan. Is al-Qaeda up in ur mountns plannin ur massacres, or do all their base belong to Pakistan?

Senator Mac: Pakistan is a real problem, my friends. But the deal is, we have to pretend we like them or we wont get invited to Bangladeshs skating party. When it comes to bin Laden, I will stop at nothing to capture him. But if Pakistan asks, you didnt hear that from me, OK?

Senator Bam: The fact of the reality of the matter is, Osama bin Laden is still out there somewhere. Hes not in Iraq, and hes not here tonight, so thats two places we can cross off our list. But look: every breath he takes, every move he makes, every bond he breaks, every step he takes, well be watching him.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: I say we stomp him, and then we tattoo him, and then we hang him, and then we kill him.

Tom: The next question will again come from section F, from a Mr. Pladimir Vutin of Moscow, Idaho.

Pladimir Vutin, voter: Thank you in the name of the motherland. Candidates, the mighty Russian empire was bringing light to the darkness of Central Asia when America was just a bunch of naked beaver-trappers with malaria. How dare you lecture one of the most advanced civilizations on Earth about how to conduct her internal affairs?

Senator Bam: The problem was, Putin went down to Georgia, looking for a soul to steal. But look: he paid for it all with Grannys caviar money. Russias laughing all the way to the bank, or wherever they keep their money in that messed-up country. So until we end our dependence on foreign caviar, Russia wins.

Senator Mac: Our friends in Georgia must know that they have friends in us, my friends. That is why I will always, always stand by those brave, brave Duke boys. Theyre just good ol boys, never meaning no harm. And theyre fighting the system like a true modern-day Robin Hood.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: See, the reason the Russians are such jerks is simple: theyre cold. Send a couple hundred million of me over there and see if they dont kinda let all that Georgia and Chechnya-type crap just kinda slide off their backs.

Tom: And our final question tonight also comes from the Internet, and it has something of a Zenlike quality: what do you not know that cannot be unknown, and when did you know it?

Senator Bam: Im glad someone has finally asked that. But look: as I travel this nation seeking the votes of Americans, Im constantly reminded that people need help. Right now, somebody out there has a flat tire. Somebody is trying to reach something on a high shelf, only to find that in America today, reaching high shelves is a right reserved only for the tall. Somebody else has just run out of brown sugar, and may be turning to a neighbor or a relative just to finish the recipe they started. I say, its governments job to give these people a hand. This is the best of America at its worst. This is the highest point of our lowest moment. And its time for the beginning of the middle of the end. Thank you.

Senator Mac: Heres what I know. My friends, our nation faces challenges the likes of which weve never seen. The recession. The fuel crisis. The gathering storm over Iran. And the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But with a leader like President Reagan, Im confident that our nation will see its way through the 1980s in better shape than ever. And if you, the good people of Arizona see fit to elect me Senator, I pledge to always fight for your interests, against the special interests. Not that youre not special in your own way. You know what Im saying. Thank you.

DeLonghi Multi-Position Ceramic Heater: Wait, what? What do I know no, what do I not know? And what, now? I think I missed part of the question.

Tom: Thank you to the candidates, and to the horses of Belmont Park. Good night.

You know what's most bothersome? The fact that the ceramic heater makes more sense than either candidate right now.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 03, 2008

My reaction

Okay, once more into the political breach. I did watch the veep debate last night, while simultaneously following threads on 3-5 blogs; my wife called me an absolute dork. Anyway, I thought that Palin did well. There were times when she was out of her depth on subjects (not surprising, she's been on the national stage for about 5 weeks), but she managed to swerve into similar experience earned in her capacity as mayor and governor. Biden also did okay, but I think, at times, he forgot about the split screen when Gov. Palin was speaking. Gore lost the election when people all over the country saw him sighing and making upset faces whenever Bush spoke during their first debate. However, one downside for Joe was that he lied. A lot. Shamelessly and repeatedly, as if by sheer repetition he could make his statements more true. I'm a political junkie, so I noticed 8-10 of Senator Biden's prevarications right when he said them. I realize that debaters will, at times, stretch the truth in ways that serve their purpose, but I did not know that being able to spout complete bullshit was allowed, or that said spouting would be considered a net positive. Jonah has a pretty good analysis of this:

What struck me the most about the debate and it probably helped having quintessential Obamaphiles in the room was how Bidens gravitas is derived almost entirely from the fact that he can lie with absolute passion and conviction. He just plain made stuff up tonight. I read a long list tonight in my debate with Beinart here at Wash U, we can visit the details tomorrow.

Just a few: Flatly asserting that Obama never said hed meet with Achmenijad; that absolute nonsense about spending more in a month in Iraq than weve spent in Afghanistan (let me say it again, he said as if he was hammering home a real fact); the bit about McCain voting with Obama on raising taxes; his vote in favor of the war etc.

Its amazing how the impulse to see Biden as the more qualified and serious guy stems almost entirely from his ability to be a convincing b.s. artist. Im not saying Palin was always honest or unrehearsed, but when she offers up a catchphrase or a talking point, you can tell. When Biden spews up a warm fog of deceitful gassbaggery the response seems to be what a great grasp of the issues he has!

His ability, nay his eagerness, to fake not only the facts but his sincerity is so shameless many pundits seem either mesmerized by it or scared to call him on it. Id call his fakery passive aggressive except its actually just aggressive aggressive. Beyond being a tool of trial lawyers, I never saw much similarity between Biden and John Edwards, but tonight I was really struck by how alike the two are. Edwards fakes being an everyman, and Biden does too. But his real fraud is intellectual seriousness. He talks like an intellectually mature person, but thats all it is talk.

Update: More from Jonah:

And, again, I never said that Palin was pure. My point is that Biden showed himself to an exceptionally facile liar. He makes stuff up with great passion, conviction and seeming command of the substance. So it just bugs me when people say he's better on the substance. I could be a great physicist if I'm not held to a requirement to be factually correct;

"Well, Gwen, that's an interesting question. As we all know the hamster spinning at the earth's core runs in a counter-clockwise direction. Let me repeat that so everyone understands. That hamster does not run in a clockwise direction, that would be madness. It's counter clockwise. That's why our lakes and rivers don't simply turn into a fine mist, and why our atmosphere doesn't simply spontaneously combust. This is something that my dear friend John McCain just doesn't understand. And it saddens me."

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 01, 2008

Tomorrow night's debate

I posted this in the comments over at Wachel's site, but I, being a narcissistic asshole, decided to post it here as well.

Ifill: Good evening, America. Tonight is the Vice Presidential debate between the charismatic, experienced, intelligent Senator, Mr. Everyman himself, Joe Biden, and his slow-witted opponent, the former mayor of Wasilla. Now lets begin

Question #1: Senator Biden-can I call you Joe?-, please tell us about how much you love your family and how it pains you to have to leave them for hours every day, riding Amtrak in to DC to do work on behalf of the American people.

Joe Biden: Snakes! Get em off me!

Iffil: Thank you, Joe. Now, former mayor Palin, please explain to everyone why a bubble-headed former beauty pageant runner-up like yourself should even be included in this debate? Please, no mention of I was asked to be on the ticket because youll only embarrass yourself.

Gov. Palin: Gwen, Id first like to say that maybe someone should help Senator Biden.

::Biden beating his head on the podium::

And next, Id like to

Ifill: Times up. Onto the next question.

Gov. Palin: I thought that Id be allowed to respond?

Ifill: HAHAHAHAHA! You thought?! Youre killing me! HAHAHA! ::sniffs, wipes away tears:: Anyway, Senator Biden, please tell us why you graciously allowed to share the stage with this killer of polar bears.

Biden: ::whipping out his junk and shaking it at the camera:: Look! I can go pee-pee like a big boy now.

::proceeds to urinate on stage::

Gov. Palin: Ms. Ifill, isnt this a bit inappropriate?

Ifill: No one cares about your prudish, Puritanical ideas. Now go back to blaming rape victims, or raping them yourself, or whatever you do when your husband isnt incestuously breeding with your gap-toothed offspring.

::another 45-50 minutes or so of this::

Ifill: Now, one final questions for our next Vice President and the stupid bimbo who shares the stage with him. Please tell us, in your own words, why you would make a good Vice President. Sarah, go first.

Gov. Palin: Gwen, Id first like to point out that Im really worried about Senator Biden.

::points at Biden, who has just set his hair on fire ::

And Id like to say that as your Vice President I will-

Ifill: HAHAHAHA! You actually think you can win?! Bitch please! Oh my, but thats funny. Senator Biden, Ill give you the last word.

Biden: EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! ::running naked around the stage::

Ifill: Thank you, Senator Biden. And thank you, America.

Post-debate reviews

Chris Matthews: I think that Senator Biden really touched a chord deep within the American people tonight, showing that he was really one of us. Sarah showed that, pretty as she is, she really isnt ready for primetime. Keith?

Keith Olbermann: Id just like to say that I touched myself when Biden ran naked around the stage. And I know that everyone in America was doing the same. Lets just call off the election right now.

=================================================

Ahh well, it should be an interesting spectacle. It reminds of this old joke about who gets to leave in the lifeboats. The first man is asked how many Titanic passengers survived. The second is asked how many drowned. The third is asked to name them. I kind of think that that is how the debate will go.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:11 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 24, 2008

Required reading

Orson Scott Card not only adopted the town in which I grew up, he's a pretty fair writer. Excerpt:

Is Obama really so stupid that he believes that Bush is merely doing what Obama called for a year ago?

Of course he's not stupid. He's lying. He's pretending that there's no difference between his position then and Bush's (and McCain's) achievement now. He thinks that the American people are so dumb that they will take his obviously-false claims at face value.
...
Obama ludicrously claimed that running his campaign for the past year is somehow comparable to governing a state. What a laugh! In the campaign, everybody serves at the candidate's pleasure. In the executive branch, most of the employees are under civil service regulations and can't be fired.

If Obama doesn't understand the difference, he really is unqualified to be President, because he clearly doesn't have a clue.
...
Where and when has Obama taken anybody on in his own party? Where is his vote that flew in the face of his party's discipline, like many of McCain's? Obama liked to claim that McCain voted with President Bush ninety percent of the time. But that means McCain voted against a President from his own party ten percent of the time.

Meanwhile, Obama has voted with the extreme left of his party, right in line with the party leadership, one hundred percent of the time.

That ten percent of McCain's votes that went against his party is actually a remarkable record of independence. One that Obama has never even attempted.
...
f we wanted to elect a man who yearns for America's defeat and can never admit to making a mistake, we could have elected John Kerry four years ago.

A lot of us really wanted to elect you as America's first African-American president.

But there are things more important to our future than mere tokenism. You should only be our President if you are the best person for the job, and you clearly are not.

We don't need a president who hasn't the courage to admit that his previous policy failed and openly change his mind -- the way President Bush did when he determined to change strategy and execute the surge.

We saw your true colors when you sneered at white middle-class voters who cling to guns and religion because they're bitter, as if an entire class of "those people" can be analyzed and dismissed in a sentence.

McCain was not my choice for President at the beginning of the campaign a couple of years ago, Mr. Obama. You were. I rooted for you. I voted for you as recently as the North Carolina primary.

Obviously, I have changed my mind. Why?

I learned a little more about McCain. I learned a lot more about you.


Posted by Physics Geek at 03:20 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Food for thought

As I mentioned, I cannot quit politics entirely, especially in a presidential election year. Anyway, Patrick Reddy types an article that posits Eight Keys to 2008. Excerpt:

2. Will race sink Obama? ... The problem for Democrats is that the last two elections were decided by less than three points, and this year is that close, so even a small racial vote could tip the balance here. As of September 14, the average of national polls complied by RealClearPolitics.com showed the horserace essentially even. Assuming that undecided white voters will break heavily against the black candidate in the privacy of the voting booth, Obama is actually behind right now. As my former boss, CNN Analyst Bill Schneider used to say, any black candidate below 50 percent in late polls in a two-way race is extremely vulnerable. ... #8 Is Obamas support too geographically concentrated? Obama will probably carry New York, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia by a total of 5 million votes, but in an electoral-college system where each states winner gets all the states delegates (except in Maine and Nebraska), it wouldnt make any difference if he carried these states by one vote each. If the national popular vote is close, that means that McCain is ahead in most other places: Generally speaking, Republican votes are more efficiently spread across the small states of the Heartland. By carrying battleground states by one percent or less, McCain could win the election without winning the popular vote.

I made point #8 to some friends recently about the popular vote versus the electoral college. States like CA, NY and MA have become even more Democratic the last few years, meaning that a Lamppost-D would probably win a huge majority of votes in those states. However, those votes do not translate to other states, meaning that a handful of states will almost definitely decide the election. I don't have a feel overall on how things will go, but I'll make a stab at a couple of states:

1) Virgina: I predict that McCain will carry the state, albeit by a small margin. Fairfax County, a Democrat stronghold, has grown a lot the last few years. However, polls in VA historically under count that final GOP vote tally by 5%-8% (Dole was behind by a couple of points, but won by 4% against Clinton). Even if that discrepancy is now down to 4%, McCain will almost certainly win the state's electoral votes if polls going into election day show him within 2%-3% of Obama.

2) Colorado: Right now, I think that Obama will probably win the state's electoral votes. If he does not, I think that it's over for Obama. The possibility exists that the debates will cause a shift, or Joe Biden will make another spectacularly Bidenesque gaffe to turn the tide, but I'll go with my gut.

3) Florida: McCain wins here, unless he goes on an axe-wielding rampage in a retirement community.

4) Ohio: It's gonna be close, but I think that McCain wins here as well. Too many 2nd Amendment voters live in that state, I believe, for Obama to win. Also, I think that we could see a 1%-2% Bradley/Wilder (for us VA residents) effect at play.

5) New Hampshire: This one's tight and could go either way. I might change my mind, but McCain is popular in this state and I think that it will flip into the GOP column.

6) Pennsylvania: If the election were today, McCain would almost certainly carry it over the "no clean coal" ticket. Also, there are a large number of blue collar Democrats in the state who appear to be less than fond of Obama, although this group's antipathy will be offset quite a bit by the fact that the state is strongly pro-union. Kerry won PA by a narrow margin over Bush in 2004 and I would normally expect a similar result this year. However, the anti-coal message of the Democratic ticket, the anti-elitist sentiment against Obama, combined with, again, a small Bradley/Wilder effect will flip this state to McCain by a slim, slim margin.

7) The rest of the states remain their election day 2004 color.


That's my political analysis of how the race stands TODAY. How it will look after the debates is anyone's guess. Also, I have way of predicting what national and/or world events might occur before election day that could influence the race. I'll revisit this analysis right before the election and, afterwards, compare it to the actual election results.

Update: I almost forgot: I think that New Mexico will flip back to blue this year. Just an FYI.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 23, 2008

Because I can't quit politics

Okay, I give: I can't entirely ignore politics on this blog because I'm too much of a news junkie. I'll make a few points and then go back to boring everyone with whatever amuses me:

1) The 50 state campaign was a fool's errand. Obama, not being a fool, is concentrating on the 10 states likely to decide the election.

2) I still don't like McCain the politician; actually, I loathe him, although I respect him both as a man and for his service to this country in the time of war. However, I like Gov. Palin a great deal.

3) Those of you who continue to claim the Palin is unqualified for Veep while simultaneously claiming that Obama IS qualified for President are, to be blunt, full of shit and fooling no one. The best quote that I've seen on the topic is from a liberal commenting over at Rick Moran's site:

Note to my fellow Obama supporters:

Obama has accomplished essentially nothing in the public sphere. Its a fact. Live with it.

My reasons to support Obama over McCain are 1) I prefer Obamas positions to McCains, 2) I think Obama will do a better job of uniting the country, 3) I think McCain is a man of the past and Obama is a man of the future.

Stop pretending Obama is something hes not. Its waste of time and youre playing a losing game.

The appropriate response to accusations about Obamas lack of experience is to laugh and say, You gave up that argument when you nominated the mayor of Wasilla. And then talk policy.

I'd quibble about his final sentence comparing the Dem #1 to the GOP #2, but he's pretty much spot on otherwise.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 05, 2008

Common sense

From an expected source.

John Scalzi and I differ quite a bit politically, but he's always given the impression of being a decent guy, and not just at his book signings. Anyway, he makes the following comment, which I think everyone should read:

And at the end of the proverbial day, this election is the guys who are the headliners: about McCain and Obama, and their policies and plans, or lack thereof. One of these guys is a rock star, and the other isnt and to be honest, I hope that doesnt matter, either. What should matter, and what I hope will matter, is the substance of the two candidates. Substance is not what people come to rock stars for. But it should be what we look for in a president.

Update: He also doesn't take kindly to anyone, regardless of political stripe, crapping in his sandbox:

Also remember that this site gets lots of people of all sorts of political persuasion visiting, including persuasions that arent mine, and I see that as a feature, not a bug. Also, you know what? Each of them are my guests. Please dont be rude to my guests. Because then I might be compelled to be rude to you. And as we all know, Im really good at being rude.

I've seen Mr. Scalzi angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:49 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

What he said

Frank J. echoes pretty much what I was thinking while watching McCain's speech last night:

He's McCain; what else can you say. You may not like him, but it will be hard to meet anyone half the man he is.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:32 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 02, 2008

One quick question

I like the Palin pick for VP, but is it possible that the excitement and enthusiasm felt by conservatives and libertarians is limited to political junkies like me? In other words, are most people so out of touch and politically unaware that this pick makes no difference whatsoever to them?

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:11 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 01, 2008

Treacher, you magnificent bastard

Quoted in its entirety:

ne of them is little more than an elegant, attractive, dare I say sexy piece of eye candy.

The other one kills her own food.

Related update Related because I say so. From KP:

Dems have been comparing Palin to Joe Biden and laughing derisively at the contrast. But for some reason, the comparison between Obama and McCain - who are light years apart in terms of experience - doesn't incite the same level of concern or condescension.

I actually buy the Obama camp's original argument that Washington experience isn't the only thing that matters. Life experience, thoughtfulness, intellectual curiosity, a willingness to listen and learn, shared values and an ability to inspire and communicate - all count as much.

The jury is still out on Palin but the argument that Washington experience isnt the most important criteria still holds true, even if you have ovaries.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 28, 2008

Convention update

I've always enjoyed Stephen Green's drunkblogging of things political. Tonight, though, he must still be fairly sober, because he's acting a little pissed off:

8:48PM If Colorado isnt in play, I planned on voting for Bob Barr. But Obama is being so dishonest tonight that Im tempted to vote for McCain out of spite.

8:47PM Obama just had the gaul to claim that he wont challenge McCains character. Its not HIS fault that McCain is evil.

8:45PM Tough, direct diplomacy! I negotiate in your general direction!

8:44PM Strained our oldest alliances. Like all those right wingers recently elected in France and Germany and Italy who see our side more and more?

8:42PM Did Obama REALLY just accuse McCain of being unwilling to pursue bin Laden? I dont like McCain. I dont (yet) plan to vote for McCain. But I would NOT go around impugning John McCains manhood.

I told my wife that political conventions have all the honesty of used car salemen
and all the spontaneity of Broadway musicals. She asked, "So how else are people supposed to know what the candidates say?" I responded that I don't care what they say; I pay attention to what they do. Of course, I'm a political junkie and pay attention to these things. She pointed out that most Americans don't pay any attention at all and therefore get easily persuaded by these dog and pony shows. Sadly, she is absolutely correct. Here are the likely responses to convention speeches:

1) He's/She's pretty.

2) Gee, that sounded good. Maybe I can get a free pony, too!

3) Yeah, he/she is going to create 5 million new jobs. [ed. note: this was called vaporware back when I was a programmer]

Fuck, I'm depressed. I expect to be no less depressed watching the GOP bullshit next week.

Update: Via Ken in the comments comes this doozy:

MOOSEBURGERS FOR EVERYONE!

And via Gerard comes little doozy:

"The smart liberals are worried. The dumb ones think they've won."

I've been reading a lot of dumb liberals today.

Final update: From in the tank for Obama land:

For me, the more I think about it, the more this pick is about McCain's contempt for Obama. He really seems to think that Palin is as qualified as Obama to be president.

I know that Andrew isn't really that stupid and it's just his man crush forcing him to say stupid shit like this. The Palin pick might well not work out, but trying to pretend that Obama's 150 days in the Senate followed by 2 years campaigning for president makes him magically qualified to be president isn't wishful thinking, it's absolutely bathshit insane. Then again, this IS Andrew we're talking about.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:57 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

This just in

I can barely stand the spectacle our national party conventions are. They're full of completely rehearsed bullshit passed on as the truth and accepted as gospel by one group of people and discarded as ignorant lies by the other half. It's even worse this year, what with the GOP nominating John McCain. Believe me when I tell you that conservatives and libertarians aren't, like Keith Olbermann, soiling themselves in ecstasy over the opportunity to vote for the Maverick.

However. As much as I understand the "our guys are great/your guys suck" mood after each speech is given, I simply cannot fathom the complete disconnect from reality at places like BugFuckCrazy Juice. To hear John Cole tell it, unlike many actual Democrat strategists, the convention has been such a dandy success that the coming "disaster" of the GOP convention will only further cement the Obamamessiah's lead among the electorate. And while I know that Cole is completely in the tank for Obama to the point that he neglects to remove The Chosen One's cock from his mouth while typing, I'm still amazed at what idle drool he assumes is intelligent analysis. In fact, about the only thing he said that makes sense is the fact that the Republican base is not excited about voting for McCain, something so obvious that it probably took Mr. Cole only a month or so to figure out.

Even as someone who plans to vote 3rd party this year, I've got to say that the thought of how unhinged OlberCole would become if their Greek God manages to lose to McCain does make me smile. Watching the ensuing meltdown would almost be worth being forced to live through a McCain presidency. Almost.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 26, 2008

Hillary unifies the party

From Neal Boortz comes this preview of Hillary's speech tonight:

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 25, 2008

My only live blog thoughts for either convention

I had an aunt die from a brain tumor. It was a horrible, awful death that I wouldn't wish on anyone, not even someone as loathsome as I consider Senator Kennedy. Anyway, listening to the tribute given to said senator at the DNC tonight, one thought kept running through my brain: Mary Jo Kopechne was unable to attend.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:06 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Choice of President

Received via email from my mother, of all people:

electile dysfunction.jpg

Electile Dysfunction: the inability to become aroused over any of the choices for President put forth by either party in the 2008 election year.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Let's get it on

In honor of this week's Great American Mile High Snoozefest, I give you Dave Barry's column. Excerpt:

But in the end, the focus of this convention will be on Barack Obama, who on Thursday night will receive the nomination in long-overdue recognition of a distinguished career of seeking the nomination. His goal, in his acceptance speech, will be to win over the undecided voters -- the people who are unsure of what he really stands for, or who have received emailed rumors that he is a Muslim, or a socialist, or a vampire, or a lesbian. His goal will be to show, with no disrespect to the Muslim socialist vampire lesbian community, that he is a regular person just like you, except he has Vision and Leadership. After that, he will lay out his specific policies for building a brighter future. Then he will turn into a bat.

No, he won't, although that would make this the most fun convention EVER.

I'm rooting for the bat thing myself, but I've got a perverse sense of humor.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 22, 2008

Quote of the election season

From Megan McArdle:

It should be possible to debate the issues in this election at a level above "My guy's awesome and your guy is a big fat doody-head". But it doesn't seem to be. I find this profoundly depressing.

I've noticed the same thing the last couple of elections.

Update: Actually, John Scalzi has a pretty good comment of his own:

I think the race has tightened because thats what often happens around this time, if Im not wildly mistaken. Do McCains ads have anything to do with it? Oh, probably. So does the fact that Obama went on vacation. So does the fact that conservatives have unleashed their poo-flinging monkeys (see: Jerome Corsi), and so does the fact that some liberals have come around to the realization that Obama, does not, in fact, fart cinnamon-scented rainbows.

I kind of wish that I had come up with that particular line, but I suppose that there's a good reason or three that Mr. Scalzi writes for a living and I do not.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 20, 2008

What she said

For the last few years, I've opined that McCain cannot get elected president. Most of that time, though, I had assumed- wrongly- that Hillary! would be the Democratic nominee. And now with the young, handsome Mr. Hope-ity Change-ity as the opponent, Mr. Maverick Melanoma looked like dead meat, especially since some conservative/liberatarian types (okay, ME) will not be voting for him.

Recently, though, I've started to see cracks in the Obama campaign. Once again, the Democrats look like they might have gone with the pretty choice instead of the smart choice. And while I still won't be voting on the McCainiac ticket, I have to admit that the thought of seeing all the leftists in a catatonic stupor the first Wednesday in November does bring a smile to my face.

Anyway, I'll give Karol Shenin the last word:

The thing they [Democrats] all have in common, and have since, oh 2002, is that they all think the Democrat is going to win and they can't wait to tell me so. They were all completely shellshocked when Bush was re-elected in 2004, obviously, but nothing will compare to the devastation if Obama loses. There is a uniform smirk that they all have these days, almost like "silly Republican friend of a friend, can't you see Obama can't lose?" I mostly nod and smile and tell them that I consider Obama a 4 on a 1-10 scale and McCain a 5 so, y'know, I'll live. Blue states should have smelling salts and anti-depressants on hand if somehow, some way, John McCain pulls this thing off.


Posted by Physics Geek at 01:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 11, 2008

When life hands you a sh*t sandwich

Bill Quick has finally decided to vote for McCain. He's not happy about that decision, either. In fact, I'd say that Bill is the complete opposite of happy. Excerpt:

I have often publicly worried about the threat of some sort of biowar attack against the United States, and also worried about things like airborn Avian Flu. I still worry about such things, and I consider them to be major, even potentially existential threats to the survival of the United States.

Now, from a political point of view, I think a John McCain presidency will be disastrous for the GOP in the long term, and certainly disastrous for conservative principles within the GOP. In fact, I think an Obama presidency, in which things generally proceed from bad to worse, would be better for conservatism in the long run.
...
John McCain is probably not going to do much for anything political I care about - I consider him a moderately left centrist - but he is something else, as well. He is capable of making a decision and sticking to it in the face of public opposition. He is a former navy pilot and commander who made life or death decisions on the fly, and then carried them out. So here is what it comes down to: For the sake of my own safety and survival, who do I want in the White House if Bird Flu starts killing people in San Francisco?


Posted by Physics Geek at 04:18 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 08, 2008

Party of the stupid, part infinity plus one

The GOP has a great issue- energy- that's actually working for them. So what do they do? They decide to piss it away.

Its taken time, but Sen. McCain and his party have finally foundin energyan issue thats working for them. Riding voter discontent over high gas prices, the GOP has made antidrilling Democrats this summers headlines. . . .

Still, it was probably too much to assume every Republican would work out that their side was winning this issue. And so, last Friday, in stumbled Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Thune, Saxby Chambliss, Bob Corker and Johnny Isaksonalongside five Senate Democrats. This Gang of 10 announced a sweeping and bipartisan energy plan to break Washingtons energy stalemate. What they did was throw every vulnerable Democrat, and Mr. Obama, a life preserver.

If you're response is WTF?!, be aware that an explanation does exist, courtesy of Rob:

Sound like a good deal? Its not. So why are these Republicans on board with it? Lindsey Graham is from South Carolina. John Thune is from South Dakota. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson are from Georgia. Bob Corker is from Tennessee. Every one of these states has a significant base of agriculture thats tied in with the ethanol industry. What these guys are doing is putting whats best for the ethanol lobbyists, who are no doubt regular visitors to their offices, over what is best for the country.

Some day the GOP will finally realize that it's bullshit like this that has returned them to minority party status. Or maybe not. It's not like you see a lot of Whig candidates these days.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Worth 1000 words

Check out the picture in this post by Gerard.

In honor of this year's Summer Olympics, some new competitions will debut. Here are a couple:

1) The Run in Front of the Tank Relay.

2) The Dissident Debate Biathalon, where one competitor states an opinion, the second competitor disagrees and the first then shoots the second. Yes, much like chess, going first in this "sport" is an advantage.

Feel free to add your own in the comments.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

If only

The Paris Hilton spoofing of McCain ended up highlighting the deficiencies of Obama's plan. Someone emailed to Jerry Pournelle what I think would be a great followup:

McCain moving to the realm of "Cool"

If Paris Hilton can mock McCain (& Obama - but the impetous is McCain) http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080806/D92CVG180.html , then McCain must be moving to the realm of "cool"! To steal a march, McCain should come out with his own mock add:


Scene - McCain in a lawn chair with a beach umbrella; obviously in a 'back yard'. He's wearing swim trunks, Hawaiian shirt, flip-flops, and a sun hat. His nose is smeared with zinc oxide and he's holding a glass of iced tea. Long shot of back yard, moves in to headshot.

McCain - "Boy, I wish I had a job like this. It's got to be nice to have no responsibilities, but still dream of being president!. Ah, well, I have to think about the economy, Iran, Iraq, social security, immigration, and there's just a little thing like running for the office of President. I wish I could work on my tan more."

Camera moves in tighter to McCain as he settles back in the chair to take a nap. As the camera moves in, he opens his eyes a bit and cuts them toward the camera.

McCain - "I think I'm ready for the A-List".

Cut to closing: "McCain for A-list"

Couv

-- David Couvillon Colonel of Marines; Former Governor of Wasit Province, Iraq; Righter of Wrongs; Wrong most of the time; Distinguished Expert, TV remote control; Chef de Hot Dog Excellance; Collector of Hot Sauce; Avoider of Yard Work

That's a pretty good funny right there. If McCain were smart, he'd do it. Then again, they don't call it the party of the stupid for nothing.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 31, 2008

Worth 1000 words

pied piper obama.jpg

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:50 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 30, 2008

Hubris, they name is Obama

Sen. Obama: "I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions."

I believe that the proper response to such messianic bullshit is Fuck You.

This should be a great year for Democrats at the voting booth, but if Obama continues with his self-aggrandizing ways, I might have to eat my words and watch the swearing in of President McCain. After that, I'll retire to the bathroom to vomit for 48 hours straight. Actually, I'll be doing that no matter who wins, so I've got that goin' for me.

Update: From the Corner:

Any man who believes he is the moment that the world is waiting for and views himself as the symbol of the possibility and best traditions of America is an individual of staggering arrogance. That is doubly so when, like Obama, you have achieved nothing so far in your life in terms of scholarship or literature, legislation, acts of valor, self-sacrifice, or anything else that qualifies you to view yourself in quasi-Messianic terms.

One increasingly senses with Obama that he views himself not as a presidential candidate but as a world celebrity, with all the vanity and arrogance that accompanies such people.

Obama, a literate man, might want to reacquaint himself with the Book of Proverbs, which warns that Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall, and the story of Icarus.

Barack Obama is a very talented political figure, but he is not indestructible. And right now he is flying closer and closer to the sun. At some point its hard to tell when the wings of wax will begin to melt.

Obama vs. The Bible

Proverbs: Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.

Obama: "Your lips are moving and sounds are coming out, but I can't understand a word that you're saying."

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 29, 2008

Time for another bite of that sandwich

From the Corner:

March 2007:
Ponnuru: If you could get the Democrats to agree, or at least to come to the table on entitlements or on tax simplification, are those circumstances under which youd be willing to accept a tax increase?

Sen. McCain: No; no.

PONNURU: No circumstances?

Sen. McCain: No. None. None.

Yesterday:

MCCAIN: I am a supporter of sitting down together and putting everything on the table and coming up with an answer. So, there is nothing I would take off the table. There was nothing I would demand.

I think that's the way that Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did it. And that's what we have to do again. . . . I have said and will say, I will say that everything has to be on the table, if we're going to reach a bipartisan agreement. I've been in bipartisan negotiations before. I know how you reach a conclusion. We all have to sit down together with everything on the table.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So, that means payroll tax increases are on the table, as well?

MCCAIN: There is nothing that's off the table. I have my positions, and I'll articulate them. But nothing's off the table.

I don't want tax increases. Of course I'd like to have young Americans have some of their money put into an account with their name on it. But that doesn't mean that anything is off the table...

Try as I might, I cannot envision actually gnoshing on this particular sandwich. As far as I can tell, we're all getting force fed a Mammoth Turd-Burger this year, regardless of whom we vote for. However, I don't plan to help make it any bigger.

One thought, though: the Obama supporters appear to be more detached from reality than your average moonbat. Over at Batshit Crazy, John Cole actually stated that the MSM was in the tank for McCain. And while I enjoy the point-and-laugh quality that the site excretes on an almost hourly basis, I couldn't resist commenting at such blatant stupidity. It was something along the lines of "rejecting reality and inserting your own version". Of course, the Obamalytes immediately started screeching and calling me stupid for not noticing that I had been rebutted in the comments above. Let me try to clarify for their sake, and I'll type slowly and use small words so that they might understand:

1) Repeatedly stating baseless assertions does not make them true, no matter how much you wish that they were. I'll wait while you restart your heart.

2) Linking to a handful of pro-McCain pieces does not prove that the media is "in the tank" for him. In your mind, of course, any anti-Obamamessiah piece is obvious proof of pro-McCain bias. To most people with functioning brains, though, it's merely and indication that not 100% of the MSM wants Obama to win.

Update: With regards to my second point above, I've rethought my position a little because I think that, frighteningly, I understand the warped thinking that drives some detachment from reality. When pundits or commentators exhibit such overt Obama worship that it appears that they still have his cock in their collective mouths, this does not mean that the MSM loves him. Rather, it's merely and expression of reality the way that the Obamalytes see it. Any deviation from that constant political blowjob is therefore considered heresy and proof of an overt McCain infatuation by the press. Therefore, pro-McCain pieces, no matter how rare, indicate that the MSM is in the tank for Maverick. Frankly, I don't know what to say about such sublime idiocy. It's not cognitive dissonance, it's rank stupidity, willful ignorance and blatant dishonest all rolled into one.

Ah well, I suppose in the land of unicorns things are always pretty, so I understand the attraction. Maybe they can tell me what color the sky is in their world.

Update: As much as I think that McCain is gonna get steamrolled this November, I'm curious as to how those morons will react if he manages to beat Obama this year. I wonder: will they rend their clothes and cover themselves in ashes? Or piss and moan impotently and then bend over and take it up the tailpipe? Either way, it would be fun to watch, except that McCain would then be president, which means that the shit sandwich finally reached epic proportions.

Update: I'm not the only who thinks that "the press is in the tank for McCain" is an absurd contention. Of course, most people with IQs above room temperature- Celsius- know better.

Update: Unrelated, but the following quote by Ace is in the spirit of the post above:

And you do realize the point you're making -- even if it weren't so absurdly flawed -- is, as the delightful French phrase has it, so fucking stupid it sounds like you skull-fucked yourself with the Retard-Stick?

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 02, 2008

Worth 1000 words

This political cartoon pretty much sums it up:

Posted by Physics Geek at 06:45 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 25, 2008

Still a long way off but...

Over here at the Coldhearted Truth is a possible outcome of the EC this fall. He currently has it at 289-249, Obama over McCain. While looking at the at pickup states, I saw something that I found interesting: if Virginia and Iowa hold for the GOP, and ChT is correct about the rest, we'd have a 269-269 electoral split. No big deal, of course, since the Democrats own- and will own- both the House and the Senate and will vote accordingly. However, it would be quite entertaining to see the president selected, rather than elected.

In truth, I have trouble feeling that interested in the projections right now. The election is still a few months away and past polls around mid-June haven't proven that useful as a means to forecast the election. Either that, or I slept through the Gore and Kerry presidencies.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 19, 2008

)$*$&%($*& on a pogo stick

I just checked out a link via Nealz Nuze and it's a good thing that I don't suffer from high blood pressure:

House Democrats responded to President's Bush's call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.

Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

I could make some snarky comment about a refinery being run with the efficiency of the post office and the compassion of the IRS, but I think that I'll go with my gut response here: FUCK YOU, DICKHEADS!! Maybe next you can own the fucking grocery stores to better control the flow of the food supply to us fatties who vote for you.

Oh, you don't want to do that? Why? Are you afraid that there'd be a swarm of people wielding pitchforks and torches and carrying tar and feathers? You're right, of course, but don't assume that screwing with our food is the only thing that will piss off us stupid little voters enough to come throw the lot of you into the Potomac.

Update: McQ uses less colorful language, but his point is essentially the same.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:44 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 15, 2008

Whistling past the graveyard

I've long predicted that if McCain garnered the GOP nomination he would lose in a landslide of epic proportions. Turns out that I'm not the only one who feels that way. Excerpt:

McCain shouldnt win it, said presidential historian Joan Hoff, a professor at Montana State University and former president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency. She compared McCains prospects to those of Hubert Humphrey, whose 1968 loss to Richard Nixon resulted in large part from the unpopularity of sitting Democratic president Lyndon Johnson.

It is one of the worst political environments for the party in power since World War II, added Alan Abramowitz, a professor of public opinion and the presidency at Emory University. His forecasting model which factors in gross domestic product, whether a party has completed two terms in the White House and net presidential approval rating gives McCain about the same odds as Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and Carter in 1980 both of whom were handily defeated in elections that returned the presidency to the previously out-of-power party. It would be a pretty stunning upset if McCain won, Abramowitz said.

While I agree with this analysis, predetermining the fate of a presidential election still 5 months away seems, shall we say, a bit suspect. At this point in 1984 , Reagan trailed Mondale by a wide margin, only to end up kicking Minnesota Fritz's ass. And I have a suspicion what the overall political party affiliation would be if you took a poll of these oracles historians. My guess is that a majority of them wouldn't be rooting for Team Elephant, which gives some sort of nagging doubt that some people-maybe lots of people- out there are trying to win this thing in advance. That makes me question my political prognostication abilities a bit because you don't try to create such a self-fulfilling prophecy if you're confident in your candidate's ability to win it on his or her own. Instead, you try to convince your opponent that he's already lost, so he might as well not even try. There is a danger there, though: if everyone on your side is already convinced that victory is at hand, many of them might be tempted to coast along smugly. Smugly, that is, until someone hoists a paper containing the headline "Dewey Beats Truman" and makes them look like complete and utter jackasses.

I still think that this election won't be decided on issues, but rather personalities. McCain will come across as a crotchety get-off-my-lawn sort of guy and Obama will come across as the Second Coming. The contrast will be striking, and the nimrods who make up their minds in the voting booth will poke the chad for the younger, prettier guy, which means McCain loses. However, I will state for the record that some of the pre-ordained victory articles that I've seen the Democratic aides MSM writing lead me to believe that they aren't nearly as confident as they let on. It should be an interesting 5 months.

Oh, and if you think I'm a McCainiac, you should wade through the comment threads over at Rachel Lucas' site to prevent you from making a fool of yourself. Just a friendly FYI.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 05, 2008

Gimme some of that old time new religion

Orson Scott Card has a pretty good editorial up about the beliefs that motivate Black Racist Jesus:

And it's disturbing that he seems not to understand that it's Iran's declared willingness to unilaterally initiate nuclear war against a civilian population, for religious reasons, and without regard for retaliation, that makes them a far greater threat than the Soviet Union's vast nuclear power ever was.

But if Obama gets the whole ignorant-of-history-and-world-affairs vote, he'll win by a landslide.

No, what troubles me most is what he said right after that, while campaigning in Oregon: "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK."

"That's not leadership," Obama declared. "That's not going to happen."

What's not going to happen? Us continuing to drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes at 72 degrees? Or other nations saying OK?

We already know, from Obama's comments at a private meeting with big-pocket donors in San Francisco, that he's an elitist who sneers at the common people who cling to religion and guns because they're bitter about job losses twenty years ago.

But what this statement reveals is that Obama's real religion has nothing to do with Reverend Wright.

Obama is a true believer in the religion of Environmentalism.
...
If we overeat (an arguable concept, by the way; America did not invent obesity, even if we're unusually good at it) it's because we respond to plenty according to the biological imperative of the beast. Those who have a genetic disposition to overeat or to pack on pounds are, in fact, behaving exactly according to our evolutionary nature. So much for their love of nature -- apparently human beings are the only animals forbidden to act according to their evolutionary history.

When Obama says we eat too much -- we, whose surpluses feed so many nations that when we cut back a little on food production in order to make ethanol it causes near famine elsewhere -- what is he suggesting?

Is he saying that, as president, he would put us all on a diet?

Is he going to wave his hand and make people whose genes predispose them to gain weight suddenly have the metabolism of naturally skinny people? Can't wait for that change!

Or is he simply going to ration food, so we don't eat so much? What, exactly, is his solution to the problem of environmentally sinful America?
...
Obama is not a leader of the Environmental Puritans. He's one of the sheep.

But isn't that even scarier?

Here's the odd thing: George W. Bush, in his personal life, in the home he lives in when he's not at the White House, is easily the most environmentally conscious president we've ever had.

But he is excoriated as the personification of environmental evil, because he thinks that maintaining the economy is also important. Puritans don't have to think of real-world consequences. They simply demand perfection.

The frightening thing is that Obama might follow their agenda. The result would be strangulation of the economy without any serious plan for the only alternatives that are known to work -- nuclear power, hydroelectric power, windmill farms -- because they are also "sinful."

I had planned to excerpt more, but I'm already over the edge as far as "fair use" goes. All I can say is that you should read the whole thing.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 23, 2008

Not so tasty. I give it an F-

I see that Jonathan Hawkins has finally decided that, tartar sauce or no tartar sauce, he won't be voting for the shit sandwich Republicans this year, embodied, of course, by the one and only John McCain.

I think it's sweet that he believed McCain on the comprehensive piece of shit "secure the borders first" promise, but I'm glad that he woke up before the election.

Posted by Physics Geek at 05:26 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 06, 2008

My prediction

I predict that Hillary will win Indiana by 10 tonight. Also, I predict that Obama will survive in NC, despite the water that his campaign has been taking on. So call it Obama by 2 tonight.

If my predictions are off, well, what did you expect for nothing? Anyway, feel free to weigh in with your predictions in the comments.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

I see dead people

Or maybe it's dead trees. Yes, definitely dead trees.

An idea whose time has come: increasing your carbon footprint. Excerpt:

Carbon Debits - Increasing Your Carbon Footprint...

Making a carbon debit is a delicate matter taking both skill and time. Our carbon debiting process starts with our FECON spinning shredder and a driver who has vendetta against trees. Add any tree and about 20 seconds and a carbon debit is born!

On a Mission - Taking Away Al Gore's Carbon Credits...
We are on a mission to take away every one of Al Gore's meaningless carbon credits by simply providing carbon debits. Help us make this dream a reality by purchasing one of the packages below. Don't let Al Gore assuage his guilt with meaningless penance, heap it back on with carbon debits every one of which we will let him know about.

Included is the image of your carbon footprint certificate, which I've placed below the fold.

carbondebitcertificate.jpg

Thanks go to A Little More To The Right for finding this link.

Posted by Physics Geek at 06:57 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 05, 2008

once more into the breach

So Jeff Goldstein is going behind enemy lines at the Democratic National Convention. No word yet on whether Ann Coulter will show up as his room with a 6-pack of Mickey's Big Mouth again. Stay tuned.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:34 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 23, 2008

Into the cheap seats

Whipping up on Andrew Sullivan, while fun, has become somewhat boring because (a) he's too predictable and (b) he makes himself such an easy target. However, it's worth noting when someone lands a haymaker on Sullivan's glass jaw. From Ramesh Ponnuru comes this little gem:

Andrew Sullivan comes to the aid of John Derbyshire, with whom he is well-matched in argumentative style and malice. Sullivan, adducing, as is frequently the case, absolutely no evidence, intuits that I "basically want Vatican II undone." The accusation is false, baseless, presumptuous, and sort of insane, which is another way of saying that it does not stand out on Sullivan's blog.


Posted by Physics Geek at 08:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 22, 2008

A battle of wits is no place for an unarmed man

Karl Rove, meet Dan Abrams. Dan, meet the guy who just made you his bitch. Excerpt:

It boils down to this: as a journalist, do you feel you have a responsibility to dig into the claims made by your guests, seek out evidence and come to a professional judgment as to the real facts? Or do you feel if a charge is breathtaking enough, thoroughly checking it out isnt a necessity?

I know you might be concerned that asking these questions could restrict your ability to make sensational charges on the air, but dont you think you have a responsibility to provide even a shred of supporting evidence before sullying the journalistic reputations of MSNBC and NBC?

People used to believe journalists were searching for the truth. But your cable show increasingly seems to be focused on wishful thinking, hoping something is one way and diminishing the search for facts and evidence in favor of repeating your fondest desires. For example, while you do ask Siegelman what evidence he had to back up his charges, you did not press him when he said "We don't have the knife with Karl Rove's fingerprints all over it, but we've got the glove, and the glove fits."

The difficulty with your approach is you reduced yourself to the guy in the bar who repeats what the fellow next to him says The glove fits! The glove fits! - only louder, because it suits your pre-selected story line ("Bush Justice") and you dont want the facts to get in the way of a good fable. You have relinquished the central responsibility of an investigative reporter, namely to press everyone in order to get to the facts. You didnt subject the statements of others to skeptical and independent review. You have chosen instead to simply repeat something someone else says because it agrees with the theme line your producers slapped on your segment, created the nifty graphic for and promoted in the ads before your appearances.

Dan, I realize that you're an intellectually stunted, Democratic sycophant little ass-kisser, but even you should realize when you're punching out of your weight class. Tell you what, though: I'll match you up against my 5 year old son. And don't worry: I'll tell him to take it easy on you.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 16, 2008

You're guilty

Now we will conduct a proper show trial.

Radley Balko links to a story which displays more evidence of the increasingly acrimonious relationship between cops and the "justice" system and us, the general public. It's disturbing. While I'm all in favor of putting actual criminals behind bars, I'm quite concerned that law enforcement now considers the citizens of this country as mere pawns in some bizarre game of "fuck you" chess, where the first move is for the cops to declare checkmate, forcing you, the accused, to prove your innocence, turning the theory of jurisprudence on its head.

I don't pretend to know what the answer is, but perhaps our public servants need to be reminded who actually is in charge. Memo to the police: it isn't you.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

The tax man cometh (repost)

I'll keep reposting this every year because it's worth remembering.
===========================================

Again. And again and again.

Reprinted from Neal Boortz's website, albeit an entry that has disappeared into the bit bucket:

Message: APRIL 15th TAX DAY

http://www.boortz.com/nealznuz.htm
From Neal Boortz

"Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed."

-Robert Heinlein

"There are two methods, or means, and only two, whereby man's needs and desires can be satisfied. One is the production and exchange of wealth; this is the economic means. The other is the uncompensated appropriation of wealth produced by others; this is the political means."

- Albert Jay Nock

The income tax is a vicious, inequitable, unpopular, impolitic and socialistic act. The crusade for an income tax is the most unreasoning and un-American movement in the politics of the last quarter-century.

Editorial - New York Times. 1894.

TAX DAY- FOR ABOUT ONE-HALF OF US

It's April 15th. That day is important for just about one-half of Americans; the one-half that actually carries the load for all of us. For the remaining one-half of income earners it's either just another day, or it's a day they revel in their ability to not only avoid paying taxes themselves, but in their ability to loot the pockets of those who do through such gimmicks as the rancid Earned Income Tax Credit.

April 15 is depressing ... and not just because your taxes are due.

OK , I know you've heard this before, but it doesn't do any harm for you to review the facts just once a year.

This is the day when a simple question can lead to the discovery that most people have no idea how much income tax they pay, though this is becoming less and less true as we go along. There is one group that does know how much federal income tax they pay every year, and this group is growing ever larger. It's that segment of wage earners who pay nothing. So, we'll revise this statement to read: "Most people who actually do pay federal income taxes have no idea how much they pay."

For proof, try this little test: Approach a friend or co-worker whom you actually suspect may pay federal income taxes and ask them what their tax tab was. You will get one of two responses. For the majority of taxpayers who actually get refunds, the response will be "I didn't have to pay anything! I'm getting some back!" Taxpayers who actually have to write a check on April 15 will quote the amount of that check as their tax bill.

This is all by design. Politicians know that if those who pay federal income taxes knew what they were really paying there would be an instantaneous and ugly tax revolt. To hide the ugly truth, these politicians have kept alive our wonderful system of withholding. With the magic of withholding, the money is gone before the wage earner even gets the slightest whiff of it. It's almost as if it was never really there in the first place ... so, what's to miss?

Not only do most people not know how much tax they pay, they don't even know what they make!

You've already asked your co-worker how much tax they had to pay in 2001, and they didn't know. Now, ask them how much they make! Most will tell you it's none of your business. Some will respond, though, and their response will begin with the words, "I take home ..."

If you wanted to be particularly obnoxious at this point, or if you fancy yourself to be a radio talk-show host, you could say: "I didn't ask you how much you took home. I asked you how much you made." Then, standby for the inevitable blank stare.

See how well this system of withholding taxes has worked! The majority of wage earners can't even tell you what they earned! Just what they "took home." It's as if they viewed their "take home" pay as their total earnings! No wonder they don't think they paid any taxes when they get that refund check from the IRS!

But --- if you happen to work for youself then it's a good bet that you DO know how much tax you paid. The owners of small businesses, the businesses that employ about 80 percent of the workers in this country ... you know. You are the people who have to sit down four times a year and write a check to the IRS for your quarterly tax payments.

WHY WE'LL NEVER HAVE A TAX REVOLT.

One word. Withholding.


Withholding was sold to the American wage earner as a purely temporary measure to speed up cash flow to the government during World War II. As soon as the war was over, things were supposed to return to normal and the wage earners would get their entire checks, just as before the war.

In case you haven't checked, the war has been over for about 58 years or so, but withholding is still with us. It's still with us because the proliferation of the "I take home ..." workers and the "I didn't have to pay anything, I'm getting some back" taxpayers are such a boon to our politicians. As long as the majority remains ignorant of the extent to which their paychecks are plundered, politicians will be safe.

Now ... get those tax returns completed and then completely forget what they say so that you can join the ranks of the unknowing.

PROTECTING POLITICIANS

I can't let this April 15th go by without reminding you of what a wonderful job politicians, especially Democrats, have done insuring that there will never be enough angry taxpayers to cost them their jobs.

Politicians pay attention to polls. Polls are indications of the presence or lack of job security. When politicians read a poll which says that the majority of Americans (a) don't think they're paying too much in taxes, and (b) don't see any need for a tax cut, they sit back and smile. Politicians, and especially Democrats, have been working for generations to shift the burden for the payment of federal income taxes to a small minority of high-income earners. They have succeeded marvelously. Today the top 10 percent of income earners pay over one-half of all federal income taxes. The bottom 60 percent of income earners, a majority, as you can see, pay less than 10 percent of all income taxes. Even someone educated in a government school can tell you that this leaves politicians free to increase taxes on the upper-income minority and then spend that money on the middle and lower-income majority in return for votes.

AND NOW --- TIME FOR SOME TAX AND SPENDING OUTRAGES.

We begin with a statistic that should jolt you right out of your seat. Have you ever stopped to consider just how many cumulative hours are spent across this entire country every year just handling the paperwork associated with the federal income tax? American businesses will spend about 3.4 billion man-hours doing tax paperwork this year. Individuals will spend another 1.7 billion man-hours. These figures represent 3 million people working full time all year just to do tax preparation work. Now --- get this. It takes more man-hours in this country to pay federal income taxes than it does to build every car, van and truck produced in this country during the same year. (Money Magazine)

Where does your tax money go? Try this:

Between 1986 and 1998 the IRS spent $5 billion of your money on a computer system that they were never able to get to work. Five Billion, that's with a B.

Taxes now comprise 31% of the cost of a loaf of bread, 30% of the cost of a hotel room and 43% of the cost of a bottle of beer. (Money Magazine)

The two major tax writing committees of congress are the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee. Money Magazine reports that seven out of ten members of these committees cannot figure out their own taxes. They have to hire professionals.

Your government recently gave $170 million to a group called PSI. PSI was founded by Philip Harvey. Philip Harvey runs a mail-order porno business called Adam and Eve. PSI wants to hand out condoms around the world. They now have $170 million of your money to fund their project.

At a series of employee retreats workers played children's games and sang We are family. They wrote Christmas carols, went on treasure hunts, dressed in cat costumes and talked to imaginary wizards and magicians. It was a team-building exercise for the U.S. Postal Service. Cost? $3,600,000.00.

There are 1.2 million paid tax preparers in the United States. That's six times more than the number of troops in Iraq. These 1.2 million people add absolutely nothing to our quality of life or standard of living.

Do you know what IRS form 8845 is? It's the form you fill out to get your Indian Employment Credit.

In 1969 the congress discovered that there were 155 taxpayers who paid no taxes because their deductions eliminated their tax liability. That's when congress passed the Alternative Minimum Tax, just to catch those 155 taxpayers. Today the AMT nails 3 million taxpayers. Within 7 years that figure will soar to 36 million.

The IRS still insists that the income tax is voluntary. If you believe that then you believed Bill Clinton when he said that oral sex isn't sex.

THE SOLUTION

The solution is twofold.


First --- reform the tax system by getting rid of the income tax, repealing the income tax amendment and moving to a national retail sales tax. I've been promoting such a system for over 15 years. You can find out everything you want to know by studying the website for Americans for Fair Taxation at http://www.fairtax.org.

Second -- Government must be reduced to its constitutionally appropriate size. Neither Republicans nor Democrats are up to the task. That's why I'm a Libertarian.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 14, 2008

I think that I finally understand

I finally realized what makes the Instamonster say "Heh" so much. Such insight was finally gained by reading something from the Puppy Blender himself:

"VISUAL SEXUAL AGGRESSION:" Perhaps we should cover women in large, tentlike garments to prevent this. It's popular some places, I hear.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 09, 2008

What she said

The inestimable Camille Paglia, in responding to a letter, makes a point that most of us on the right have been saying for years:

I live in Nicaragua and am familiar with the expat community, and though I know this implicates Democrats, I think you will find this interesting from 2004. My in-laws are registered Ole Dixie Democrats from North Florida, and in 2004 they received two ballots each. Surprised, they asked another American couple here if they had received two. The husband, a registered independent, had received one absentee ballot, while his wife, a registered Republican, had not received an absentee ballot.

It is interesting, and I agree there needs to be some kind of oversight of this.

Chris Farrington
Nicaragua

Wow, this sure stinks like week-old mackerel wrapped in soggy newsprint! Though I'm a registered Democrat, I've often been alarmed and disgusted by rumors of ballot manipulation by Democratic ward heelers in big-city neighborhoods, where even the dead vote. In past elections in some Democratic districts in Philadelphia, for example, the percentage of reported voter turnout has at times been suspiciously, stratospherically high.

Absentee ballots, in my view, should be more strictly limited and supervised. Their promiscuous distribution is an invitation to corruption. I have heard troubling stories from upstate New York, for example, about campaign operatives (of which party I don't know) taking absentee ballots into nursing homes and directing how they are filled out. In unscrupulous hands, this practice is unacceptably coercive.

Funny how the districts with the most suspicious voting activities tend to be Democratic districts. Okay, funny isn't the right word. The word I'm looking for is "predictable".

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 19, 2008

Nobody does it better

Allah unloads on the Obamessiah and the MSM as only he can:

Hey, guys? If the last 20 years count for anything, the best estimates of his fundamental beliefs are that the United States is a racist hegemon begging to have jets flown into office towers to teach it a thing or two about imperialism. Hes a gutless, opportunistic coward who was afraid to say an unkind word to one of the power brokers in the black community on whom he counted for votes as an Illinois politician, and now that hes a national figure hes throwing the same guy under the bus to preserve the illusion that hes a post-racial politician. And youre sitting there cheering him on because you dont care what sort of idiocy or anti-American vitriol you have to swallow to put a Democrat back into the White House. Does that about sum it up? Have I missed any nuance in the U.S. government created the AIDS virus rant that Obama never, ever heard anything about and that youre now willing to wave away?

Obviously, the question was rhetorical, but the answer is definitely yes. I saw Lanny Davis on H&C the other day. When questioned about the intra-party fighting, Lanny stated something like the following:

We're all united as Democrats by a common set of beliefs. Regardless of who the nominee is, we'll all get behind him or her this fall.

Does anyone honestly believe that Democrats will not vote for HillObama, irrespective of who their favorite candidate is? While many conservatives cannot bring themselves to vote for Maverick™ due to our belief that a McCain presidency would do irreparable harm to GOP and the right in general, most Democrats are not-these days- motivated by any ideals. It's all about the pursuit of power for power's sake, which is why I still haven't written Hillary off. The Clintons exemplify the do anything, naked lust for power wing of the Democrats. And if Hillary, as I expect, pounds Obama into a frigging pulp in PA, she's likely to have overtaken him in actual votes cast, which will strengthen her position with regards to the superdelegates.

As much as I enjoy the political infighting amongst team donkey, if doesn't really matter. The winner will grind McCain into a pulp come November.

Update: I go to Ace for the D&D references and hooker pictures. After all, who doesn't? Yet he keeps going off form to post "interesting" and "intelligent" pieces like this one.

Obama, and his liberal media spirit squad, speak of having an "open, honest" dialog on race and racial resentments, hatreds, and paranoias. But Obama has had twenty years to have an open dialog -- but a private one, which is far easier -- with his "friend" Rev. Wright.

Did he have this dialog? He says he disagrees strongly with some of Wright's "controversial political positions." Did he, you know, actually raise these points with Wright?

If he did, his putative skills at "reconciliation" and "healing" seem woefully deficient. This bastard has gone on spreading his noxious racism and hatred of America until his retirement... and then beyond a bit. Obama's going to heal the racial "wounds" of 300 million but he can't get through to his very good "friend"? He can't even get him to tone down his hateful rhetoric, even if he continues to give hatred a safe harbor in his heart?
...
My idea of a truly groundbreaking speech would involve a Cosbyesque riff on some of the real causes of white resentment, starting first and foremost with rampant black criminality and anti-social behavior, and blacks' acceptance of this as not only acceptable but justified -- perhaps even obligatory -- given past and current racial discrimination.

He did not touch on this. He's still pandering to Wright's flock. And it's not just pandering of course; he is required to excuse the black racist, not just out of ideological fervor, but out of personal circumstantial necessity. After all, he was caught in bed with a black racist and anti-American radical, not a white racist. So of course he demands that we "understand" and "forgive" the black racist. He needs us to. His personal fortunes depend on that.

But imagine if he were white and had been caught in a 20 year cynical political alliance with a white racist -- would his calls for "forgiveness" and "understanding," and his maudlin Checkers-style "I cannot renounce him, he's my favorite dog" self-justification carry any weight whatsoever with liberals, the media, or good-hearted conservatives?

Well, it's funny in an unconventional way. And I suppose his use of the word "spirit" could be considered part of the fantasy wargaming genre. But no pictures of hookers. Sigh. Guess I'll have to check in later.

Posted by Physics Geek at 06:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 18, 2008

Coming soon to an Anderson Cooper expose near you

Yeah. In Bizarro World. Anyway, the Bard of the Internet types another thought-provoking piece. Excerpt:

From my direct observation, these Christian Fundamentalist churches have all -- every single one -- had congregations composed of all the races. From my auditing of the sermons I have never, not once, heard a message of race hate preached. Neither have I heard race hate promoted in the social meetings after. Not one single time, not even in the whitest of congregations. I have never, not for one instant, felt anything coming from these meetings that is anything other than embracing tolerance and Christian love for mankind. I have never, not for one instant, detected a whiff of bigotry or of anti-Semitism in these gatherings. Being a reformed radical from Berkeley in the 1960s I have keen radar for this sort of thing. Like many of my unreformed cohort I can detect it even when it doesn't exist. ... What has also become clear to me -- what has been a revelation to me -- in the last week is that you do find racism embedded in some Christian Fundamentalist churches; churches whose congregation is almost strictly African-American. Indeed, scanning the tapes of the Reverend Wright Church that Barack Obama has attended it was difficult for me to find one white member of the congregation. I have, it is true, seen a tape where a white female pastor of another church was brought in to gush over the church, but that seemed to me to be a special occasion; something performed for the cameras.

While I can imagine many parishioners of many of the fundamentalist churches I've attended over the last few years sitting through a lot of sermons on this or that, I cannot imagine a white person sitting through the kind of sermons I've heard coming out of Reverend Wright's mouth -- unless they were overwhelmed with guilt and had a twisted sort of Christ-complex.

Posted by Physics Geek at 06:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 04, 2008

The ideal presidential candidate

32 years ago, this nation was forced to choose between Howdy Doody and the liberal wing of the GOP. Faced with the rock and the hard place, many in the nation went a different route altogether, supporting the longshot candidacy of a short, cigar chomping, no nonsense sort of a guy. Okay, maybe "guy" is stretching the truth a bit. It's time for the All Night Party candidate to get down again.

For you poor children too young to remember the campaign, but not old enough to have forgotten this abomination, I offer this little link as backstory to the whole thing.

howardtheduckforprez.JPG

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:20 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 29, 2008

This just in

So McCain wins Florida and is now the presumptive nominee. Huckabee won't pull out, even though he has less chance of winning than I do, which means he's probably trying for the Veep slot, because his staying in hands the conservative states to McDick. So for the first time in my adult life I'll be free during an election year. Assuming McFuckthefirstamendment wins most of Super Tuesday's delegates, my give-a-shit factor will be in the Fermi-fuckit range, and dropping like a stone.

Kind of sad, because I won't understand the SNL parodies, having not bothered to watch the debates. On the other hand, I won't have to worry about president McCain, so I still call it a win.

Update: Quote of the day comes from Stephen Green:

Now that I think about it, a McCain/Giuliani ticket might be the first Republican ticket without any actual Republicans on it.

What he said.

Update: Interesting comments in this post over at Bill Quick's site. Not mine, as I'm apparently having a tantrum and should be ignored. Also, I'm quite the potty typist. However, this comment is spot and should be read by everyone:

had a friend who was always right. It was infuriating. For example, I wanted to like Jimmy Carter. He was a southerner and a Christian. How bad could he be? Frank said Carter was basically a mean spirited hick. And he was right.

He told me there were two parties in this country, a government party and an antigovernment party. There are Republicans in both. There are very few antigovernment Democrats. This is why a Republican majority in Congress always loses to the government party super majority. He was right in this too.

John McCain is a member of the government party. he will support such things as the fairness doctrine because he believes bloggers and talk radio are corrupt and his friends in Congress are not. He will cheerfully support continued campaign finance reform because he really believes anti-corruption is a more fundamental value than free speech.

It would be a catastrophe for the country to see Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama in the White House. I could never vote for them. But McCain shares their membership in the government party. He would be better in the sense of less bad. Thats not enough. There must be some minimum standard and McCain doesnt meet mine.

If John McCain is the Republican nominee, I will vote third party or leave the Presidential selection blank. I am not angry. I do not hate John McCain. I simply cannot vote for him.

Excellent. Now I'll back to flinging poo at the walls.

Update: Excellent discussion/fight over at Rachel Lucas' site. Bill Whittle , someone who I respect greatly, weighs in with several thoughtful posts with which I could not disagree more.

There are plenty of people who think McCain is a fine candidate. I worry about those people, but I know that they exist. However, there seems to be large number of people who think that he's worth nominating because "he can win". Remember Kerry in 2004? How did that work out for the Democrats? In any event, that line of reasoning is flawed because McCain cannot win in the general and you're off your rocker if you think differently. In fact, it's absolutely need more meds and a padded room batshit crazy.

Look, you want to vote for someone because you think they can win, you might as well vote for Hillary or wear a New England Patriots jersey.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:38 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 25, 2008

Post debate wrapup

I didn't actually watch it last night because (a) I had some clothes to fold and (b) we need to get this crap over with. Seriously, this 2008 campaign started back 2001. Just have a nice tall glass of STFU and get on with the voting.

Anyway. Stephen Green livedrunkblogged the event. Some of his comments are quite insightful:

7:14pm To Romney: Are these other jokers really tax cutters? Again, Paul got stiffed. Again, Romney appears stiff. You know what bugs me about Romney? If his hair were even only slightly curly, youd swear he was a Viagra-laced penis. The man is erect.

7:14.5pm Mormon Erectus.
...
7:27pm Once you start to think of Romney as a six-foot-tall erect penis, you just cant see him any other way. I mean, watch the guy with that in mind and tell me Im wrong. Were the party of fiscal responsibility. Bulging, thrusting fiscal responsibility.
...
7:44pm The Giant Man Penis has some penetrating insights on China and the economy.
...
7:56pm Giuliani just accused Romney of being too lawyerly. Which is probably true, especially if the lawyer in question is a six-foot man penis.
...
8:31pm The six-foot man-penis is running on his record, and his record is stiffly pro-life and anti-gay. Very stiffly anti-gay. Suspiciously stiffly and handsomely anti-gay.

Good times, good times.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 24, 2008

One more thing

If things turn out how I fear they might during this presidential campaign, it will actually prove quite liberating to me because I simply will not care. If [insert Democrat here] squares off against John McCain, I will ignore the process, the debates, the polls and pretty much any news channel until after the first Tuesday in November. My give-a-shit factor will immediately reach the Fermi fuckit range, and it will be dropping like a stone.

You know what? Go ahead: nominate McCain. All that time and energy I would have normally wasted during an election year will be freed up. I can spend more time with my family, or doing odd jobs around the house. Hell, licking clean all of the bathrooms in Grand Central Station would look more appealing than watching the party commit Mac-icide.

Update: Mike at Cold Fury nails it, as usual:

Sure, the current GOP candidates are in fact perfectly reasonable choices for Democrats, mushy-middle Republicans, and other liberals. Conservatives, federalists, and libertarians, youll get nothing and if folks who agree with the Anchoress have their way, youll damned well like it, too. Now get back in line and stop sniveling.

Look, contrary to the snide, insulting assertions of childishness and petulance from the anybody-GOP-will-do crowd, nobody is looking for perfect, and nobody expects it, either. What we are looking for is an actual conservative: someone to vote for instead of against. With teh Fred! hanging it up and nobody ever said he was perfect, either, by the way; his since-recanted support for McCain-Feingold was troublesome, to say the least the GOP simply does not have one on offer this year.

Since McCain is perfectly willing to countenance disregarding the First Amendment; Romney and Rudy are ditto on the Second; Hucklebee is a perfect storm of anti-Federalist self-contradiction; and all of them have been pro-illegal immigration and amnesty until required politically to do that most awkward of dances, the Politico Flop I have to wonder: are there any bedrock conservative principles at all that you GOP-firsters arent willing to sell out on?
...
But just because the GOP offers up 12 percent less liberal excrement doesnt mean it isnt still a shit sandwich. And some of us dislike the taste enough to decline the damned thing when the GOP lifts the cover off the latest steaming pile on the same old tarnished, filthy platter.

Update: Okay, this from Joe is too good not to excerpt:

Perhaps had you Republicans thought about giving your natural base a candidate they could vote for a little sooner, your party wouldnt be imploding. But go ahead: you geniuses keep right on pandering to the mushy middle, the unprincipled, the undecided. Keep right on ignoring the folks who brought your party back from near extinction in the post-Nixon years. Make sure your candidates dont try to run a campaign outside the parameters set by your sworn enemies, the media. Use Fred as your object lesson of what happens to candidates who dont bow at the progressives media altar, and play by the other sides rules. Show your ever-dwindling supporters how good little bitches let the other guy set the agenda and frame the issues. And whatever you do, dont vary the lockstep march down the Iwannabea Dem trail lest the lemmings see the cliff youre leading them over before you reach it.

Youve learned nothing at all from Reagan or the Contract with America. Youve been cheek-and-jowl with the Democrats at the taxpayers feeding trough for so long now that not only do you look and sound just like them, you want to be them. To paraphrase a great American, I didnt leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me.

And so you bloody fools are going to suffer a historic defeat: worse than Bob Doles embarassment, maybe even worse than Mondales disgrace. Congratulations, youve certainly earned it. Unfortunately, its the nation that will pay.

Final update: I've been wasting my time. The ideal presidential candidate is right here. The naysayers have already lined up.

Final update- and this time, I mean it!: I've seen lots of bloggers- who shall remain nameless- accuse me of whining, pouting and being a brat in general because I won't vote for a liberal RINO over a liberal Democrat. They (you know who they are) say that I'm pissed off because I won't get the perfect candidate. Allow to respond fully:

1) I haven't had the opportunity to vote for my ideal candidate once. Ever. And this will be the 7th presidential campaign in which I could legally vote.

2) I don't plan to take my ball and go home. I will vote in the general election, I just won't be voting for McCain or [insert Democrat here]. Third party candidates exist and, your pedanticism notwithstanding, I have the right to vote for whomever I want including, but not limited to, me. My vote won't be wasted, it will simply be used however I see fit.

3) Blow me.

4) Seriously. Fucking blow me, you sanctimonious suckers of big swinging GOP dicks. You want to keep bending over and taking it up the ass while screaming that the other guy/gal is worse, go right ahead. But don't presume to lecture me on how much better the RINO assfuck is than the one the Dems are sure to inflict on me.

5) I need a beer. Guess I'll go home and brew a new batch tonight.

What do you mean, #5 doesn't belong in that list? It's not a perfect list, but it's the only one here. Why are you looking for a perfect list instead of taking what's here?!

I keeded before: Final Update: Via Ace comes this little Ann Coulter nugget:

John McCain is Bob Dole minus the charm, conservatism and youth. Like McCain, pollsters assured us that Dole was the most "electable" Republican. Unlike McCain, Dole didn't lie all the time while claiming to engage in Straight Talk.


Posted by Physics Geek at 08:27 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 22, 2008

Uh no

While I certainly understand Beth's position on a possible McCain candidacy versus whatever nutjob the Democrats nominate, I do not share her conclusion that voting for McCain would be the lesser of two evils. From George Will's recent column and McAmnesty:

In ABC's New Hampshire debate, McCain said: "Why shouldn't we be able to reimport drugs from Canada?" A conservative's answer is:

That amounts to importing Canada's price controls, a large step toward a system in which some medicines would be inexpensive but many others new pain-relieving, life-extending pharmaceuticals would be unavailable. Setting drug prices by government fiat rather than market forces results in huge reductions of funding for research and development of new drugs. McCain's evident aim is to reduce pharmaceutical companies' profits. But if all those profits were subtracted from the nation's health care bill, the pharmaceutical component of that bill would be reduced only from 10 percent to 8 percent and innovation would stop, taking a terrible toll in unnecessary suffering and premature death. When McCain explains that trade-off to voters, he will actually have engaged in straight talk.

There are decent, intelligent people who believe that equity or efficiency or both are often served by government setting prices. In America, such people are called Democrats.
...

McCain says he would nominate Supreme Court justices similar to Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Sam Alito. But how likely is he to nominate jurists who resemble those four: They consider his signature achievement constitutionally dubious.


When the Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold 5-4, Scalia and Thomas were in the minority. That was before Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, who was in the majority. Two years later, McCain filed his own brief supporting federal suppression of a right-to-life group's issue advertisement in Wisconsin because it mentioned a candidate for federal office during the McCain-Feingold blackout period prior to an election. The court ruled 5-4 against McCain's position, with Alito in the majority.

And you want this person to be the standard bearer of the GOP? Crap, this party uber alles mentality is what makes me barf at the current state of the Democratic party. For the record, the GOP is in its current sorry state because of this type of action by voters. As the Republicans have become more and more like Democrats, people have continued to vote for them. There's a word for this: enabling. Now they know that they can take you for granted because hey, the other guy/gal is worse. Well screw that. I will not be party to voting for someone whose signature piece of legislation these last few years is one which curtails my 1st Amendment right. If this country is headed down, we might as well hit bottom sooner rather than later to get the rebuilding underway.

One final thought: here is Ace's comment on the whole Maverick-cide the party seems intent on committing:

Sure, we're aware of that. But we always, in every cycle, have the option of fairly easily winning an election by nominating a virtual Democrat. But we usually don't, because we don't just want our party to own the White House, but our ideas and our policies too.

Update: Bill Hollis left the following comment over at Bill Quick's site:

I think voting the same hacks into office again and again and getting screwed by them again and again is irrational. Its certainly not the behavior of a rational adult.

So, by my standards, Mark Martin is not rational. Perhaps calling me and my ilk infantile may soothe the cognitive dissonance resulting from his irrationality.

As that Puppy Blending monster would say, indeed.

Update: I should probably make another post at some point, but since this update follows the thread above, I'll be lazy and simply excerpt from Rightwing Sparkle who, by the way, I actually enjoy reading:

Go ahead, hate McCain, Huckabee, or even Romney all you like, but you better dang well vote for them. This is important stuff. Life changing, history changing, nation changing stuff.

So stop whining. Keep fighting for your guy now, but when the nominee is selected, we better all get behind him. If we fail to do that, we fail at our own peril.

Life changing stuff? Like relegating the GOP to permanent minority party status by selling out pretty much all conservative principles? I repeat, this is called enabling. And it's idiotic. Do I want a Democrat in the Whitehouse while the donkeys control the legislative branches? I do not. That's why I won't vote for McCain.

Posted by Physics Geek at 05:23 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 17, 2008

Political unendorsement

Since everyone else keeps posting who they want to win, I'll offer my opinion: I don't care. I've said since around 2004 that the Hildebeast is the likely winner of the 2008 presidential free for all and, Obama's recent success notwithstanding, I still see her pulling it off. At the very least, I know that the phony, two-faced, ambulance chasing little rat bastard won't become our next president. And what a bunch of far left pandering wish in one hand, shit in the other losers when it comes to energy policy. Won't even consider nuclear power? Not in favor of coal power? Beat the drum of renewables as the answer? While I wish that I lived in the land where fairies and pixes created electricity with moondust and kisses, this is the real world. If this country spent a shitload of money over the next 20 years, we could maybe, just maybe, have 5%-10% of our current national demand created by renewable sources. And maybe we'll have a technological breakthrough which will answer our power prayers a la The Gods Themselves. Until that day, our best bet is to build more nuclear plants. Period. And make use of the almost limitless coal reserves we have by using the newer, cleaner coal plant technology. If you decide against that path, you get to pick which people live and which die during the next big snowstorm. Good luck with that.
Now that I've dispensed with the Democrats, let's look at the GOP:

1) McCain: honorable service to this country, but I wouldn't vote for him if my hair were on fire. That bastardly repeal of the 1st Amendment of which is the proud co-author disqualifies him from the presidency all by itself. Add in his open borders stance, his anti-tax cutting positions and his overall delight in sticking his finger in the eye of conservatives in general makes him a non-starter as a candidate.

2) Huckabee: we already have one of these currently sitting in the Oval Office. A pro life social con who wants to use the powers of the federal government to force his will on you.

3) Rudy: while I respect his anti-crime work and I admire his ability to clean up what I assumed what was an impossible city to govern, you'll have to work to convince me that a pro-choice, big government guy will be the nominee. Think a pro-choice Bush.

4) Romney: a very astute businessman, which I think this country needs. I find his recent conversion on some issues troubling. And his pander to the auto workers in Michigan about the government partnering with the industry to the tune of 20+ billion a year to bring back jobs that, frankly, won't come back, makes me question his sanity. A good tactical position for the campaign perhaps, but I'm sick and tired of candidates promising more of my hard earned money to some group's boondoggle. Truthfully, I don't care about the whole Mormon thing. While I think that Mormonism is pretty kooky, the vast majority of Mormons that I've met are people I would love to have around. So his religion isn't the issue, it's his other positions that are.

5) Paul: I agree with the vast majority of his domestic positions, but I disagree almost entirely with his foreign policy stance. A guy I work with lived in Ron Paul's district and voted for him every time. He agrees with me on Paul's foreign policy. Please, no screeching from Paulbots about how he's the only true savior of this country. And this recent spate of writings that at best were written by someone with Paul's tacit approval kind of make me think that either he or some of his supporters are people that I don't want to be associated with.

6) Fred Thompson: now Fred says lots of things that I agree with, especially his statements concerning federalism. His record pretty much backs up his conservative positions, but he voted in favor of the McCain-Feingold abomination. Maybe he did so because he believed in the crap theory that money was corrupting the political process, but at the end of the day he voted to abridge our right to free speech. This alone makes him damaged goods in my eyes. Yes, he says now that he was mistaken and he might be entirely honest in that statement, but it's a big leap of faith for me.

Where does this shake out? Well, when I took that quiz which matched my answers with presidential hopefuls, my closest match was Tom Tancredo. Looks like my wish won't come true this year. And while I did vote for the Libertarian candidate Browne in 2000, it looks like the national party has decided that nominating kooks is its best bet to to grow. I think they choose poorly. In any event, I will vote in the primaries here in Virginia -a recent development, as we used to have caucuses(cauci?)- and in the general next November. I just don't for whom I'll be voting. The reality is that I don't think it matters as I believe that the country's electorate has decided to do a swam dive into the abyss this year.

By the way, here's the complete quotation from Asimov's book: "Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain." I think that that, in a nutshell, describes perfectly this election season.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 31, 2007

The word that you're looking for is "projection"

I don't normally link to the brain fart that Batshit Crazy< Balloon Juice has become, but every now and then I want to see what the asylum inmates are writing. Today I saw this:

If the Peter Principle were true, George Bush and Bill Kristol would be the street-cleaner and dogcatcher in Crawford, Texas.

Now I have no real use for Bill Kristol and I don't think Bush has been a good president at all, but this level of idiotic, hyperbolic bit of asshattery masquerading as "analysis" provided me with an opportunity to help another blogger say what he really meant to say:

If the Peter Principle were true, I [John Cole] would be licking clean all of the toilets at Grand Central Station.

Now it's fixed. No need to thank me. But the next time you dive head first into a cesspool, it's best not to open your mouth to scream for help.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 20, 2007

Apropos of nothing

Over at Vox's site, I left a comment about what I see are the obvious flaws of the current crop of presidential hopefuls. My final thought was somewhat snarky in nature, but then I thought it through:

  • I was born in this country
  • I'm 35+ years in age.
  • I've never been convicted of any crime, let alone a felony

And I've watched the West Wing and 24 on television, which means that I've absorbed presidential gravitas by osmosis. I'm hereby announcing my candidacy for president. It'll have to be as a write-in candidate, because I don't want to spend any actual money. I realize that Iowahawk's campaign got an earlier start, but frankly, I think that I'd be better for the job. Besides, that Burge dude ignored my request for a cabinet position. Not that I'm bitter, of course. In any event, my stupid, futile and pointless quest for Oval Office is now officially launched. PHYSICS GEEK 2008. Motto: brew and drink your own beer, earn and spend your own money, and kick DC in the gonads.

I eagerly await the returns on election night. Just think how great it will be to see all of the talking heads go WTF?! on every freaking channel.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:41 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Submitted without comment

Criminal lies about address and moves in with family. This move is enforced by a judge.

I lied. I do have a comment to make:

Wrap your mind around the sublime idiocy of what's inside that article. Someone asked a criminal where he lived and he spouted off an address. No one bothered to check if the criminal was lying. Now he's living in the house of a family with a teenage daughter. This lodging is being enforced by the courts. Were I in this situation, I'd lock the asshole outside and tell the judge to go provide himself with some special self loving.

Actually, I think it's a great idea. There are some wealthy people living in the Richmond area. If I end up in court, I'll give one of their addresses as my own. I need to be smart about it though and make certain that the family I move in with has a butler. I obviously can't be expected to fend for myself.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:42 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 10, 2007

Keep that sense of humor

I've been as tough on Hugh Hewitt as anyone when it comes to what I see as his relentless shilling for the old vanguard GOP types and Mitt Romney. To be fair, I actually like Mitt and understand why you want to pump up your candidate, but when it turns into hero worship, it becomes downright creepy. Anyway, Iowahawk pummeled Hugh in the usual fashion. HH, to his credit, linked to the, umm, parody.

I'll be honest: I thought that Iowahawk had merely transcribed Hugh's former post, but I'll assume that it's a little more over the top than the original.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 30, 2007

And now for something completely different

Okay, it's not completely different. Rather, it's a topic that I almost never bring up here on the blog. Megan McArdle has a series of posts on vouchers, all of which you should read. I'll excerpt from a couple. Number 1:

Forgive me--I'm about to get testy again--but this thread on 11D really does seem to me to showcase in stunning technocolor the moral bankruptcy of voucher opponents who have pulled their own kids out of failing inner city schools. They have no good answer for why their choice is morally worthy, but vouchers are horrifying; their response to the deep need of kids in failing schools is a slightly gussied up version of "screw you, I've got mine." Their children's future, you see, is an infinitely precious resource that trumps their principles of distributional justice and community solidarity, but they cannot imagine putting the futures of poorer, darker skinned children ahead of sacred principles such as "Thou shalt not allow children to attend schools run by the Catholic Church" and "Supporting the public schools (even when they suck)". I could do a better job arguing against school vouchers.

Number 2:

How many educated people who:

a) Oppose vouchers
b) Have children who do not attend inner city public schools

would still oppose vouchers if they were the only way to get their child out of an inner city public school? How many of them would accept that their child had to be left in that school because the systemic effects of allowing their child to exit that repulsive school would be dreadful?

Respectfully, I believe the answer is "null set".

And the money quote here in number 3:

Empirically, I may be wrong; vouchers may not work. But we know that the current system isn't working. And poor kids should not bear the burden of making affluent liberals feel better about themselves.

I believe that OUCH is the word you're looking for.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 18, 2007

A possible future

By Doug Ross@Journal.

These are the politicians that stopped international terrorist wiretaps in a play for political power.

Don't worry: they'll blame Bush. Heck, I always do.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Quote of the day

And it comes from Stephen Green:

It only took six years of constant, strong growth, record-low unemployment, low interest rates, several years of a housing boom, and new stock market records... for the MSM to finally convince almost half the population that we're in a recession.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:34 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 08, 2007

Some common sense

Lots of people talk past their political opponents with regards to the current US troops still in Iraq. Gerard reposts an excerpt from his 2004 pre-election column and adds some more insightful comments. While it's entirely possible for reasonable to read Gerard's analysis and remain unconvinced, he does present a compelling argument for his case. Excerpt:

Given these five reasons derived from the facts on the ground in late 2004, it would be suicidal for the United States to withdraw militarily from Iraq for at least ten years and probably 20. The level of forces needed to maintain control can fluctuate as the situation dictates, but the presence of significant forces is a necessity.

This is not to say that the United States will not withdraw, but only to underscore the price of such foolishness. The United States has, through bad politics, misdirection and clouded thinking, made monstrous errors of judgment in the past and is certainly capable of doing so in the future. It is only to say that should we, through a posturing for mere political power at home, cede military control of Iraq and hence the Middle East before the matter of Islamic fundamentalism is settled, and the Islamic cultures fully assimilated into the 21st century, departure early would only require our subsequent return. And that return will be far more bloody and necessary than anything seen to date in what is still a brush-fire war.

I'm certain that John Cole will posit that this post is more proof that the center/right side of the blogosphere has gotten dumber since he left it.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 03, 2007

The rich get richer

Colleges and university endowments, that is. Gregg Easterbrook, in TMQ this week, makes one of his usual detours into a non-sports topic and, as usual, makes a pretty good analysis. Excerpt:

At Least Harvard Hasn't Demanded a Seat on the G-8 -- Yet: According to last week's Wall Street Journal, Harvard's endowment is up to $34.9 billion and Yale's has risen to $22.5 billion. To put those numbers into perspective, the Harvard endowment now exceeds the gross domestic product of Sri Lanka or Kenya and the Yale endowment exceeds the GDP of Costa Rica or Iceland.

It's wonderful that such great institutions of higher learning are funded so well, with assets that seem to assure their continued existence for centuries. But as Tuesday Morning Quarterback asked last year when Harvard's endowment hit a mere $29 billion, why does anyone pay anything at all to attend this school?

Conservatively managed investments using low-risk strategies yield 5 to 7 percent per year; federal law requires many types of philanthropies to disburse a minimum of 5 percent per year or lose their tax-exempt status. At 5 percent, the Harvard endowment would throw off $1.7 billion annually. That's $104,000 for each of the 16,715 undergrads and graduate students currently attending the university. Yet according to College Board figures, the average undergrad who lives on campus at Harvard this year will pay $37,900, that being the official price minus average financial aid award. Can Harvard seriously expect us to believe it is spending $144,000 per year per undergraduate? (That's the actual payments from students plus 5 percent of the endowment.) Shifting Harvard's endowment spending from empire-building to reducing tuition -- either lower prices for everyone, or, say, eliminating all costs for students from families that make $200,000 or less -- would be a tremendous progressive step without jeopardizing Harvard's legitimate desire to hold a rich endowment into the indefinite future.

Instead, Harvard just keeps charging an arm and a leg and the endowment keeps empire-building. One result of the extremely high cost of private colleges is that many graduates feel they must go into high-paying professions to justify what was just spent. If Harvard were free for students whose families aren't rich, or cost much less for all students, perhaps graduates would be more likely to become public-school teachers or Peace Corps volunteers or work for the U.S. Public Health Service or in legal-aid settings. Rather than use its colossal financial assets to educate a generation of smart people willing to serve society in thanks for a great education at little cost, Harvard continues to soak parents, teach money obsession and set an example of hoarding.

Update: Uh uh. I bet that Mr. Easterbrook won't be invited to any TNR reunions anytime soon.

Exaggerating the Case Against Bush Only Lessens the Focus on His Real Faults: There's a lot to dislike about the George W. Bush administration -- the Iraq war, lack of action on petroleum waste, wiretapping -- but in the rush to make Bush seem as bad as possible, the establishment media consistently have distorted his domestic environmental record, which is basically fine. Air, water and toxic pollution have declined since Bush took office; all U.S. environmental indicators except greenhouse gas emissions have been positive for 20 to 30 years, which you'd never know from opening the morning newspaper.

A problem is that environmental journalists are genetically programmed to spin all stories as bad news while ignoring progress. A classic example is stories expressing horror and outrage that environmental prosecutions initiated by the EPA or filed by the Justice Department are declining, as they have been since the middle of the Clinton administration. But it's good that environmental prosecutions are declining -- the reason is that pollution is declining! As pollution declines, there are fewer violations to prosecute. If speeding declined, police would write fewer tickets: Would we be glad speeding was declining or express horror over the shocking, shocking reduction in prosecution of speeders?

There the canard was again as the Sunday lead-headline story of The Washington Post: "The Environmental Protection Agency's pursuit of criminal cases against polluters has dropped off sharply during the Bush administration, with the number of prosecutions, new investigations and total convictions all down by more than a third," the story began. Of course environmental prosecution is declining, there is less to prosecute every year! The Post's banner story ran 38 paragraphs but never mentioned that all forms of pollution except greenhouse gases are declining, and because greenhouse-gas emissions are legal, there's nothing to prosecute. Mention that pollution is in long-term decline, and Sunday's front-page banner story in The Washington Post goes "poof."

Honesty. It's something that The New Republic seems to have forgotten.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 21, 2007

Something stupid this way comes

It doesn't bother me that wrinkled, bitter old Dan Rather filed suit against CBS. It doesn't bother me that he's going to prove ::ahem:: that the documents were, in fact, real. It doesn't even bother me that his partner in crime, Mary Mapes, is going to the mat for Danny boy. After all, her reputation is shit because of this too, so I expect her to stick her fingers in her ears while going LALALALALALA at the top of her lungs. What does disturb me are the bugfuck crazy commenters at the H.R. Puffington Stuff, who claim that -finally!!!- the truth will be revealed. Other than the fact that these loons are overdue for their meds, I mean.

I won't link to the Huff-and-puff-and-blow-your-house-down site, but Jim Treacher does, so go read his post. And especially follow the link to this story as well.

Update: From Slublog's comment in Allah's post comes this link to Jonah. Excerpt:

In 2004, at the height of the Dan Rather Memogate story, I wrote in National Review: Across the media universe the questions pour out: Why is Dan Rather doing this to himself? Why does he drag this out? Why wont he just come clean? Why would he let this happen in the first place? Why is CBS standing by him? Why ... why ... why?

There is only one plausible answer: Ours is a just and decent God.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 13, 2007

I'm a state

No, not in a state. I'm actually a physical, got House member voting rights state.

Sound retarded? Well, it's no more retarded than this idea being considered by the Senate.

Let's call this what it is. It's not a measure of fairness; it's not something that's overdue or necessary; it is in fact an act designed to circumvent the Constitution, with the only goal in mind to create more Democratic votes in the federal legislature. Why beat around the bush? Just give the Democrat votes more weight than those of the GOP, say 1.01 for each donkey vote. Every 100 or so Dem votes would be worth 101.

Sure it's ridiculous, but it accomplishes what's desired and it's honest: it doesn't pretend to be legal or constituional.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:04 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 29, 2007

Reality: it's not what you think

Good article by Noemie Emery over at The Weekly Standard. It chronicles at some length the mental game of Twister that leftists have to play for their non-stop parade of anti-Bush assertions to make sense. Excerpt:

God sometimes seems to be toying with the Goracle, scheduling frigid weather and ice storms on the dates of his speeches about global warming, but his fans have an answer for that: all weather changes, if they are dire, come from global warming. Here are some other choice fancies that the Party of Reason believes:

* Global warning causes both hot and cold weather, just as elections are stolen when the Democrats lose them, but are stolen too when they win.

* A country in which dissent is a flourishing industry is on the brink of a great fascist crackdown, as you can tell by all the books written attacking the president, the plays put on that call him an idiot, and the movies that call for his death.

* When exit polls indicate a different result from the actual vote count, the polls are correct and the vote count is fraudulent, a fact covered up by journalists who are (a) Democrats by something close to a nine-to-one ratio; and (b) dying to uncover a huge government scandal, so that they too can be famous like Woodward and Bernstein, make millions of dollars, and be played in the movies by Hollywood stars.

* That the Presidents Bush, from Yale and a long line of Yankees, who made the careers of the first black secretaries of state ever named in this country, are secretly longing to bring back the South of 1859.

* And, that the Republican party, whose frontrunners are a once-divorced actor (just like Ronald Reagan), a Mormon from Massachusetts by way of Michigan, and a thrice-married Italian Catholic from the streets of Brooklyn, is a shrunken husk of a regional faction, punitive, narrow, and wholly obsessed with extreme social mores, relying on extralegal repression to perpetuate itself in power. To the more intense members of the reality faction, all of this makes perfect sense.

Ah, reason! How sweet it is, and to what lengths it can lead you, when you think that you have a monopoly on it. Political parties are coalitions of interests, fighting it out in a series of struggles, in which no side has a patent on wisdom and virtue, and no wins are ever complete. People who understand this maintain their own balance and bearings, but those who insist they are fighting for reason lose what remains of their own.

Over and over, they do what they claim their opponents are doing, want to do, or have done: make vast leaps of faith on almost no evidence, get carried away on large waves of emotion, build towering edifices on small collections of factoids, omit, deny, or denounce all contrary evidence, build fantastical schemes which they project on the enemy, put two and two together and get 384. People are entitled to say what they want, but it takes something other than reason to look at raging debates and discern in them fascistic oppression, to look at large Republican losses (wholly in line with a sixth-year election) and see massive fraud on the part of the losers, to look at today's South and see John Calhoun's, to draft both the Bushes (and the entire Republican party) into the Confederate Army, 150 years after the fact. Facts on the ground have no effect on their fantasies, which exist in a realm of their own.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 22, 2007

A worthy roundup

John Hawkins has compiled a list of what he believes are some of Ann Coulter's best lines during the past year. Yes, she says asinine, dick things to promote her books, but she still gets off some of the best one-liners around. Here's one of my favorites:

I'm astounded that debate has sunk so low that I need to type the following words, but: No law is ever enforced 100%. We can't catch all rapists, so why not grant amnesty to rapists? Surely no one wants thousands of rapists living in the shadows! How about discrimination laws? Insider trading laws? Do you expect Bush to round up everyone who goes over the speed limit? Of course we can't do that. We can't even catch all murderers. What we need is "comprehensive murder reform." It's not "amnesty" -- we'll ask them to pay a small fine.

If Ann would stick with her strength, which includes caustic bon mots, she'd be fine. However, you and I know that she'll say something even more offensive this year, because I'm guessing that she has another book in the works and she'll want to gin up sales.

Note to Ann: Not everything that offends and infuriates the left is wrong. You might check once in a while to see if your ideological brothers and sisters are offended, too. That would be a sign that maybe you are actually wrong.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 01, 2007

Club versus baby seal

And the winner is... Jeff Goldstein, of course. It helps, of course, that his opponent is an illogical, lying, hypocritical sack of horse squeeze, but Jeff would have whipped his ass anyway. Just my opinion; I could be wrong.

But I doubt it.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:17 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 26, 2007

What he said

Bill Quick succinctly states what I believe is the correct position for the US to take regarding terrorists:

What I do desire is that they be so frightened of us that even the thought of attacking us, whether openly or via some terrorist surrogate, causes strong men to dampen their drawers, and women to run weeping from their bedrooms.

I'm thinking about printing the above quotation and distributing 10,000 copies here at work. Better yet, I'll give them out at the local hotbeds of leftism: the universities. The frightened stares from the students will warm my heart.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 12, 2007

Getting back the conservative soul

Jim Geraghty types a pretty strong essay detailing 10 different principles that, in theory, 90% of conservatives could get behind 9 of, hence the "9 with 90" idea. A lot of interesting ideas and possible policy implementations are contained within the bounds of his post. However, I am a bit troubled by one thing: how is it possible that a political junkie like me has remained unaware of this blog until now?

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 03, 2007

Would that there were more like Kirsten Powers

I know that she and I would disagree on most issues. However, I really enjoy reading and/or listening to Kirsten Powers. She's honest and fair about most things including, but not limited to, the (Un)Fairness Doctrine. Excerpt:

Conservatives long ago adapted to life in a world where watching the network news or picking up one of the major news dailies is a virtual guarantee of having their views mocked, demeaned or misrepresented. If you're a social conservative, multiply the odds by 100.

But some liberals, unused to feeling such stings, view government intervention as a salve.
...
Liberals claim they just want "fairness" - but if that were so, they wouldn't limit their concern just to talk radio, the one area where they've been shut out (by their own incompetence, mind you - Air America, the liberal talk-radio network, was a complete fiasco). They aren't concerned that Americans "get both sides of the story" on abortion or embryonic-stem-cell research or abstinence training. They weren't concerned about "fairness" when Katie Couric blamed evangelicals for the death of Matthew Shepherd.

They protest that the airwaves belong to the American people. They're right - which is all the more reason to keep grubby government mitts off of them. And if we're going to start dictating media content for the good of the proletariat, then there's no reason to stop with radio. (As Fox's Sean Hannity joked last week, "OK, then we want the 'no sex before marriage' channel to balance out MTV.")

In calling for the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine, Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called conservative talk radio the "generators of simplicity." Presumably this differs from the high-minded debate that occurred over at Air America, where Randi Rhodes liked to say that "Satan is Bush's campaign manager" and routinely claim (why was unclear) that the Bush administration was full of repressed homosexuals.

Look for Kirsten to be savaged once again by the Nutroots for not toeing the party line.

Update: I was waiting for Allah to post something about Kirsten's latest op-ed piece. The wait is over. Excerpt:

Exit question: Who are they going to get to be Michelles Democratic opponent on OReilly now?


Posted by Physics Geek at 08:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 29, 2007

One final thought on the immigration bill

I had planned to use the word "shamnesty" to drive John Cole into an apoplectic stupor, but decided against it. Why? Because it is a pretty fucking stupid word.

Could have been worse, I suppose. It could have been "Bennifer" again. ::shudder::

Anyway, here's Lileks' take on the recent attempt by the Senate to legalize their current gardeners and nannies:

The failure of the immigration bill was a remarkable event, I think but not the first notch in the belt for the new media as some suggest. Its interesting how many of the big victories seem to have been large bites out of the Presidents hide Dubai, Harriet Miers, now this. It shows the power of a swarm concentrated on a particular thing a person, a bill, a specific policy initiative. ... I had fun with the subject on the Hewitt show tonight Dean Barnett was chowdah-tawkin in Hughs place, and I found myself describing the Senate as a place where the fizzy effervescent passions of the day are poured into a saucer, where they can go flat and get warm and sticky and attract flies. Good a definition of the Senate as any, I guess. Its like a bowling alley with no pins, circular lanes, and nerf balls.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:59 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 27, 2007

True dat

Dean Barnett posts a picture that is worth more than a thousand words. Unless, of course, you're a tone deaf elected official sipping lattes up in DC.

Actually, I hope that Dean doesn't mind, but I'm swiping that picture. It's too good not to share.

reformjj0.jpg

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 19, 2007

Batshit crazy on display

Jonathan Hawkins links to this Michael Medved piece that, frankly, reeks of an April 1 article. Unfortunately, it's the middle of June, so apparently Mr. Medved is dead serious, which makes him, unfortunately, a retarded jackass. I remember Hugh Hewitt saying that Medved was strongly in favor of the amnesty bill as is; no amendments need apply. I thought that Hugh was kidding, but apparently I was mistaken. Anyway, excerpt:

...Despite the courageous reform efforts of far-sighted Republican Senators and of President Bush, the loudest voices in the GOP currently speak in strident, angry, desperate, uncompromising and unmistakably anti-immigrant tones.

Gee Michael, I'm almost at a loss how to respond to your puerile, insane, retarded, moronic and infantile prattle. Almost. Since reason, logic and, obviously, sanity are strangers to you, I'll make a slight breach in ettiquette by leaping over any factual arguments and going straight for the insults and ad hominem attacks.

You, sir, are embarrassment to conservatives everywhere. Your brain, such as it is, not only fails to fire on all cylinders, it's a wonder that can breathe without wearing a iPod that eternally cycles a recorning of "inhale....exhale". In fact, you are so fucking stupid that I'm convinced that, like the dinosaurs, you must have a brain in your ass to help you take a shit. However, unlike the dinosaurs, your assbrain is the larger of the two, which makes sense, since what comes out of your mouth is more putrid, vile, stinky and worthless than what comes out of the other end. At least your crap can be used for fertilizer.

Frankly, Michael, your act has more than worn thin. I will admit that I used to enjoy your occasional forays into the Attila the Hun chair, when you subbed for Rush. But somehow you mistook your modest talent for actual self-importance. I know, I know: you know so much more than the rest of us. I suppose that we should thank you for condescending to lecture to us about how we should act, or what we should do, or how we should vote. The reality is that most of us think that the fact that you have a syndicated column and a radio show is a sign of the end times. Sure, Err America was even more ridiculous that you. The buffoons on that network at least had the entertainment value of clown repeatedly stabbing himself in the eye. You, as I'm sure you're aware, have no such value. In fact, I swear that what fills my daughter's diaper daily has more intrinsic value than you and your opinions do. And quite frankly, her diapers' content disgusts me far less than you do.

I know what you're thinking: if I'm so bothered by you, why don't I simply ignore you? Well Michael, I think that you and I have finally found a point on which we can agree. Don't be too surprised when other coservatives - you know, the ones that you accuse of hating us some brown people- follow suit.

Enjoy yourself. And remember to keep a spare battery around for your iPod. I wouldn't want you to suffocate.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:25 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 06, 2007

Fund raising made easy

Iowahawk delivers another classic. Excerpt:

Skip to 7.

7. Now that you know the facts, would you like to reconsider giving a donation?

If "yes," return to 1a; if "no," go to 8

8. Two words: Nancy Pelosi. You at least have to admit we're somewhat better than Nancy Pelosi.

If "yes," return to 1a; if "go fuck yourself," go to 9

9. If I actually did fuck myself, would that help you reconsider giving a donation?

If "yes," describe fucking self and return to 1a; if "no," go to 10

10. All right then. Thank you for your time.

Despite not being a registered Republican, I've received dozens of GOP fundraising phone calls and they seem genuinely perplexed by my hope that the GOP national party should go piss up a rope. However, I'm very polite as I tell them to remove my name from their list, and that I hope the current GOP leadership gets an incurable case of chiggers in their nether regions.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 18, 2007

I'm glad that I'm not a registered Republican

It saves me the trouble of having to re-register under a different party affiliation.

I was so pissed off last night that I everything I thought about posting consisted entirely of Amanda Marcotte type Tourettes style posts:

Fuck-fuck-fucking-duckle-fuck.

Then I waited a while, thought about it some more and became even more incensed. Ace succinctly states what I've been thinking:

Whichever. I'm not voting for anyone supporting this sell-out, and no, I am no longer worried by the threat of a Hillary! or Obama presidency enough to carry the water for the Republican Party. We've done the go-along-to-get-along thing for years, and it has earned us merely greater contempt and scorn and nonresponsiveness from our "leaders."

That's it for me. I don't give a fuck if Hillary is President. At least if a Democrat is pursuing liberal policies I don't like, I'm not responsible for that, and the conservative movement isn't damaged further by acquiescing to them.

If our Republican congressmen and President are carrying out the Democrats' agenda anyway, I say give the keys of government to the Democrats so that at least they'll be responsible for the consequences.

Sometimes a party needs to be brought to the brink of extinction before it changes its policies. After six years of Bush and the godawful overspending Republican Congresses, I think that time is just about now.


Kim du Toit, someone who I respect a great deal has long railed against people who want to teach the GOP a lesson. His point is that you never give control of the government to Socialists. Here's where I think that he misses the point: the GOP leaders are socialists, just a small-s version instead of the big-S version that the Democrats represent. Continually supporting the slightly less liberal Republicans over the Democrats because "the Democrats are worse" is completely the wrong attitude. In fact, supporting the GOP when its leaders are forcing its nominal base to drop trou, bend over and beg for more only emboldens the Republicans to do whatever the fuck they want, which always entails more spending, more government control and more ass-fucking of the the voting base. I waited my entire life for the Republicans to control the House, Senate and presidency at the same time, and all I got was more spending, less border control and more Democrat-style programs. So tell me again why I shouldn't entertain the thought of giving the Republican leadership the finger?

Vox Day made the point during Bush's first term that he thought George Delano™ would do more damage to the Republican party and conservatives than any Democrat could do. It turns out that he was entirely correct.

Update: From Vox:

When Hillary gets elected, I'll be the one pointing and laughing at all of your sad Three Monkey faces. Nice work losing the House and Senate, you politically astute "pragmatists". Well done putting the Lizard Queen on the Cherry Blossom Throne, all you "he's only doing it in order to unveil his double-secret super-conservative plan to save the nation" voters.

Maybe you will all finally see and hear some evil once your party finishes its third trip to the guillotine. I know you'll certainly be speaking plenty of it.
...
Bush is such a disaster, the Democrats don't even want to impeach him anymore. But after the 2008 elections, I bet there will be a lot of ex-Republicans who will wish they had.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:44 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 04, 2007

Quote of the day

Lots of people live-blogged the debates last night including, of course, Stephen Green doing the drunk-blogging version. Great stuff everywhere, but I found a line that will be almost impossible to top over at Alarming News:

8:55pm: McCain loves amnesty for people that broke the law to get into America. He could not be less my candidate if he tried. Which, it seems, he does.

If the GOP is stupid enough to nominate McCain, I will write myself in for president.

Now there's a campaign for you: Physics Geek 2008!

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:49 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 02, 2007

I'm so glad that Bush supported his re-election

Orrin Hatch supports giving DC a seat in the US House. Not surprisingly, there's a little backrubbing going on:

Sen. Orrin Hatch should know better: He supports giving the District of Columbia a special seat in the House of Representatives. So does Utah's other senator, Robert Bennett. Their backing has everything to do with the fact that under a deal brokered in the House, Utah would get an additional seat as well. It certainly has nothing to do with the Constitution, which says only states may be represented in the House. And DC isn't a state. Read the NRO editorial, here.

I'm certain that Hugh Hewitt will continue to extoll the virtues of having supported Hatch in 2004. Maybe the sandwich has grown even more tasty over time.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 24, 2007

Muddying the lily

Andrew Klavan details the perils of being a conservative.

The thing I like best about being a conservative is that I dont have to lie. I dont have to pretend that men and women are the same. I dont have to declare that failed or oppressive cultures are as good as mine. I dont have to say that everyones special or that the rich cause poverty or that all religions are a path to God. I dont have to claim that a bad writer like Alice Walker is a good one or that a good writer like Toni Morrison is a great one. I dont have to pretend that Islam means peace.

Of course, like everything, this candor has its price. A politics that depends on honesty will be, by nature, often impolite. Good manners and hypocrisy are intimately intertwined, and so conservatives, with their gimlet-eyed view of the world, are always susceptible to charges of incivility. Its not really nice, you know, to describe things as they are.

...

Still, mannerly as we would rather be, truth-telling continues to be both compelling and ultimately satisfying. There is, after all, something greater than courtesy. Firmness in the right, Lincoln called it, as God gives us to see the right. We find ourselves at a precarious moment in an endeavor of great importance: namely, the preservation of Western rationalism and liberty. It does mankind no good to allow so magnificent an enterprise to slip away merely for fear of saying the wrong thing.

When my friends and family want their egos stroked, they ask other people for their opinions. When they want the unvarnished truth, they ask me. I've never had problems answering the following question honestly: "Does this (whatever) make me look fat?" I realize that it's supposed to be the one question that men are supposed to lie about, but I think that letting my lovely wife go out in something unflattering does her a great disservice. Hence, I tell it like it is.

A good friend - someone I've lost touch with over the years- once criticized me as being "brutally honest". I wear that comment as a badge of honor. For the record, I understand the meaning of the word "tact". Being honest doesn't mean that you have to be a complete dick about things.

Link found via McQ.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Turn out the lights

The party's over.

Looks like California will actually try to ban regular incadescent bulbs. My guess is that people like Bill Quick will order truckloads of the damned things, just to eff with the legistlature.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:32 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

The end is near?

McCain-Feingold to take it on the chin this time? Excerpt:

The Supreme Court has taken up the WRTL case again and the real agenda of McCain-Feingold has been exposed. Senator McCain and the other congressional sponsors argue in their Supreme Court brief that broadcast ads would be sham, not genuine, if they took a critical stance regarding a candidates position on an issue. Thus they admitted that stifling criticism of public officials is at the core of the electioneering communication prohibition.

It is now apparent that the electioneering communication prohibition was misrepresented from the outset, that the arguments to justify it were shams, and that its real purpose is to silence criticism of public officials. This is irreconcilable with the First Amendment and with our form of government created by the Constitution.

But what will the Supreme Court do? Oral argument in Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. FEC is scheduled for this Wednesday, April 25, and a decision is expected by the end of the Courts term in June.

I will be watching this case with interest. For the record, I will post whatever information about a candidate that I wish to, at any time. If our federal government elected officials disagree with my position, they have my permission to blow me.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 20, 2007

Maybe some in Vermont should actually read the Constitution

Then again, based on this ludicrous vote in the Vermont state senate, it's unlikely that any of Vermont's elected officials know how to read:

For its second story at the top of the hour (1PM Central time), NPR just reported that the Vermont State Senate has voted in a 'non-binding resolution' for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Great, now that they've voted for the impeachment, it's time for... umm, what exactly? The Vermont state senate has exactly zero power to affect the current power structure in DC, no matter how much the member might wish otherwise. The US Constitution clearly gives the US House of Representatives the authority to impeach the president. It also gives the US Senate the authority to vote to remove the president from office if he's impeached. Nowhere in my copy foes it say "unless the Vermont senate votes otherwise". Then again, my copy is simply dead paper, unlike the Doctor Frankenxerox creation, which both lives and breathes.

Sure, I know that it's simply poltical grandstanding. I also know that the Vermonters in question wear little cups under their collective chins to catch the drool sure to be dripping out.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:07 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 17, 2007

The tax man cometh

Again. And again and again.

Reprinted from Neal Boortz's website, albeit an entry that has disappeared into the bit bucket:

Message: APRIL 15th TAX DAY

http://www.boortz.com/nealznuz.htm
From Neal Boortz

"Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed."

-Robert Heinlein

"There are two methods, or means, and only two, whereby man's needs and desires can be satisfied. One is the production and exchange of wealth; this is the economic means. The other is the uncompensated appropriation of wealth produced by others; this is the political means."

- Albert Jay Nock

The income tax is a vicious, inequitable, unpopular, impolitic and socialistic act. The crusade for an income tax is the most unreasoning and un-American movement in the politics of the last quarter-century.

Editorial - New York Times. 1894.

TAX DAY- FOR ABOUT ONE-HALF OF US

It's April 15th. That day is important for just about one-half of Americans; the one-half that actually carries the load for all of us. For the remaining one-half of income earners it's either just another day, or it's a day they revel in their ability to not only avoid paying taxes themselves, but in their ability to loot the pockets of those who do through such gimmicks as the rancid Earned Income Tax Credit.

April 15 is depressing ... and not just because your taxes are due.

OK , I know you've heard this before, but it doesn't do any harm for you to review the facts just once a year.

This is the day when a simple question can lead to the discovery that most people have no idea how much income tax they pay, though this is becoming less and less true as we go along. There is one group that does know how much federal income tax they pay every year, and this group is growing ever larger. It's that segment of wage earners who pay nothing. So, we'll revise this statement to read: "Most people who actually do pay federal income taxes have no idea how much they pay."

For proof, try this little test: Approach a friend or co-worker whom you actually suspect may pay federal income taxes and ask them what their tax tab was. You will get one of two responses. For the majority of taxpayers who actually get refunds, the response will be "I didn't have to pay anything! I'm getting some back!" Taxpayers who actually have to write a check on April 15 will quote the amount of that check as their tax bill.

This is all by design. Politicians know that if those who pay federal income taxes knew what they were really paying there would be an instantaneous and ugly tax revolt. To hide the ugly truth, these politicians have kept alive our wonderful system of withholding. With the magic of withholding, the money is gone before the wage earner even gets the slightest whiff of it. It's almost as if it was never really there in the first place ... so, what's to miss?

Not only do most people not know how much tax they pay, they don't even know what they make!

You've already asked your co-worker how much tax they had to pay in 2001, and they didn't know. Now, ask them how much they make! Most will tell you it's none of your business. Some will respond, though, and their response will begin with the words, "I take home ..."

If you wanted to be particularly obnoxious at this point, or if you fancy yourself to be a radio talk-show host, you could say: "I didn't ask you how much you took home. I asked you how much you made." Then, standby for the inevitable blank stare.

See how well this system of withholding taxes has worked! The majority of wage earners can't even tell you what they earned! Just what they "took home." It's as if they viewed their "take home" pay as their total earnings! No wonder they don't think they paid any taxes when they get that refund check from the IRS!

But --- if you happen to work for youself then it's a good bet that you DO know how much tax you paid. The owners of small businesses, the businesses that employ about 80 percent of the workers in this country ... you know. You are the people who have to sit down four times a year and write a check to the IRS for your quarterly tax payments.

WHY WE'LL NEVER HAVE A TAX REVOLT.

One word. Withholding.


Withholding was sold to the American wage earner as a purely temporary measure to speed up cash flow to the government during World War II. As soon as the war was over, things were supposed to return to normal and the wage earners would get their entire checks, just as before the war.

In case you haven't checked, the war has been over for about 58 years or so, but withholding is still with us. It's still with us because the proliferation of the "I take home ..." workers and the "I didn't have to pay anything, I'm getting some back" taxpayers are such a boon to our politicians. As long as the majority remains ignorant of the extent to which their paychecks are plundered, politicians will be safe.

Now ... get those tax returns completed and then completely forget what they say so that you can join the ranks of the unknowing.

PROTECTING POLITICIANS

I can't let this April 15th go by without reminding you of what a wonderful job politicians, especially Democrats, have done insuring that there will never be enough angry taxpayers to cost them their jobs.

Politicians pay attention to polls. Polls are indications of the presence or lack of job security. When politicians read a poll which says that the majority of Americans (a) don't think they're paying too much in taxes, and (b) don't see any need for a tax cut, they sit back and smile. Politicians, and especially Democrats, have been working for generations to shift the burden for the payment of federal income taxes to a small minority of high-income earners. They have succeeded marvelously. Today the top 10 percent of income earners pay over one-half of all federal income taxes. The bottom 60 percent of income earners, a majority, as you can see, pay less than 10 percent of all income taxes. Even someone educated in a government school can tell you that this leaves politicians free to increase taxes on the upper-income minority and then spend that money on the middle and lower-income majority in return for votes.

AND NOW --- TIME FOR SOME TAX AND SPENDING OUTRAGES.

We begin with a statistic that should jolt you right out of your seat. Have you ever stopped to consider just how many cumulative hours are spent across this entire country every year just handling the paperwork associated with the federal income tax? American businesses will spend about 3.4 billion man-hours doing tax paperwork this year. Individuals will spend another 1.7 billion man-hours. These figures represent 3 million people working full time all year just to do tax preparation work. Now --- get this. It takes more man-hours in this country to pay federal income taxes than it does to build every car, van and truck produced in this country during the same year. (Money Magazine)

Where does your tax money go? Try this:

Between 1986 and 1998 the IRS spent $5 billion of your money on a computer system that they were never able to get to work. Five Billion, that's with a B.

Taxes now comprise 31% of the cost of a loaf of bread, 30% of the cost of a hotel room and 43% of the cost of a bottle of beer. (Money Magazine)

The two major tax writing committees of congress are the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee. Money Magazine reports that seven out of ten members of these committees cannot figure out their own taxes. They have to hire professionals.

Your government recently gave $170 million to a group called PSI. PSI was founded by Philip Harvey. Philip Harvey runs a mail-order porno business called Adam and Eve. PSI wants to hand out condoms around the world. They now have $170 million of your money to fund their project.

At a series of employee retreats workers played children's games and sang We are family. They wrote Christmas carols, went on treasure hunts, dressed in cat costumes and talked to imaginary wizards and magicians. It was a team-building exercise for the U.S. Postal Service. Cost? $3,600,000.00.

There are 1.2 million paid tax preparers in the United States. That's six times more than the number of troops in Iraq. These 1.2 million people add absolutely nothing to our quality of life or standard of living.

Do you know what IRS form 8845 is? It's the form you fill out to get your Indian Employment Credit.

In 1969 the congress discovered that there were 155 taxpayers who paid no taxes because their deductions eliminated their tax liability. That's when congress passed the Alternative Minimum Tax, just to catch those 155 taxpayers. Today the AMT nails 3 million taxpayers. Within 7 years that figure will soar to 36 million.

The IRS still insists that the income tax is voluntary.” If you believe that then you believed Bill Clinton when he said that oral sex isn't sex.

THE SOLUTION

The solution is twofold.


First --- reform the tax system by getting rid of the income tax, repealing the income tax amendment and moving to a national retail sales tax. I've been promoting such a system for over 15 years. You can find out everything you want to know by studying the website for Americans for Fair Taxation at http://www.fairtax.org.

Second -- Government must be reduced to its constitutionally appropriate size. Neither Republicans nor Democrats are up to the task. That's why I'm a Libertarian.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 16, 2007

Bring it back

The drinking age of 18, that is. I've hated and bitched about the federal drinking age since it was instituted. For what it's worth, I was 18+ at the time the law was implemented, so it didn't affect me at all. However, I find the law, as well as the strong-arm tactics of the feds, to be completely at odds with personal liberty. There are even some self-described conservative pundits who want to raise the drinking age to 25 or higher (Ross Mackenzie, I'm looking at you). My reply to scolds like those? Blow me.

Let's examine the things that you can do and are responsible for at the age of 18:

  • You can be drafted, if necessary. If not, you can still enlist and go to a foreign land and risk life and limb.
  • You can vote in pretty much any election in this country, including but not limited to, federal elections, including those for the presidency.
  • You can -and will- be tried as an adult for any crime that you commit.
  • You can legally enter into contracts, which are binding(some states may restrict that to 21 in certain instances, I suppose)
  • You can get a job, work hard and pay taxes.
  • You cannot, however, enjoy a beer at the end of a hard day.

Radley Balko revists the drinking age in this article, which I highly recommend. Here's one of my favorite quotes:

The age at highest risk for an alcohol-related auto fatality is 21, followed by 22 and 23, an indication that delaying first exposure to alcohol until young adults are away from home may not be the best way to introduce them to drink.

Emphasis mine. Notice that the magical age of 21 isn't quite so magical.

Update: Not surprisingly, Bill Quick and I are on the same page.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:36 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 14, 2007

Quote of the day

From Dean Barnett:

8) What happens to Nifong?

Its hard to imagine he wont be disbarred. If he has any brains (admittedly a highly dubious notion), hell remove himself from the bar and pursue his lifelong passion of plucking the wings off live butterflies on a full-time basis.

That will have me chuckling for a while. Not as much as a verdict that would allow the Duke lacrosse players to work over Nifong with a tire iron for a few hours, but I'll take what I can get.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 09, 2007

Non-useful idiots

After the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA should control CO2 emissions unless it finds scientific reasons not to (crikey, that turns logic on its head), our elected officials have started to weigh in on possible solutions to the emission problem. Interestingly, former allies have started in-fighting over the prospect of more nuclear power plants. Excerpt:

The renewed push for legislation to cut greenhouse gas emissions could falter over an old debate: whether nuclear power should play a role in any federal attack on climate change.

Congress, with added impetus from a Supreme Court ruling last week, appears more likely to pass comprehensive energy legislation. But nuclear power sharply divides lawmakers who agree on mandatory caps on carbon dioxide emissions. And it has pitted some on Capitol Hill against their usual allies, environmentalists, who largely oppose any expansion of nuclear power.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Barbara Boxer Bay Area Democrats with similar political views are on opposite sides.

Pelosi used to be an ardent foe of nuclear power but now holds a different view. "I think it has to be on the table," she said.

Boxer, head of the Senate committee that will take the lead in writing global warming legislation, said that turning from fossil fuels to nuclear power was "trading one problem for another."

[Editor's note: Like, say, electing one Bay Area brain donor instead of another?]
...
"I've never been a fan of nuclear energy," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who has called it expensive and risky. "But reducing emissions from the electricity sector presents a major challenge. And if we can be assured that new technologies help to produce nuclear energy safely and cleanly, then I think we have to take a look at it."

The public's attitude toward nuclear power is more favorable when such energy is seen as part of an effort to fight climate change. Polls over the years have shown that a slim majority backs nuclear power, but a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg survey last summer found that a larger majority, 61%, supported the increased use of nuclear energy "to prevent global warming."

Legislation introduced recently in California seeks to repeal a 1976 ban on new nuclear plants in the state.

I predict that pigs will fly before that last statement comes to pass. San Francisco residents will garb themselves in human excrement to stay warm before they'll consent to using power generated by nuclear power.

On Capitol Hill last month, former Vice President Al Gore, who has become a leading advocate for swift action on climate change, said he saw nuclear plants as a "small part" of the strategy.

"They're so expensive, and they take so long to build, and at present they only come in one size: extra large," he said.

No article on energy policy would be complete without a comment from the Goreacle. However, he does make a valid point, albeit one contained in his usual inanity: nuclear power plants usually come in only the "extra large" size due to several reasons:

1) When a utility has to borrow several billion dollars to build a plant, it will want to generate enough energy during the plant's lifetime so as to ensure an adequate return on its investment.

2) Part of the reason that nukes were so expensive in the past was the ridiculous number of hearings, lawsuits, et al that the utility had to wade through before even breaking ground. A lot of that cost has been eliminated with the combined site permit and operating license process. Now, if a utility builds an NRC-approved design on a site that receives a permit, all systems are go. In fact, the company that I work for will probably attempt to build a monster plant sometime within the next 10 years. For the record, once the construction phase begins, the plant could be completed and go online within about three years, although normal construction delays could add a year or so to that figure.

3) All of the currently approved designs are pretty damned large. The Pebble Bed design has not been approved for construction within the United States. South Africa is working on one, and the US will gain lots of useful knowledge from its operation, which will -probably- lead to that design's eventual approval. You would then have a nuclear plant design that you could build in a modular fashion, where 300 Mw(e) plants would become economical.

We'll see where it all goes. For those of you who are opposed to the generation of power via the burning of fossil fuels, but are also opposed to nuclear power, I have this to say to you: you had better move south, because it gets cold in the winter. Just an FYI.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 13, 2007

Two little words, Mr. President

For the record, they are Fuck and You. I've got your "comprehensive immigration reform" right here. ::pointing to crotch::

Karol manages to not use foul language in her post. I'll confess to being amazed by this.

Update: Allah is not amused, either.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 06, 2007

Wanna see something really scary?

Annika and I are on the exact same page.

And when I say scary, I mean scary for Annie. She should see it as a sign of the end times that she and I have the same thought running through our brains. However, since I can only hold one thought at a time in my pea-sized brain, eventually everyone will think like me, if only for an instant.

Seriously though, I've left comments at multiple blogs that McCain will not receive my vote for any reason. If the Democrat nominee is Beelzebub, I might write-in Mickey Mouse. Heck, I think that I'll write in my name. Anyone else want to join in the Physics Geek for President campaign? Unlike Chevy Chase, I'm okay with math questions being asked.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 23, 2007

Government insanity

But I repeat myself.

The Puppy Blender links to a BoingBoing article which, frankly, I thought was an April Fool's joke until I realized it was still February:

Two Florida teenagers, Jeremy and Amber, ages 17 and 16 respectively, boyfriend and girlfriend -- snapped digital photos of themselves engaged in sexual activity. They were prosecuted under state child porn laws, and convicted. . . . In Florida, Amber and Jeremy did not break the law by having sexual relations -- even though they're both teens -- but the courts decided they were criminals for having documented it digitally.

I think that I just threw up a little bit in my mouth.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 20, 2007

Sewing up the anti-Semitic vote

Well, it looks like Edwards is about to reach out and tag Jimmy Carter as his running mate. From the original article that Geraghty links:


There are other emerging fissures, as well. The aggressively photogenic John Edwards was cruising along, detailing his litany of liberal causes last week until, during question time, he invoked the "I" word Israel. Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace, Edwards remarked, was the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. As a chill descended on the gathering, the Edwards event was brought to a polite close

John, I know that you're desperately courting the moonbat vote for the primaries, but you might be laying it on a little thick. I'm just saying.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:51 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

So who's counting?

For those of you who want to blame Bush for the astronomical number of dead US men and women fighting in a war overseas, you might want to see how many soldiers were killed when we weren't at war:

The total military dead in the Iraq war between 2003 and this month stands at about 3,133. This is tragic, as are all deaths due to war, and we are facing a cowardly enemy unlike any other in our past that hides behind innocent citizens. Each death is blazoned in the headlines of newspapers and Internet sites. What is never compared is the number of military deaths during the Clinton administration: 1,245 in 1993; 1,109 in 1994; 1,055 in 1995; 1,008 in 1996. That's 4,417 deaths in peacetime but, of course, who's counting?


Link via Jonah.

Update: Even more perspective:

Jonah,

You asked for more information on military deaths. Here is a table of all military deaths, broken down by cause, over the 25 year period 1980-2004. This includes all active duty and reservists.

The gist is that soldiers are more likely to die from accidents than hostile action (combat and terrorist actions combined). The death count from accidents has been lower than the death count from hostile action. The fall in accidental deaths is greater than the increase in deaths by hostile action.

Note that there were far more military deaths in 1980, the last year of Carter's presidency, than any year of the current administration. The death rate was, also, higher. This was because of lower standards and less care in training.

The bottom line is that we're fighting this war with lower casualties than that expected from normal training accidents in a peacetime army. You should be embarassed that you didn't know this. It's a testiment to the near universal innumeracy and incompetence of the journalism profession that most journalists haven't even seriously considered looking at basic statistics and putting things in context 5 1/2 years after 9/11.


Posted by Physics Geek at 01:35 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 12, 2007

An idea whose time has come

Presenting the Autorantic Virtual Moonbat, courtesy of Sean Gleeson:

I believe that I'll add the smaller version in the sidebar, which differs in this respect from the original:

Unlike the live chat module, which lets you talk back to the robot, the sidebar module wont let anyone else get a word in edgewise. All you can do is click the RANT button and get ranted at. (Although if the robot sits idle for a couple of minutes, it gets antsy and rants without you.)

Cool. It'll be like talking politics with one of my lefty friends. KEEP YOUR PATRIARCHY OFF MY UTERUS!!!(apologies to Jeff Goldstein).

Update: I asked the AVM for some sports predictions. Q&A below the fold.

Q: So who will win the World Series this year?
A: "Win". Pigs? Of course, when the Israelis say "VICTORY," they really mean "fur"! When they say "DEMOCRACY," it is just a code word for "violence"!!! I hate you!! U.S. get out of Liberia!

Q: Will the Colts repeat as Superbowl champions?
A: On the TOPIC of "champions": If you aren't INCENSED and GALACTOPHAGOUS about the religion of this president, then you are a Repooplicker errand boy of Bill O'Reilly and the Likud Party!!! Whatever!!!!?

I got a little tired of having to ask questions. so here's the mini-AVM. It'll speak its mind without asking which, I suppose, is even more realistic. Many times have I run into an Autorantic Real Moonbat who spewed whatever happened to be passing into his mouth from his colon.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:35 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Screwing with us some more

Don't forget that Daylight Savings Time has been changed for 2007. Now you will spring forward on the second Sunday in March, instead of the first Saturday in April. And you will fall back the first Saturday in November, instead of October.

YOu know what's the best thing about this switch? Ever since Windows 95 appeared, my computer has automatically updated its internal clock for the EST/DSt switch. Now I will have to manually update my PC's clock. It's a trivial problem to be sure, but it still pisses me off.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:12 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 05, 2007

I don't think so...

I disagree with Reynolds's assessment of John Edwards decision to hire Amanda Marcotte. In fact, I think that it was a wonderful choice because that vituperative harpy probably killed Edwards' campaign before it got fully underway.

Let's be honest: I can't be the only one who wants to know how much the Clintons are paying Amanda.

Update: Quote of the day over at Reason's blog. I'll excerpt a little bit more to put it context:

Not exactly the best defense disgraced Durham DA Mike Nifong has received, but interesting in the same way that ramblings about CIA radio transmitters in your teeth are interesting -- as a marker for raving moon-bats.

So you might be thinking, at last and at least, a presidential candidate has had the balls to hire on a full-fledged, out-front propagandist, someone boldly willing to not just fudge facts, but fuck them in the ass. A Marcotte-led Net communications op may actually give the jaded among us some reason to pay attention to this 08 election-thing -- there'd be no telling what she'd say.

Update: Patterico offers some of his thoughts on the matter:

And there was a post about Katrina looting that termed racist fucks anyone appalled by the looting in New Orleans. The post was titled Dear racist fucks who complained about looting, and said:
And as for the racist fucks behind this foot-dragging and lying and all those that support them, I hope that when you get to hell, after youve been greeted nicely by Satan and checked in by Ronald Reagan, your punishment is to be drowned over and over and over again until you fucking realize that suffering is suffering, no matter what race or class or ethnicity the people suffering are.

I responded here and I also detailed the habit of the bloggers on her site: namely, squelching comments that they disagree with, or that make them look bad. Seems consistent with the more recent allegations of Amanda trying to cover her tracks regarding the Duke lacrosse rape case.

But hey if John Edwards wants to have a psychotic, profane, illogical, man-hating feminist as his chief blogger, more power to him. This is much better for us than if he had hired someone unlikely to embarrass him.

Eh, I don't mean to give Amanda a hard time. It's only 99.9999% of her qualities that give the rest of them a bad name.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:40 AM | Comments (1)

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 01, 2007

Lock and load

Dan Riehl doesn't mince words in this post: It's Official: The Press Has Gone To War

And no, I don't think that he's overstating the case one little bit.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Sad news

I hear that Molly Ivins passed away from cancer. As anyone who has read me at all the last 4+ years would know, I'm not a fan of Molly Ivins. However, I wouldn't wish that on anyone. My condolences to friends and family that she left behind.

Update: Dean is on the same page that I am, which should scare the living crap out of him.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 12, 2007

From the actual reality based community

And to any Kosmonauts that stumble onto this blog, the title of this post does not refer to you.

Anyway, I've followed Michael Graham's career since he had a radio show here in Richmond, VA. His current show isn't available for me to listen to, but his website is. Here are his determinations as to what will happen when the US bugs out of Iraq:

1--The Islamists get another country, and its one with lots of oil generating lots of money to fund lots more terror.

2--America is defeated in the Middle East. We lose, and we lose in a region where the brutal tribal culture values strength over all. People in the region looking to back a winner have yet another reason to back the whackjobs. More whackjobs who want to kill us will have more power, and the moderates will have less. Or be dead. Which brings up point #3:

3--Blood in the streets. LOTS of it. You think 1,000 Iraqis killed in a month is a lot? You're not paying attention. Rwandans died by the thousands per day, and they only had machetes. Imagine how ugly a real religious cleansing campaign would look. Are you prepared to say "Yep, 100,000 Iraqi women and children had to die in 2007 because we weren't sure we could win?"


Go read the rest.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:38 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 16, 2006

And now for something completely different

I'll take a break from my normal collection of brewing related, computer related, or bad joke related posts to make this political insight: Hugh Hewitt fervent support for both Lott and Martinez will become his Harriet Meirs II moment. Excerpt:

I have to agree with Paul Mirengoff at Powerline about some reactions to the election of Trent Lott as Senate Minority Whip and Mel Martinez as RNC Chair. Both have the potential to be huge wins for the GOP, especially given Lott's command of Senate procedure.

I like Hugh Hewitt. his radio show is one of the better ones on the air, although I rarely get to listen to it. His unwavering support for almost anything that this administration support baffles me at times, especially on an issue which most conservatives oppose. Check out the excerpt from this post:

Regularization of the nation's millions of illegals along common-sense lines such should follow the fence's construction --or at least robust beginning of construction. If the GOP avoids plainly inequitable proposals such as the grant of social security benefits for the wages earned while illegally in the country or a path to citizenship for those who do not return first to their home countries, the comprehensive legislation can be worked out quickly.

Allow me to translate:

Regularization: amnesty for illegals

Comprehensive legistlation: amnesty for illegals

While working in IT the last decade or so, I had to opportunity to work with lots of foreign nationals, most of whom have to jump through hoops on a yearly basis just to guarantee that their visas stay up to date; this includes those attempting to get their green cards. Some of them, from India mostly, go back home for a few weeks each year to work through all of the technicalities at the local consulate. Anyway, that group of individuals is large and well-educated. They are almost unilaterally opposed to this amnesty talk. It pisses them off that some people lolly-gagged their way illegally across our borders and are about to be rewarded for it.

I know what the problem is: Hugh has swallowed the big effing lie that illegal immigration wasn't a winner in this past election. Bill Quick delivers a swift kick in the nads to this bullshit. Excerpt:

Fred Barnes in the Weekly Standard makes the case that immigration restriction wasn't a plus issue for House Republicans. In Arizona, with the biggest illegal border crossing crisis in the nation, two loud advocates of immigration restriction and opponents of guest-worker and legalization provisions lost: incumbent J.D. Hayworth in the Scottsdale-Tempe Fifth District and open-seat primary winner Randy Graf in the Eighth, which includes the east side of Tucson and Cochise County, site of most of the illegal border crossings. In 2004, Graf won 43 percent in the primary against incumbent Jim Kolbe, who favored guest-worker and legalization provisions. With Kolbe retiring, Graf won the same 43 percent in the primary again, but that was enough to win a three-candidate race. I tend to agree with Barnes's take. If an anti-immigration candidate can't win in these two districts, where can he win?
Pity. Mike Barone used to be a reasonably honest, reasonably trustworthy reporter, but here, he outright lies by omission.

An anti-illegal immigration candidate did win in both districts.

Here's Hayworth's opponent:


Every sovereign nation has a responsibility to secure its border. In Congress, I'll make it a top priority to secure the U.S.-Mexico border and stop illegal immigration.
...

And here is Graf's opponent's position on the issue:

is "absolutely unfair," she said. Republicans have not done enough to stop illegal immigration, she added, ridiculing Graf's idea that tougher enforcement will lead immigrants to go home.

"I don't believe they're going to stand up, walk home and self deport," Giffords said, carefully adding "I do not support amnesty."

Immigration nerds understand the difference in positions between the Democrats and the Republican candidates, but the average voter probably thought their positions were identically tough. For Barone - and the sleazy RNC hack Barnes - to intimate otherwise is, frankly, nothing more than ideological dishonesty.


Update: Check out Blogs of War for a roundup of the conservative[translation for Hugh Hewitt: not Republican] opinion. It isn't pretty.

Time for the GOP to go the way of the Whigs. The way leadership is behaving right now, I expect the Democrats to own all 3 branches of government in early 2009. Might as well gear up for the revolution now instead of waiting for the self-immolation to be complete.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:12 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 07, 2006

Game on

So I'm late. Sue me. I had two small children to tuck into bed. Priorities. Now on to the results:

VA: Allen leads by 3% with 48% reporting. That's good, but he'd better have a decent margin before Fairfax county comes in, or he will be a one-termer.

The marriage amendment is winning handily, after recent polls showed it within the margin of error. I guess that's true if your margin of error is large as John Kerry's face.

Update:

1,404 of 2,443 (57 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 629,330 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 609,220 49 %

Looks like a nailbiter in the Old Dominion.


Update: Mother of God, Shumer is smiling. Smiling. It's creepy. Also, not a good sign.

Update:

1,502 of 2,443 (61 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 679,127 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 653,942 49 %

Also, it appears that Ace and Dave of Garfield Ridge are liveblogging, too. I'll stick with Virginia, because, well, I live here.

Update: I lied. Corker is up big in TN right now.


1,625 of 2,443 (66 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 741,790 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 713,794 48 %

Update: CNN just called the race for Lieberman. A Dem hold on a bad night for the GOP, but I like bitchslapping those krazy Kos kidz.


Update:

1,803 of 2,443 (73 %) Precincts Reporting
George Allen 822,186 50 %
Jim Webb, Jr. 788,704 48 %

Spoke too soon. The lead is down to a percentage point with 77% in. Starting to sweat a little bit now.

Update: Jim Geraghty thinks that Allen will win. I hope that he's right.

BTW, WTF is up with Maryland? Steele up by 11% with 1% of the votes in and they called it for Cardin? I think that I'll watch the actual count come in, thankyouverymuch.

Oh, and apparently the exit polls blow chunks. Again. Fox kicked them to the curb and took the unorthodox method of counting the actual votes.


Final update: Barone just stated that we might not know the VA senate winner for a month. Under state law, if the margin of victory is within 1% of the total cast, an automatic recount is triggered.

Go-go absentee ballots!

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Pre-election predictions: 2006 edition

My guesses are of the aggregate kind. I don't feel like going through each race. Anyway, here goes:

Senate: Republicans hold serve, maintaining a 52-46-2(okay, 52-48) edge.

House: Democrats manage to wrest control from the GOP for the first time in 12 years, grabbing a grand total of 218-220 seats, which would give them a 1 to 5 vote margin.

These predictions are free, which means double your money back if I'm proven wrong.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 03, 2006

Up yours

The Defense Department implemented a program that allows members of the US military stationed abroad to submit ballots via email or fax. It's designed to make certain that our men and women in uniform get the opportunity to cast a meaningful ballot. That's a good thing, right? Apparently not if you're Democratic Rep. Rush Holt from New Jersey:

In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Democratic Rep. Rush Holt said the electronic registration and voting service is well-intentioned, but could expose troops to identity theft, or allow hackers or others to tamper with the ballots when they are in transit.

You mean like having illegal aliens or dead people vote? I'll tell you what: when you author legislation in New Jersey requiring people to show ID at the polls, I'll give you a pass. Until that day, when monkeys will be streaming out of my ass in large numbers, you can take your military vote suppressing ass-because they vote strongly Republican- somewhere and drink a nice, tall glass of STFU.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 01, 2006

Nice move, John "by the way, I served in Vietnam along with the other child killers and rapists" Kerry

I tried to stay of the Kerry snafu. I figured that no one was dumb enough to double down on a sure loser of a hand. Apparently, I don't know Lurch all that well, because the dumbass didn't apologize about his comments, but rather complained because someone was making his comments an issue. Some former fence-sitters have now chosen a side. I give you Neal Boortz:


OK ... all bets are off.

Don't get me wrong ... I still have this deep felt desire to see the Republican's get punished by the electorate in next week's midterm election ... but suddenly the stakes seem to be too high.

What turned the tide for me? John Kerry, that's what. That insipid, haughty, pretentious jerk uttered another one of his absurd statements about our men and women in uniform ... and in a flash my fear of Democrats and their disdain for our military services overcame any desire I had to put Republicans over my knee.

You did hear what Kerry said, didn't you? Come on now .. surely you have. [refresher] For the few of you who might have been in a 48-hour coma, The Poodle was talking to a group of college students in Pasadena, California (where else?) on Monday when he said: "You know, education--if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."

So there you have it. There's your choice. According to Mr. Band-Aid Purple Heart, you either become smart, or end up serving in our armed forces.

John Kerry seems to have a deep-seated disdain (bordering on hatred) for those in uniform. Remember, please, that it was John Kerry who, many years ago, talked about our troops in Vietnam regularly committing atrocities against innocent women and children. It was also John Kerry who remarked earlier this year about American troops in Iraq "terrorizing" women and children. How dare that pompous ass suggest that it is our troops who are doing the terrorizing over there?

For the record, Kerry is dead wrong. Not that he cares. Just four days ago The Heritage Foundation issued a report by Tim Kane entitled "Who Are the Recruits? The Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Enlistment, 2003-2005." You have the link, go and read the report for yourself. If you do you will find that a higher percentage of military recruits have graduated from high school than the general population. In 2004 82.7% of recruits were high school graduates while another 7.03% had their GEDs. The national high school graduation rate that year was 79.8%. Even today, in 2006, the high school graduation rate for recruits is still higher than the high school graduation rate for the civilian population. Looks to me like the recruits are doing pretty well. You'll also find that "the Department of Defense reported that the mean reading level of 2004 recruits is a full grade level higher than that of the comparable youth population."

Clearly John Kerry had no idea what in the hell he was talking about .. the arrogant putz.

So .. the firestorm erupts, and here comes Kerry to the microphones to set the record straight. Did he apologize for his insult against our troops? Are you kidding? Not only did he not apologize, but he actually had the stones to try to tell us he wasn't talking about our troops, he was talking about Bush! I would ask just how stupid Kerry thinks Americans are --- but the very fact that he thinks we should have made him president indicates what his answer, were he to be truthful, would be.

These men and women are on the front lines, giving up their lives, to defend us from Islamic fascism -- and Kerry is back here talking about what intellectual failures they are. Intellectual failures that terrorize women and children in the night.

Do we hang the sins of John Kerry around the necks of all Democrats? Well, let me ask you. Did you hear of one single Democrat .. just one .. anywhere .. stepping forward to repudiate what Kerry said? Maybe some Democrat did, but I sure as hell haven't heard anything about it. Have you? A Democrat congressional candidate in Iowa has gone so far as to say Kerry's words were "inappropriate." Hardly an apology .. but he did ask Kerry to cancel a planned campaign visit to his district.

In other words ... these gutless wonders who just love to tell us how much they truly do support our troops won't even stand up to be heard when our soldiers are slandered by this rich woman's boy toy.

This is such a gift to the Republicans. It's as if Karl Rove himself paid John Kerry a large amount of money to read from a script. It couldn't be better. Here we are, on the even of the 2006 mid-term elections...in which the Democrats are poised to take over the House and maybe the Senate. Now here comes John Kerry, standard-bearer of his party in the last presidential election...to slander our troops. Bad move....even the most anti-war politician never blames the troops. It's political suicide.

So .. that's it. We're six days out, and I've come unglued. Sure, the Republicans have become just another party of big government and pork barrel spending ... but at least they don't slander the very men and women who are shedding blood every single day to defend our country.

Give me the big-spenders who support our troops over the big-spenders who slander them any day.

I'm voting Republican.

We'll just have to figure out another way to take these Republicans miscreants to the woodshed.

Good job, John. You might the guy who forces Pelosi to send her new drapes back.

Update: Jay Tea and I are on the same page.

Final update: Looks like Kerry ignored the Nutroots folks- who must be apoplectic right now- and finally did the right thing.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:24 PM | Comments (101) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 06, 2006

Support from an unexpected source

Michelle Malkin joins the legion of folks like me by advocating that you should Brew Your Own Beer.

Oh wait, it's a political post that mentions Miller and Anheuser Busch's support of illegal immigration. Since I don't drink their beer anyway, my new lack of support will go largely unnoticed by the two brewing giants. But my point still stands: brew your own beer. If you want some info, this archive is as good a place to start as any, in my humble opinion.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 31, 2006

Potential horror show

I know that I've said many times that the Republicans deserve to lose their majority this fall. This editorial from Opinionjournal.com does give me pause, though. Excerpt:

Consider the man likely to run the Judiciary Committee, Michigan's John Conyers, from the Congressional class of 1964. He recently made his plans clear in a 370-page report, "The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Coverup in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance." The report accuses the Administration of violating no fewer than 26 laws and regulations, and is a road map of Mr. Conyers's explicit intention to investigate grounds for impeaching President Bush. ... Ways and Means, the chief economic policy panel, would go to New York's Charlie Rangel (1970), who opposed the Bush tax cuts and recently voted against free trade with tiny Oman. His committee's crucial health care subcommittee would be run by California's Pete Stark (1972), who in 1993 criticized Hillary Clinton's health care proposal because the government wasn't dominant enough. Over at Financial Services, the ascension of Barney Frank (1980) would mean a reprieve for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, despite $16 billion in accounting scandals. His main reform priority has been to carve out a new affordable housing fund from the two companies' profits. And forget about any major review of Sarbanes-Oxley. ... And then there's Alcee Hastings, who, should Ms. Pelosi succeed in pushing aside current ranking Member Jane Harman, would take over the House Intelligence Committee. Before he won his Florida seat in 1992, Mr. Hastings had been a federal judge who was impeached and convicted by a Democratic Congress for lying to beat a bribery rap. He would handle America's most vital national secrets.

I have nothing useful to add to this except ugh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 30, 2006

Oink, oink baby

Today's Pig of the Day

It looks like we have a winner: Ted Stevens(R-AK), come on down! You're the final contestant on Who's a Whiny, Obnoxious, Petulant, Self-Important Senatorial Prick.

Actually, Senator Stevens has provided an invaluable service for me: I had promised to blog frequently pigs, if for no other reason than to aggravate the many jihadists who keep hacking Aaron's site. And I have to admit that I had fallen down on the job. Congratulations, Ted. You've just reminded me that the biggest oinkers feed at the federal trough.

Oh no, did I post this within 60 days on an election? No? Then I guess that I'll have to repost it on or after September 8 of this year.

I'd like to point out that I don't actually enjoy blogging about politics(and others do it much better). I started out blogging about the things that interested/entertained me: brewing beer, old(bad) jokes, technology/computer issues. But I will be damned if I let such a blatently unconstitutional law prevent me from blogging about whatever I feel like. Starting September 8, almost every post on this site will involve politics. I will post free political ads to whomever asks me(I'm not kidding myself- almost no one knows that this site exists); I will post commentary on the views/votes of politicians; and I will mercilessly mock those running for office. Will these activities run me afoul of McCain-Feingold? Good. I'll bet that I won't be the only one.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:46 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 11, 2006

The time has come

Kim du Toit just reminded me that we, the American people, are about to be subjected to the "no political ads within 60 days of an election" bullshit of the McCain-Feingold Act. And he has a dandy idea for any and all political persuasions who believe that the First Amendment means what it says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

In Kim's words:

Here’s my promise: If a conservative organization wants to run a political ad criticizing any Congressman up for re-election during that 60-day window, I’ll let them run one on this website, for free, right up until Election Day.

And if Congress or for that matter law enforcement think that I’m going to refrain from criticizing an elected or wannabe-elected official, ever, they’re sadly mistaken.

Sounds good to me. Anyone want to put a political ad on my blog free of charge? Not surprisingly, Misha is on board as well.

redstate-pledge-screwmg.jpeg

I just remembered something that Stephen Macklin posted in the comments to this post of mine. I'll repeat it here because it's too good not to share:

My blog will change in response to FEC rules. No more quizzes, no more book or movie memes. All political advocacy all the time.

Damn right.


Update: Dean sports the blue version of the image above, which is entirely appropriate. This is an area where the left and the right have the same goal in mind: free speech unregulated by Congress, just as the Constitution demands.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:42 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 05, 2006

Stupidity on display

I'd like to thank Jonah for persuing the Democratic Underground for me; I value my sanity far too much to wade into the fever swamps. Anyway, the post in question proves that burning jet fuel could not have possible caused the Twin Towers to collapse.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to point out the numerous holes in this dipshit's methodology.

Update: Of course I would mis-type a word in the title of post in which I mock the idiocy of others. Of course I would.

Update: Mike poses what is, I believe, the appropriate question:


Sweet leapin’ Jesus, can they really be this stupid? I mean, really?

It was, of course, a rhetorical question.


Posted by Physics Geek at 02:58 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 30, 2006

In a nutshell

I've avoided mentioning the Times-squared publishing the details of SWIFT, mainly because others have beaten the issue to death. Suffice it to say, despite protestions to the contrary, not ALL the terrorists worldwide knew about the program at all. God bless the Times-squared, though, because Osama-Muhammed-Achmed-Brunhilde-Grendel-Zarqawi-BinLaden-Hussein-Casper-the-friendly-ghost knows every intimate detail now. So much so, in fact, that they can probably avoid being caught by this program for, well, forever.

Lileks weighs in, as only he can. Excerpt:


September 10, 2006: The New York Times runs a story about a CIA agent named Mohammed Al-Ghouri, 1034 Summit Park, Evanston Illinois, who is attempting to penetrate a radical sleeper cell suspected of having 19 liters of homemade mustard gas. The series concludes with the agent’s obituary, and a moving quote from a CIA historian who notes that the “al-Ghouri was one of rare, brave breed whose names and deeds are rarely known. Except in this case, of course.”

Criticized for blowing the agent’s cover, a Times spokesman tartly noted that “this man is – sorry, was a government employee, and if he’s using taxpayer money to take terrorists out to lunch, we think the people ought to know, if only so they judge the menu items chosen on behalf of the government. Was veal consumed? Because a lot of people are sensitive to the veal issue.”

I can't even work up a "mheh" to this post, because it strikes me as strangely prescient, rather than mocking.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:41 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 28, 2006

Assorted assholes nothing

Goldstein? Two.

Best description of Sullivan that I've seen in a long time:


Here’s the thing: Sullivan claims he’s quite familiar with homophobic attacks from the gay left (whatever that now is), and yet he doesn’t appear to have much of a problem with a progressivist agenda that, while it might ultimately push through the policy he wants (legalization of gay marriage), will do so at a price that would be more than a little damaging to the conservatism Sullivan claims to embrace. No doubt he sees himself as being pragmatic when he selectively embraces constitutionally dubious methodologies; me, I just see a guy who’s spent the last several years throwing a very public temper tantrum.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 22, 2006

Nothing to see here

Just move along, folks. Keep moving. No WMD here. Excerpt from Neal Boortz's take:


We've known for several months that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq. Despite the mainstream media and the Democrats' lying to the contrary, several chemical weapons have been found that qualify as WMD. But people have ignored the evidence...since it would blow a hole in their 'Bush Lied, people died' nonsense. To be fair, the Bush Administration has done little to correct the record on this issue.

Now a new report from the Pentagon sheds some light on just how many WMDs have been found, and it's a lot. We're not just talking an old Sarin shell here and there. No less than 500 chemical weapons have been found since 2003, according to a recently declassified defense department intelligence report. The weapons are of the mustard gas and Sarin nerve gas variety...nasty stuff.
So why isn't this major breaking news?

Because the WMDs are said to be manufactured before 1991....not in recent years. Therefore, the mainstream media and the Democrats don't count those. For some reason, they want WMDs made in recent years. Evidently the left likes their mustard gas just a little fresher. But that's not the point. This stuff can kill ... but to the left it's harmless.

All that matters is Saddam Hussein was lying when he said he got rid of all his WMDs. He clearly did not. Also, what do you suppose would have happened had Hussein sold some of these WMD's to Islamic terrorists? It wouldn't have been pretty. But this story will be ignored...and the leftist propaganda machine that says Saddam Hussein wasn't a threat will roll on.

I question the timing.

Update: Found these links over in the comment section of this post by Ace: here, here and here. I can't remember where I saw another collection of WMD links, but I'll post it when it comes to me.

Update: See-Dubya pulls this link from the archives:


An official involved in the inquiry in Jordan told AFP news agency: “We found primary materials to make a chemical bomb which, if it had exploded, would have made nearly 20,000 deaths … in an area of one square kilometre. “The target of this bomb was the headquarters of the Intelligence Services,” situated on a hill in the western suburb of Amman, he added.

Here that ripping sound? That's the sound of goalposts being moved.

Final update: From Bill Quick: Which is, of course, not just moving the goalposts down the field, but over to another planet.

What he said.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 19, 2006

Schadenfreude: it's not just for breakfast anymore

The following statement about Dan Rather from Bill Quick echoes my own sentiments. Minus the excessive profanity, of course.


Nobody wants to see your sagging mug or watch your lying lips, especially not in high definition.

Go home. Go to bed. Or go watch nostalgia movies about a time that never existed, over and over again, all alone.

I rather like that image, by the way: You, sitting in a darkened movie theater, a stray tear leaking down your raddled cheek over what might have been, might have been, but never will be again. All...alone.

Makes me feel all warm and happy inside.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 06, 2006

Justice...

I've waited patiently for some actual facts to appear in the Duke lacrosse case. Statements by the DA and/or Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton do not qualify as such. Apparently, plenty of facts have been unearthed. Unfortunately for the DA, they do not support his publicly stated position.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

June 05, 2006

What he said

From Vox:

UPDATE - Podhoretz the Younger does not disappoint with the eminently predictable reaction to Noonan's column:
In my book, Can She Be Stopped?, I specifically warn Republicans and conservatives about the temptation to listen to the "siren song of schism" — the notion that they would be better off casting a protest or third-party vote in 2008. Such a vote, no matter how principled it might seem, would have only one result, and that is to elect Hillary Clinton. It is a default vote for Hillary Clinton....

If people cannot stomach voting Republican and need to cast a protest vote, that is their right. But nobody should be under any illusions about what it means. It means Democratic rule.

Which differs from the current rule in precisely what regards? Ignoring the Constitution 90 percent of the time instead of 75 percent? Signing up for 100 percent of globalist decrees instead of 85 percent of them? Invading and occupying countries without oil instead of countries with oil?

Better an open enemy that faces you than the false friend who stabs you in the back.

I'm beginning to think that it's time to resurrect the Howard the Duck campaign.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:50 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 19, 2006

WTF?! moment of the day

In today's Washington Times comes this little article which you're just going to love. Excerpt:


The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment -- even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents.

Are you kidding me? Are you fucking kidding me? And this result would have been different HOW if Democrats were in charge of the Senate? Anyway, it continues.

"There was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted. That sounds like amnesty to me," said Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican who offered the amendment yesterday to strip out those provisions of the immigration reform bill. "It just boggles the mind how people could be against this amendment."

The Ensign amendment was defeated on a 50-49 vote.

"We all know that millions of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for years and sometimes decades while they work to contribute to our economy," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.

"The Ensign amendment would undermine the work of these people by preventing lawfully present immigrant workers from claiming Social Security benefits that they earned before they were authorized to work in our community," he said. "If this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard for would be taken from them and their families."

Senator McCain, let me clue you in on a little secret: you will never, never, NEVER become president. The Democrats only pretend to like you because you oppose the actual conservative Republicans; they will never vote for you. And the Republicans hate you more and more each day.

What's that you say? I'm breaking your unConstitutional law by posting an overtly political post on my blog? Go fuck yourself, you pretentious fop.

Hey, I just used profanity. That should protect this post. However, if I need actual pornography to prevent legal action, I'll Photoshop a picture of Senator RINO fellating a pig and Googlebomb the damned thing so that every search for Johnny boy finds that image.

Update: Not surprisingly, Michelle Malkin is all over this issue. I especially liked Mary Katherine Ham's response:


Seriously, if you could see me now, I'm very Yosemite Sam. Very stampy and tantrumy and incoherent.

Unlike me, she manages to comment on this Senatorial debacle without cursing. Then again, I believe that she's missing a golden opportunity here. Some things are worth a few choice Anglo-Saxon expletives.

Update: Not surprisingly, Kim du Toit is a bit unhappy.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 16, 2006

The president's speech

I was driving home when CNN accidentally cut in to Bush's warmup. Nice work, guys. I've got some belly button lint that has the IQ to replace you. Anyway, I listened to most of the speech in the car and then watched the end on TV. I believe that I can break it down to its barest bones:


I pretend that I don't like amnesty, but everyone knows that we're going to do it anyway.

I'm going to secure the borders by sending some National Guardsmen down to push some pencils around. That'll really, really scare the illegal immigrants.

Catch-and-release is a failure which I'll end right after amnesty makes all of the illegals legal.

The hi-tech fence we're building at some point in the future won't be completed during my term, so don't worry if you see nothing being done. It's a feature, not a bug.

Finally, if you heard anything different during this speech than you did back in 2001, please stay asleep. I'm counting on it.

Thank you, and good night. Now go away and stop bothering me.

You might say that I'm a bit underwhelmed. Apparently I'm not the only one.

Mrs. IMAO(the artist formerly known as Sarah K.) was not impressed.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 15, 2006

My response

I started this humble blog as an outlet for things that interest me: making beer, telling (bad) jokes, and general geekery. The 2004 election pulled me kicking an screaming into political blogging which, I might add, isn't something I actually excel at. However, Jim Geraghty reiterates his point that conservatives who choose to sit out the November elections are umm, what's the phrase? Oh yeah, here it is: fucking morons. Mr. Geraghty uses more appropriate language, of course, but it's still sounds pretty damned condescending to me. Excerpt:


doubted the strategic wisdom of conservatives sitting out this election to “teach Republicans a lesson”; several bloggers have responded.

There are still doubters and skeptics, though. What’s really stunning is this absolute certainty of angry conservatives that A) Republicans will learn the right lessons from the defeat, and not, say, respond in a panic by embracing their inner RINO and flailing around for MSM approval and B) that the Republicans can easily win back Congress in 2008, just by stiffening their spines and pledging to return to their conservative roots.

I have my doubts on both counts. For starters, why would Republicans get the message that “we need to be more conservative” in a year that conservatives were knocked out?


Who are the Republican lawmakers most angering the conservative base? Well, let’s say Sens. Trent “I’m tired of hearing about Porkbusters” Lott, Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, John McCain for cosponsoring Kennedy’s immigration bill and campaign finance reform, Arlen Specter for being a pain in the tushie over judges, Chuck Hagel for being the New York Times’ favorite Republican senator to criticize Bush, and other minimally-conservative Republicans like Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Well, they’re not going to lose in 2006. Most of ‘em aren’t even up for reelection this year.


Look at the Republicans most in jeopardy in 2006. (I’m using National Journal’s most recent rankings.)

In the Senate, a bad year for the Republicans would mean the loss of Rick Santorum (who has lifetime American Conservative Union rating of 88 out of a possible 100, and a 92 in 2005) in Pennsylvania, Jim Talent (93 rating lifetime, and a 96 in 2005) in Missouri, Conrad Burns (91, and a perfect 100 in 2005) in Montana and Mike DeWine (80 lifetime, only 56 in 2005) in Ohio. Of course, Ohio voters who sit this one out will replace DeWine with Sherrod Brown, who has a lifetime rating of 8 and 4 for 2005. And they won’t get to revisit that decision until 2012.
...
Nice job, guys. Your effort to re-conservativize the Republican Party in Washington by staying home this year will have the effect of massacring the actual conservatives and empowering the moderates who you disdain. Perhaps we can call this counterproductive maneuver “RINO-plasty.”

But that’s okay, the staying-at-home-conservatives insist. The GOP will win back the House and Senate in 2008, establishing a true conservative majority.

Maybe. But as I mentioned, what kind of lengths do you think the Democrats will go to in order to keep power once they’ve got it? Does the “Fairness Doctrine” ring a bell? You think Pelosi and Reid wouldn’t try that tactic to hinder conservative talk radio? How about McCain-Feingold 2.0, with a particular focus on controlling “unregulated speech” on the Internet and blogs?

Think the MSM was cheerleading for Democrats in 2004? How much more fair and balanced do you think they’ll be when their task is to defend Democratic House and Senate majorities AND elect President Hillary Rodham Clinton? My guess is, they’ll make the CBS memo story look accurate and evenhanded by comparison.

Think the GOP can prevail in close races once they’re out of power? Ask the members of the military who had their ballots in Florida blocked. Ask Doug Forrester how well his anti-Torricelli campaign worked when he suddenly faced Frank Lautenberg at the last minute. Ask Dino Rossi. Ask Democrat Tim Johnson if he’s glad the last county in South Dakota to report its results just happened to have enough of a Democratic margin to put him over the top in 2002.
...
We usually like looking at the Daily Kos crowd insisting for an immediate pullout of the troops or impeachment hearings right this second and we laugh at them for their ludicrously unrealistic expectations.


But apparently the Kos are not the only ones with an all-or-nothing mentality. Sometimes in life you have to use the West Coast offense, nickel and diming your way down the field instead of going for the long bomb. If I want a more conservative government, I get it by electing the more conservative of the two choices, even if he isn’t as conservative as I would like. I do not get it by sitting on the sidelines and pouting, and letting the less conservative guy take the reigns of power.

For this I get labeled a “bamboobzled [sic] boob” by the likes of Bill Quick. Yeah, I’m the unreasonable one.

I will concede the point that the Democrats, once back in power, are likely to pass numerous laws which will make it more difficult for them to lose that power. Democrats will likely pass laws which further curtail our freedoms, most notably freedom of speech, and likely increase the flood of illegal immigration. And that's different from today how? Let me list what I see as the good things that have come from having Republicans control DC:

1) Nomination 2 judges for SCOTUS that look pretty good philosophically

2) Taking the fight to the enemy

That's about it. Everything else blows great big freaking chunks. I'm sick and tired of being forced to swallow my own vomit while being told that it's yummy milkshake. And for what it's worth, lecturing to me as to a small child on how stupid and irresponsible I am probably isn't the best tack to take. Want to persuade me? Don't spend all of your time telling me how bad things will get under Democrat leadership. I already know. Tell me how much better things will get if we re-elect the current Republican leadership.

What's that? I can't hear you. Cat got your tongue?

Republicans have become Democrat-lite. Increasingly, that "light" distinction has gotten heavier, like someone working his way up from skim milk to half-and-half. And I'm sick of it. If you're pushing me down the path to Hell, speed up. When the journey progresses slowly, people tend not to notice until it's much too late. If, instead, you grease the skids so that we hit rock bottom quickly, people might actually wake up and do something. Everything turning to shit usually gets attention. If not, we're lost already and we might as well get on with how things are going to turn out anyway.

So let's get it on this November. I'm ready for whatever happens and, unlike Mr. Geraghty, am unlikely to complain about the intellectual inferiority or emotional instability of the voters should they vote differently than I'd like them to. This is due, in part, to the fact that I'm an adult and don't expect things to always go my way. But hey, your mileage may vary.

Update: The Emperor suggests an idea that I can support.


If you’re lucky enough to live in a State or a District whose representative is a true conservative, and that goes for all of us who might be that lucky, vote for him or her. DO get out the vote and make your voices heard. This is NOT about stomping our feet and being silly, we leave that to the other side.

If not, however, if you happen to have an incumbent who is about as “conservative” as Harry Reid, let’s find a conservative counter-candidate for the primaries that we can back up and stump for until our fingers bleed. I volunteer whatever clout I may have for the cause and I will do anything (short of breaking the law, and the CFR doesn’t count since it’s un-Constitutional and thus I am not bound by my oath to uphold it, as a matter of fact I’m bound by it to do the exact oppposite) to boost their campaign.

Let’s get some true conservatives on the ballot, and let’s use our strength to work together, not against each other.

But if our guys don’t prevail in the primaries, don’t expect me to back the RINO “because he’s not Pelosi”, because I’m a little bit too mature to fall for Democrat campaign slogans. I’m staying at home.

Update:Mark Tapscott discusses the issue eloquently. Go there now.

Update: Good illustration over here. My only argument is that it doesn't show the critter with both heads up its own ass.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:36 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 10, 2006

What he said

I've shied away from posting about the whole Minutemen/Mexico bruhaha because others have covered in great detail. However, I couldn't resist posting Neal Boortz's take on it:


There were reports yesterday that our government is telling the Mexican government where the Minutemen are gathering to monitor illegal crossings of our border. Our government denies it. So .. whom to believe?

OK .. a little cogitation here.

The charge made by reporter Sara Carter is that the U.S. Border Patrol is telling the Mexican government where the Minutemen are staging their vigils. The Border Patrol says it isn't so.

Now you tell me ... what branch of our government oversees the U.S. Border Patrol? Now remember, there are only four branches of the government in Washington. Can you name them? Well ... if you're fresh from your experience at government education, probably not. But they are the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch and the Lobbyist Branch. Now, of these four branches, which is the only branch that has shown no inclination to do anything about the thousands of invaders who are crashing our border with Mexico? Well, actually there are two. It's not the Legislative Branch. Both houses of Congress are currently discussing proposals to shut down the borders. It's not the Judicial Branch. They merely interpret and enforce the laws set forth by the other branches. What does that leave? The Lobbyist Branch and the Executive Branch. The Lobbyist Branch is busy working for those businesses in this country who benefit from the Mexican invasion. The problem is, the Lobbyist Branch has no operational control over the Border Patrol. That leaves the Executive Branch. Clearly George Bush, who runs the Executive Branch, has shown absolutely no inclination whatsoever to take even the smallest step to stop this massive invasion of the American homeland, and it's George Bush who exercises the executive control over the policies and activities of the Border Patrol. So ... what do you think? Here we have a president with no interest in stopping the invasion, and we have a Border Patrol under his control that is reported to be handing information to the Mexican government regarding the locations of the Minutemen operations? Draw your own conclusions.

The next question is why? Why would our government tell the Mexican government where the Minutemen are? Well, we know that the Mexican government is complicit in the invasion. Mexicans are openly encouraged by the Mexican government to cross the border into the US so that they can get higher-paying jobs and send money back to Mexico. Right now that money totals about $20 billion a year. Now if the Mexican government knew just where the Minutemen were, they could either hold back the invaders in those areas, or send them to areas where the Minutemen aren't. Simply put -- if we have people in our own government who are giving the enemy the locations of our border defense forces, there could only be one reason --- to enable the invasion.

Unless it can be proven that GWB had no knowledge about, and did not grant approval for, this crap, it's time to start impeachment proceedings.

I guess that it's a sign of the End Times when I'm in agreement with the Kosmonauts. It's the whole broken, fucked up, asshat clock thing.

Update: John Derbyshire puts it rather succinctly:


This thing about our govt. colluding with Narcistan — sorry, I mean Mexico — to keep the flow of illegal immigrants coming, is the last straw. Either our govt. is criminally incompetent, or else it is maliciously hostile to ordinary American citizens. Or both.

I kept my mouth pretty well shut when the splendid whack-'em'upside-the-head assault on Iraq turned into a ludicrous and apologetic "nation-building" exercise. I bellyached in a restrained fashion at the Harriet Miers farce. I kept my grumbling over Medicaid, the budget bloat, and border security at a decently low volume. This one, though, I can't take.

I can't think of a single thing to say in favor of the national Republican party, its senators, representatives, governors, and administration. I can't think of a single reason why, right now, I should vote for any of them.

I could never vote for the liberal mob; but if a conservative third party comes up between now and 2008, they'll have my full attention — likely my money and my vote, too. We are on the last page of Animal Farm here; I can no longer tell the men from the pigs.

Oink, oink baby.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 08, 2006

Post of the day

I can usually count on Ace to provide me with the latest in dick and fart jokes. He takes a somewhat different tack today. Excerpt:


Some people actually chose to become, as Slate dubbed them, "shark apolgists." In a territorial dispute between sharks, which wanted to eat people, and human swimmers, who wanted to not be eaten, some biologists and environmentalists actually argued in favor of the sharks' "right" to chow down on 11-year-old boys. After all-- it's their territory. They have to eat too, right?

It was a sickening example of the Moral Vanity of Objectivity being taken to the next level -- not only are Americans not to be favored over non-Americans, but now human beings (and children, too!) are not even to be favored over non-human, non-sentinent aquatic predators.

Hey-- let's just take the fact that we're human, and have, of course, an "irrational bias" in favor of humanity, out of the equation. Viewed in "objective" terms, in which we don't favor humans just because we're humans -- viewing things as if we were space aliens, in other words, and space aliens who further don't favor the sentient over non-sentient -- there is no special objective reason to favor human children over sharks, right?

Liberals and leftists are forever patting themselves on the back for removing their natural affinities from the moral equation -- or at least pretending to -- and they praise themselves so highly for this habit that they scarcely realize what they are urging is not a "higher morality," but a moral obscenity.

If you are so far gone that you cannot privilege human beings over a goddamned shark, for crying out loud-- congratulations. You have, in moral terms, more or less removed yourself from the human race. Almost every other human being would favor you over an unthinking shark; but you do not return the favor, even out of respect for an implied compact (you favor me over the sharks, so, in return, I will favor you, even if I don't really agree with the principle behind that "humanocentric" favoritism).

And yes: If you cannot privilege your fellow Americans over non-Americans in your moral calculus -- even knowing you receive the benefit of that favoritism from the vast majority of your fellow Americans, who would of course save an American's life over a foreigner's, if they had to choose, and all other considerations being equal -- then you've effectively removed yourself from true citizenship and community with your fellow Americans.

But don't question their patriotism. They hate when you do that.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:02 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

May 04, 2006

Bite me, GOP

I receive several mass mailings from our GOP leaders every week, begging for more of my hard-earned money. Usually, I douse the letter in gasoline, set fire to it and dance around in my underwear screaming "How you like me now, beeyotch?!". However, Sacred Cow Burgers has convinced me that I should actually donate something, and that something is this:

heres_my_donation.jpeg

Link via Michelle Malkin.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 29, 2006

QWERTY reporting for duty, sir!

Okay, it's a bit over the top, especially since I've never served(my father did though; does that count?). Anyway, see Captain Ed, Frank J. and Derek for more info.

I support the war on terror. Could some things have been done better? Sure. Then again, hindsight is always 20-20.

And here's the logo, which will be proudly displayed in the sidebar as soon as I can update my template:

fighting101s.jpeg

Here's the blogroll:


Posted by Physics Geek at 10:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 25, 2006

Rrequired reading

Sometimes, Mike is good. Other times, he's damned good. Excerpt:


f you want our national defense to be supervised by such people, vote Democrat. I know lots of people — Bill Quick and Al Maviva, two people whose opinions I deeply respect and almost always agree with, come immediately to mind, but there are others — who say they’re done with the Republicans. I sympathize greatly; I’m pretty pissed at them myself. Al and I have tossed some e-mails back and forth about all this, and I simply can’t say he’s wrong; I share his frustration, and I think it’s more than clear that the Repubs do indeed need a damned sharp reminder of what they’re supposed to be all about.

But every time I’m just about to the point of joining Al and Bill and tossing off a long goodbye-and-good-riddance letter to the Repubs here, I run across something like this. And the marrow-freezing thought of the Dems running our foreign-policy and national-security strategies stops me dead in my tracks.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

In a nutshell

The fact that President Bush, among others, has publicly called for an investigation into the high price of gas pisses me off, because he should know better. Liberals are even more hypocritical on this issue, as Jonah so clearly illustrates:


We are horribly dependent on foreign oil. But we shouldn't develop domestic oil or boost our refining capacity. We need a gas tax to wean Americans from foreign oil, but high gas prices are an outrage. We need alternative forms of energy, but we shouldn't use nuclear power. We need renewable, sustainable energy, unless it spoils the view of rich liberal icons.

Got it?

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 24, 2006

I go on vacation and...

Michelle Malkin founds "the world's first full-service conservative Internet broadcast network", which goes by the name Hot Air. Bryan Preston and the Maker of Worlds are on board as well. Their purpose? I'll let Michelle give you the scoop:


I formed Hot Air Network, LLC, to bring ideological diversity—because we all love diversity–to the videoblogging world. And because it looked like a lot of fun. Two of the most cutting-edge bloggers on the Right have joined me in my cyberquest: video editing whiz Bryan Preston and the almighty Allah Pundit. Allah likes to think of us as a little Internet garage band. Only we’re playing in three separate home offices and a basement. But you get the idea.

And now my already extensive blogroll expands a wee bit more. Very, very cool.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Bark! Bark! Bark! Owwooooo!

Well, well, well. I've received various responses to one of my posts that have, on occasion, been a tad out there. However, I feel that I've finally arrived: I just got my first raving, anti-Semitic, frothing moonbat response. Not to be confused with non-anti-Semitic frothing moonbat. Anyway, I've adjusted the comments to reflect what he/she really meant to say. However, I couldn't resist the temptation to reveal what this oozing pustule on the ass of humanity had to say. Let's examine the comment line by stark raving batshit crazy line:


The comment justifying the stance of Israel is ridiculous. Israelis have become biggest destroyers of humanity..they are repeating Nazis have done to them

What was the comment to which this brain donor referred? Perhaps this one:


1) Israel peacefully coexists with its frothing mad neighbors

2) Said neighbors kill a buttload of Israelis

3) Israel kills the people responsible

4) The world condemns Israel's action as not helping the peace process

5) Repeat ad nauseum

Why yes, I can how the idea that a country that only wants peace might actually take issue with the murder of its citizens could make you mad. And the Nazi reference just gives the whole construct some panache. But let's continue with our peace lover:


When i read about the fucking cruelty which they show to palestinians today, i feel that Nazis should have burned all of them alive at that time itself, so that the world would have been better.

Wow. I wonder if this most civilized of commenters hies from Europe, considering that that is the prevailing opinion over there. I'm certain that if a nuke wiped out Israel, a few of our self-styled betters would wipe a tear from their cheeks before continuing their slide into the abtss. Most, though, would probably celebrate for weeks on end because "that shitty little country" would no longer bother their collective consciences which, of course, are underdeveloped.

Here's an FYI to any other people who feel tempted to post anti-Semitic claptrap on this my blog: don't. I reserve the right to censor you, ban you, fuck with your comment in general. I do not tolerate your kind here. Now go fuck yourself.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:31 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 19, 2006

Cool: a conservative woman and minority to boot

I read with disgust the insane rantings on idiotic moonbats on Michell Malkin's site. However, Frank J. has started a list of blogs that are proud to display the following banner:

malksup1.jpg

I am a proud supporter of Michelle Malkin's right to be a woman and a minority.
Feel free to join in.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:14 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

I do not think it means what you think it means

Here's the title of the article: U.S.: Israel Has Right to Defend Itself

And here is some of the text:


Israel has a right to defend itself but should consider the effect on peace prospects as it weighs a response to a deadly suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, the State Department said Tuesday.

Peace prospects? PEACE PROSPECTS?! Are you fucking kidding me? The only peace that Hamas wants is the kind that they'll get when all of those icky Jews are dead. Well excuse me for thinking that Israel should make a new parking lot where the current Palestinian headquarters are located.

It's like Groundhog Day, only without the Andie McDowell sex at the end:

1) Israel peacefully coexists with its frothing mad neighbors

2) Said neighbors kill a buttload of Israelis

3) Israel kills the people responsible

4) The world condemns Israel's action as not helping the peace process

5) Repeat ad nauseum

The freaks out there depend on the fact that the Israelis are civilized people. THere are many times that I wish they were a little less civilized and that they would fucking wipe one of their enemies off the map. Then again, I'm a dick, so your mileage may vary.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:00 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 14, 2006

I think that I've found Comedhimmi Central's business partner

And it's the entire country of England. Excerpt:


When asked about his play on the last day at Augusta, Woods replied: "I putted atrociously today. Once I got on the greens, I was a spaz."

In several countries, "spaz" is an offensive term for people affected with spastic paralysis, a form of cerebral palsy.

Britain-based disability organization Scope, formerly The Spastics Society, said of Woods's comments: "Once again, Tiger Woods demonstrates that we are two nations divided by a common language. "

I submit that Scope is populated by wool-headed wankers whose sole purpose in life is to search for every possible insult-

"Look, he said 'Spaz'!"

"Uh, that was a grunt in Swahili that means 'my penis is a dripping pustule'".

"He insulted me. Make him apologize!!!!"

- that will allow them to run around like monkeys in a zoo, screeching at the top of their lungs and flinging poo at people passing by. Screech away, my little dipshits.

Update: The Emperor puts it a little more succinctly:


Shut up. Just shut. the. fuck. UP!

If the best thing you dickheaded retards can find to occupy your time with is running around demanding apologies because someone, somewhere, might possibly have gotten offended, then we’d appreciate it very much if you’d just get in your cars, run a hose from the exhaust through a window and start playing with the gas pedal.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:10 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 07, 2006

Psst, WSJ editorial writers: look over here.

I'm giving you the finger, you self-important sphincter muscles. I know that you want an unrestricted flood of people pouring into this country, illegal or not. Come to think of it, you'd probably like to change the term "illegal alien" to "my future gardner". You're certainly entitled to share your opinion as much as you want. But you might want to drop the condescending tone when you're lecturing all the rest of brain-dead yokels, because some of us might be disinclined to pay any attention to you. Just an FYI, in case you care, which you obviously don't.

Ehh, I wasn't going to bother, but here's the excerpt:


The problem is not that 11 million foreigners are here working. The problem is that they're here illegally. Efforts to close off future flows, or deport illegal aliens already here en masse, would do economic harm to all Americans, both low- and high-income. Let's hope the Congress figures that out as well.

Let's hope that Congress doesn't heed your rather ill-considered advice.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 05, 2006

The perky one swaps her morning gig for an anchor desk

MRC has compiled a list of what it considers good examples of Katie's "leftward tilt" , although I think that Katie has long since fallen onto the ground on her left side, started sinking and has disappeared beneath the surface.

I do think that some of the examples are a bit overblown. I expect Katie's liberal tendencies to make their appearance , um, frequently. However, there are some fairly egregious statements. Check it out for yourself.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:58 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

April 02, 2006

Quote of the day

And it's from Jeff Goldstein:


To which I say, listen, honey: I’m really sorry nobody invited you to the prom—which I’m certain is the source of this kind of laughable projection.

But looking back, can you really blame them? I mean, what guy in his right mind would want to spend the wee hours of the morning having some bitter, long-suffering ideologue read Gertrude Stein to him while his rented-tux tucked erection (already dubious, given the company) is folding up tent and trying to make a run for his own asshole?

You have no one to blame but yourself for those lonely lunch table days, Amanda. You are foul, mean, and your commentary is cookie cutter feminist boilerplate. The fact that you mix in a lot of profanity to shock people doesn’t make you edgy. It makes you look pathetic and needy.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 29, 2006

Do you a hand in your pocket?

It belongs to a politician

So Virginia and North Carolina legislators have proposed a $5.00 toll on I-95 at the VA/NC border, to be paid while traveling in either direction. Not surprisingly, this news has kind of slid under the radar until recently. It's probably been stuck in the middle of Governor Kaine's new enormous tax hike road development program. Anyway, let me be one of the first in the blogosphere to give Tim Kaine and the state legistlature the finger.

To see what would make a politician propose such a batshit crazy idea, you first have to understand what goes on in his/her mind. Let's take a trip, shall we? ::CREEAAAKKKKK:: Come on in.(apologies to Robin Williams)


Politician's brain, right side(RS): I'm generating more revenue for needed government programs. All voters will love me!

Politician's brain, left side(LS): You fool! You're stealing more money from the taxpayers, making it harder for them to pay for necessities. You see them only as cash cows from whose teats you continually suck. They'll hate you!

RS: But taxpayers will see how much I'm benefitting from these expenditures. They'll be glad to pay when they see how happy I am when I get re-elected.

LS: Don't you understand? People see their taxes go up during good times because, hey, we all have extra. And then they see their taxes go up during bad times because, hey, we all have to pull together. Taxpayers might be sheep, but eventually they catch onto the idea that you're simply buying votes for yourself instead of looking out for them.

RS: But the only reason people have to exist is as a source of revenue for the government, right?

LS: Screw this. I wonder if I can get a job in the brain of someone more sane, like perhaps a psychotic. I am sooo out of here ::SLAM::


Posted by Physics Geek at 09:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 22, 2006

The defense rests

Well okay, maybe not, since the "Bush sucks!" crowd will never allow facts to sway their firmly held opinions. In truth, since those opinions are the only things solid between their ears, I'm at least sympathetic to their plight.

In any event, I'd like to make my one and only foray into the legality, or lack thereof, of the federal wiretapping programm. Jeff Goldstein has performed a yeoman's effort in wading through the issues and there is no way that I could possibly improve upon his thoughtful posts. Not that his posts changed anyone's minds, of course. The responses ranged from "Bush obviously broke the law" to "Bush obviously didn't break the law". I'm not a lawyer, but I thought that Jeff provided a pretty compelling argument that Bush had good reason to believe that he was on firm legal footing. Well, Byron York, via Betsy's Page, delivers what I believe is a knockout punch. Then again, I don't suffer from BSD and am therefore fully capable of digesting facts, and then using those facts to help form my opinion. Excerpt:


And then the Court of Review did one more thing, something that has repercussions in today's surveillance controversy. Not only could the FISA Court not tell the president how do to his work, the Court of Review said, but the president also had the "inherent authority" under the Constitution to conduct needed surveillance without obtaining any warrant — from the FISA Court or anyone else. Referring to an earlier case, known as Truong, which dealt with surveillance before FISA was passed, the Court of Review wrote: "The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. . . . We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power."

It was a clear and sweeping statement of executive authority. And what was most likely not known to the Court of Review at the time was that the administration had, in 2002, started a program in which it did exactly what the Court of Review said it had the power to do: order the surveillance of some international communications without a warrant.

Read today, In re: Sealed Case does more than simply outline the president's authority. It also puts the administration's warrantless-surveillance decision in some context. What was going on at the time the president made the decision to go ahead with the surveillance? Well, first Congress passed the Patriot Act, giving the administration new powers. Then the FISA Court refused to recognize those powers and attempted to impose outdated restrictions on the administration. Then the White House, faced with the FISA Court's opposition — and with what administration officials believed were some inherent weaknesses in the FISA law — began to bypass the FISA Court in some cases. And then, in In re: Sealed Case, the administration received irrefutable legal support for its actions.

So legal precedent exists which agrees that the President had the authority to perform warrantless wiretaps. Now I sympathize with the purist civil liberatarians that, legal or no, there is something a bit troubling about the whole activity. However, my rejoinder is that (a), the President needed to take steps to prevent another attack on US soil and (b), he had plenty of evidence that his efforts were on firm legal ground. If you believe that the law should be different than it is, then by all means, make the effort to get it changed. But don't stand around bitching about the "patently obvious illegality" of the surveillance program without first trying to acquaint yourself with those stubborn little things called facts.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Must read

Jeff Goldstein takes no prisoners in this post. He offers insight and analysis which, while clearly presented, will be ignored/misinterpreted/misstated by the KOSsacks et al. In fact, the willful ignorance has already begun in the comment section.

I'm not certain how Jeff manages to keep his cool when the drooling idiots start ranting in his comment section. If someone left infantile comments like that on this blog(and let's face it, I have about 3 regular readers), I'd probably start modifying their words to represent what they actually meant to say. Suffice it to say that their names would become closely associated with the phrase "molests baby squirrels" in most search engines.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

March 02, 2006

What he said

The whole Crunchy Con debate strikes me as somewhat, umm, retarded. I've long felt, since reading Dreher's views that there was whiff of self-evident superiority in the attitudes of the people calling themselves "crunchy cons". Turns out that I'm not alone. First up, TKS. Excerpt:


I expected to be done with Crunchy Cons until the book arrived, but there was a bit more positive response to my two cents on the Crunchy debate than I expected, so... here's another thought or two.

A long time ago, a graybeard who had worked at the Washington Post was addressing a group of young journalists, including me, and he said, “It’s not just important to know who you are; it’s important to know who you aren’t. You are not necessarily the common man. Your experiences are not universal. You cannot and should not assume that your readers have had your experiences, and that your worldview is ‘normal.’”

It’s a good lesson. He pointed out that he had heard colleagues saying that the difficulty in finding a good nanny was the biggest single problem facing America today (this conversation was back in the mid-90s).

Haven’t gotten my copy of Crunchy Cons yet, but throughout his career – the New York Post, NR and NRO, Dallas Morning News - Rod writes with clarity and passion about his experiences – spiritual, career, social. In fact, his fearlessness, honesty, and “writing from the heart” are probably what I admire most about him.

Having said that, Rod seems to have presumed that his experiences, tastes, and worldview are much more common than they are; that he’s not just a guy who likes organic food and traditional values, he’s the voice of a Long-Ignored, Rising Movement (or Sensibility). It would be nice to get a better sense of how many Crunchies are out there –Thousands? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Millions or more?

Anecdotal evidence, even from “ literally hundreds of NRO readers”, does not a social trend make. I’ve heard from probably more than 100 NRO readers sharing their positive experiences with Turkey; this does not necessarily signify the rise of the Turkophilic Cons.

The Crunchblog began with a manifesto that declared, in its very first point, “We are conservatives who stand outside the conservative mainstream; therefore, we can see things that matter more clearly.”

I’m trying to come up with a statement that more directly and arrogantly claims, “I’m just plain better than you,” and it’s just not coming to me.

Russell Wardlow appears to be on the same page here and here. Excerpt:


I agree it's serious, in as much as all of this is another example of soft-headed, emotional types trying to reintroduce sophistry, ignorance and welfare statist impulses in the guise of an atrocious brand name with the letters "con" appended to it. A brand name whose purpose is also to feed its adherents' egos by convincing them they're Hip! and With It!, all the while protecting them from the unpleasantness of having to reason through any of their positions.

Couldn't have said it better myself. No really, I couldnt't. Or hadn't you noticed the Sitemeter numbers for this blog?

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 28, 2006

Mheh

Looks like Gerard is on to something here. Fatwaland has some really cool attractions, including my personal favorite, Splode Mountain.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:55 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 25, 2006

Very cool

It turns out that the city of my birth held a pro-Denmark rally today.

Posted by Physics Geek at 05:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 13, 2006

Open letter to Ann Coulter

Ann,

The first time I ever heard of you was back in the day on Politically Incorrect with Bill Mahrer. You earned an enormous number of brownie points back then for repeatedly poking Bill in the eye. Sure, you were a bit snarky, but you were at least funny. Here, I thought, was a great spokesperson for the right. Smart, attractive, witty and more than able to hold her own against the shrill leftists. There were times when I thought you went a tad overboard as a polemicist, but still I defended you. After all: poking Bill Maher in the eye, repeatedly.

I read Slander, which I thought provided great detail on the hypocrisy of the left and its proponents repeated attacks on conservatives. It was funny. Harsh, at times, but rightfully so in most cases. Again, when you appeared to step over the line: poking Bill Mahrer in the eye.

Then you released Treason. That's where you started to lose me. Essentially, you painted all liberals as treasonous bastards. Listen up, Ann: I'm as big a critic of the JFK administration as anyone, but when you use a brush wide enough to paint that president, as flawed as he was, as a traitor, you've gone off the deep end. While you made many valid points in the book, they were pretty much lost in the white noise of the crap. The whole Bill Mahrer eye thing isn't providing the necessary balance anymore. Still, you did, at times, at least seem funny in your criticisms, so I decided to give you another chance.

I guess that we all have to live with our mistakes. Thanks for making mine so painfull:


She referred to Muslims as "ragheads." She went farther than calling for Justice John Paul Stevens to be poisoned. Muhammad is depicted as a historic law-giver on one of the court's frieses. Coulter wanted Muslims informed so they would burn down the Supreme Court. But just before that happened someone would call Justices Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, and Kennedy.

Ann, I have to ask you: when did you stop trying to be funny and just become mean? The whole "I hope your daughter is raped to death-JUST KIDDING!" schtick is something that I expect from my political opponents, and then only from the frothing at the mouth crazy ones. Reasonable people simply don't talk that way. If I haven't made myself clear to this point, that means that I've ceased to think of you as reasonable in any way, shape, or form. And I'm willing to bet most of my allies in the center or on the right feel the same way. Face it, Ann: you've lost us. You're now nothing more than the Right's version of the posters at the Daily Kos. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but hey, life is tough.

Here's a little advice that I'm certain you won't follow: apologize. Admit that you screwed up royally and that you've seen the error of your ways. No one would expect you to stop being a smartass. Heck, it's part of your appeal, especially to a smartass like me. But we'd like you to think a little bit more about what you say, before you say it.

I know what you're thinking. Yes, apologizing would give the left a bigger cudgel to beat you around the head and shoulders with. Frankly, though, you deserve it this time. At least being genuinely sorry could bring some of your former supporters like me back around. I have to tell you, though, that you're facing an uphill battle this time. So apologize. Be sincere. Accept the rhetorical beatings to follow. It's what a grownup would do, so of course I don't expect you to listen.

Sincerely,

A former, saddened supporter.

Update: I see that Dean was already at this point long ago. Hey, some of us have to learn the hard way.

Update: Ace thinks that it's time for an intervention.

Update: And it's the last; this topic weries me. Jeff Harrell is spot on in his criticism:


There are those out there who think that controversial speech should be controlled by the government. There are those who think that saying things like what Ann Coulter said -- or publishing editorial cartoons deemed by some to be sacriligious -- should be against the law. These people clearly have the wrong idea. But just because Ann Coulter should be allowed, by law, to say whatever she wants to whichever audience chooses to invite her, so also should she be held responsible for saying things that do more harm than good. And calling people "ragheads" to resounding applause certainly does more harm than good. Harm to the conservative cause, harm to east-west relations and harm to the national discourse.

Ann, seriously. From now on, just stay off our side.

Update: I lied. Michelle Malkin has collection of links to conservatives ragging on Ann.

See how easy that was Ann? I used the word "rag" in a non-pejorative fashion. You idiot.

Really, the final update: John Hawkins has been a huge Coulter fan for a long time. If memory serves, he even had an interview with her once on his blog. And now she's losing his support. Money quote:


But, if she can't tone it down a few notches and stop being so deliberately outrageous (and yes, it's all deliberate), she's going to be written off like Pat Robertson by a lot of conservatives sooner, rather than later (It's worth noting that a lot of conservatives have already said good-bye to Ann).

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:00 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

February 08, 2006

Not surprising

So Democrats use the Correta Scott King funeral as a platform to bash President Bush. If anyone- and I mean anyone- is surprised by this turn of events, I pity you. Your naivte is endearing in a pathetic sort of way, but it's still pathetic.

My wife is essentially an apolitical person. Add in the fact that she's one of the most sensitive persons I've ever met(no, I don't know how I lucked into her either) and you end up with someone who can't understand how anyone would be a bbig enough dick to do what the Dem's did yesterday. Me? I was expecting it. I'm fairly certain that our current president was, too. The only thing did surprise me was the fact that no one started screaming CHIMPY MCSMIRKY BUSHITLER!!! Then again, maybe I stopped watching too soon.

As you might expect, yesterday's reprehensible grandstanding at the funeral has everyone buzzing. First up, the Anchoress:


My best friend, who was watching the funeral, called me up and said, “exactly when did the Democrats utterly revise history and co-opt the civil rights movement? Why does the world forget that it was Democrat Bull Connor putting the hoses and the dogs on the marchers, and the Republicans standing up for civil rights? Why doesn’t anyone mention that Bobby Kennedy was wiretapping King?”

History got revised because of the US press, and two men - Lyndon Johnson (the Great Society) and Bobby Kennedy, who did indeed wiretap Dr. King in an attempt to ruin him. But Bobby Kennedy went to the poor in Appalachia, and he went to the poor in the South, and he ended every speech with “now, let’s sing the song,” and joined hands and sang “We Shall Overcome,” and it moved people to see a man born into unimaginable privilege find common cause with the under-represented. It made it easy to forget that he’d tried to get dirt on Dr. King. I remember it like it was yesterday. Kennedy then single-handedly and forever put the “Democrats=Civil Rights” equation together when he, upon hearing of the assassination of Martin Luther King, extemporaneously and movingly called for calm and gave tribute to King. You can read or listen to the speech here.

In the issue of Civil Rights, I think it’s pointless to carry on about revised history. It’s done. The warp of history and the woof of of hype will never be untangled. Let it be. People believe what they want to believe, anyway, as we see daily.

And Glenn Reynolds delivers a total bitchslap, in his usual understated manner:


The problem with today's Democrats is that they try to invest the naked hunger for power with the dignity of the civil rights movement, a dignity that they no longer possess because it was based on a self-discipline that they no longer possess.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:55 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 31, 2006

Ditto

Stephen Green usually makes better points when he's rambling than I do when I'm attempting to be concise. Case in point:


Look at me.* I'm pro-choice. I support gay marriage. I think porn is OK and that drugs (which aren't OK) ought to be legal. My tastes in music and movies and entertainers are a lot more New York and LA than they are Nashville or Branson.

But with the exceptions of maybe Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman, there's not a Democrat today I'd vote for without first chewing through my own forehead.

Democrats: I'm your target voter! Appeal to me! I'm sick of the Republicans already! Don't make me perform impossible physical acts! Please!

But they won't listen and, come November, I'll vote for a bunch of Republicans again. (Although I'll probably leave a bunch of choices blank.) I'll feel bad about it, of course, but I'd feel even worse if I voted for a Democrat.

And I'm their target voter. Sheesh.

And while I disagree with some of Mr. Green's position(I am not pro-choice), I agree with his analysis of the current state of the Democrat party. Someone like Joe Lieberman, who appears sane and reasonable, even though many of his positions differ from mine, has no chance of getting his party's nomination. Zero. Nada. Diddly, and squat, too. And therein lies the problem.

Back during the 2004 primary season, when Howard Dean looked like a shoo-in for the Democrat presidential nomination, Peggy Noonan implored the Democrats to nominate someone else, hoping that the Democrats could thereby save themselves from political suicide. Thankfully, Kerry received the nomination. Sure, he lost, but it wasn't the disaster that a Dean nomination would have been. Anyway, here's my hope that Democrat voters will come to their senses and kick their insane brethren to the curb. I keep hoping that they'll nominate someone for whom I could vote. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening for a long while yet. Which means that the Republicans will almost certainly get worse as a party.

To quote a certain loquacious bovine, "If you'll excuse, I'll just go out back and shoot myself."[Ed. note: I haven't read the book in almost 20 years, so this is a paraphrase.)

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:39 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

January 19, 2006

'Nuff said

Bill Quick has had enough. Excerpt:


I no longer have many liberal friends, and I don't expect to in the future, not until they either learn some manners, or develop slightly more open minds. Nor does that situation bother me. In fact, to be honest, I no longer care about convincing them of anything, which is a fool's errand anyway . All I want to do is crush their malignant ideologies, destroy any hold they have on political power, and otherwise render them harmless enough that I can ignore them entirely, the same way I ignore the masturbatory conversations ranting lunatics have with themselves on the streets of San Francisco.

At this point I find the endless effort on the part of libertarians and conservatives to "communicate" with liberals, to "convince" liberals a bit unseemly. It smacks of masochism and a sort of "Stockholm Syndrome," as if those on the right seem to believe they need some sort of liberal validation or agreement before their own positions can be deemed "acceptable," even to themselves.

We're in charge, not them. They need to seek our agreement, not the other way around. It's time we started to act like it.

My liberal friends are still my friends, mainly due to the fact that even though they love the Kool-Aid, they agree that my preferring Coca-Cola, while incomprehensible to them, is a perfectly acceptable choice. They try and make me change brands periodically, but they know that, in my heart, I will always prefer Coke.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:31 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 05, 2005

"Where was George?"

Jane Galt echoes Ted Kennedy's refrain from an old Democratic National Convention in this post. Excerpt:


What really chaps my ass, of course, is that if George Bush had been doing his job, checking the soil substrates under the levees, this never would have happened. We expected him to protect the country from disasters, and this is the one of the biggest disasters ever to hit the country. Yet where was George? Not taking soil cores, doing sonar analysis,or analysing soil samples in the lab--that much is clear. What the hell does he think we elected him for? Did he even make a cursory examination of the 17th street levee? I demand a special prosecutor to investigate why our president was not performing geological surveys of New Orleans in the days before hurricane struck.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

December 02, 2005

You might not have heard this

Jonah posted an email at the Corner that bears repeating. I'm including the whole thing in the hopes that more people will become aware of our booming economy.


Earlier this morning we learned that the U.S. economy added 215,000 jobs in November, beating the expected mark and posting the highest number in four months. Over the past year nearly 2 million jobs have been created -- and nearly 4.5 million jobs have been added since May 2003, when the job market began its turnaround. The unemployment rate remained at 5.0 percent -- below the average unemployment rate of the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s. The Labor Department report shows that the American economy not only remains resilient in the face of two major hurricanes that did enormous damage to the Gulf Coast region but that, in fact, the economy continues to grow at a remarkable rate.

Today's job figure is not the only encouraging news on the economic front. Here are a few other recent economic data points that underscore that the American economy is a wonder of the modern world:

· The U.S. economy grew at a robust 4.3 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the best rate in more than a year. Economic growth has been remarkably steady and strong over the past two-and-a-half years -- and the economy has now grown 3.3 percent or more for 10 straight quarters.

· Gas prices have dropped 30 percent since September (from $3.07 per gallon to $2.15 per gallon).

· Inflation was lower than projected. The consumer price index rose at a 3.6 percent annual rate, and core inflation was at its lowest level in more than two years.

· Consumer spending increased 4.2 percent in the third quarter, beating the estimated mark and setting the fastest pace since the end of 2004.

· Business spending on equipment and software grew by a 10.8 percent annual rate in the third quarter.

· Sales of single family homes showed the biggest one-month gain in more than 12 years, increasing by 13 percent in October.

· Orders for durable goods showed the largest increase since June of 2000, increasing by 3.4 percent in October.

· Consumer confidence soared. The Conference Board's Consumer Confidence rating increased by 13 points to 98.9 for November. The University of Michigan's Consumer Confidence index also rose, growing by 7 points.

· Yesterday the Dow Jones industrial average closed within 90 points of 11,000, a level the Dow hasn't hit since June 2001.

How can you possibly spin this as bad news? Hmm. Let's give it a try:

  • The sluggish stock market continues to inch upward, finally reaching a point not seen since early in Bush's first term. The Dow shows resilience despite Bush's handling of the economy.
  • Increases in new jobs reflect the fact that most Americans have finally settled for low-paying jobs without benefits, as that's all that they can find
  • The 4.3% growth in the economy is probably a temporary spike driven by the upcoming holiday season, and will likely recede to previous, non-inspiring numbers
Posted by Physics Geek at 10:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 18, 2005

Required reading

From Bill Quick. Excerpt:


Clearly, the anti-patriotic, hate-GWB's-America-First leftwing and Democratic party project is the product of the sort of insanity Megan McArdle made reference to when she declared that the party in power becomes smug and complacent, and the party out of power goes insane. This whole effort reeks of irrationality, and the response to Bush's new pushback raises those stakes to the level of psychosis. Why the hysteria, the panting, stuttering outrage from the unpatriotic left at a mere challenge from Bush?

Because they know it is true. Because they know the charges of unpatriotism are accurate. Because they are horrified, terrified, and mortified that the American people reject them in favor of Chimpy McBusHitlerHelliburton and his evil fascist crew - not once, but twice. They were raised to worship at the internationalist altar, praying for an end to nationalism and, indeed, an end to the nation-state, in favor of the triumph of world socialism. And theirs is a god that failed.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 16, 2005

Goodbye, majority party status

I was feeling pretty good this week. The President, along with many other prominent GOP'ers, finally started rebutting the BUSH LIED! meme. Add the Alito nomination to the mix and the GOP appeared to be on the rise. Then the Senate Republicans decided to give a vote of no-confidence on the war in Iraq.

Guys, here's a suggestion: go fuck yourselves. And start packing your bags. I now believe that 2006 will top 1994 as a political perfect storm.

Update: Only 13 Republican nays? The Party of the Stupid just became the Party of the Irrelevant. If those feckless sphincter muscles from the GOP aisle of the Senate think that this storm will pass, they're right. What they don't seem to grasp is that it might possibly move Republicans to permanent minority status. Us conservative/libertarian types have put up with a lot of crap from the GOP if only because Team Elephant appeared to be the only party serious about the War on Terror. If, like yesterday, Republicans act in the same manner as Democrat, voters will stay home in droves.

Via Hugh Hewitt comes this telling quote: Bill Frist is dead to me.

Look at the roll call of the vote. "Nay" votes from McCain, Kennedy, Kerry and Leahy, but not from George Allen or Rick Santorum, or Bill Frist? If you'll excuse me, I'm headed to the window to see if a certain group of Horsemen are riding by.

Update: McQ has more.

Final update: The Puppy Blender states, "It's almost as if the Republicans want to go back to being the minority party."

You mean that they aren't?

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:05 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 14, 2005

Updated movie script

Cosmic Conservative has a script excerpt from a movie that, while I'm certain I haven't seen it, seems strangely familiar...

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Jackass

Michael Newdow and Cindy Sheehan see a television camera. Who gets to it first? Chuck Shumer, of course.

Looks like Newdow is making a bid to supplant Shumer as the biggest camera whore in the US. He's now filing to have the phrase "In God We Trust" removed from the US currency.

A couple of years ago, I told a friend of mine that it was only a matter of time before someone filed this lawsuit. He told that I was full of shit, that no one would be that big of an asshole. And while my friend may be accurate in his assessment of the quantity of feces my body can hold, he seriously underestimates the enormous size to which walking, talking anuses can grow.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 11, 2005

Our national pasttime

Bashing the French, of course.

The following is from an email to Neal Boortz:


AP and UPI reported today that the French government announced that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender". The raise was precipitated by a recent fire which destroyed France's white flag factory, thereby disabling its military.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:34 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

What he said

I've ranted on many occassions about the Katie Couric/Matt Lauer/ Tom Brokaw/Dan Rather/CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/NY Times cabal who keep moaning about the horrid state of the US economy, conveniently ignoring all of the indicators of an amazing, continued expansion. Bizzy Blog adds the proper context:


QUESTION: When is this economy going to some respect?

The economy’s 3.8% third-quarter growth (subject to revision in the coming months) was remarkable, given the storms that occurred during almost the entire final month of the quarter:

Economists had forecast GDP would advance at a 3.6% rate in the July-to-September quarter. The economy has now expanded faster than 3% for 10 straight quarters.

So when was the last time the economy expanded faster than 3% for 10 straight quarters?

It didn’t happen during the 1990s (the longest streak was eight).

It last happened during the 13 quarters from 1Q 1983 through 1Q 1986. Not coincidentally, a president who believed in lowering taxes to stimulate economic growth was in charge the last time it happened.

So despite being at war, despite devastating storms, and despite legislative and regulatory drags on the economy like Sarbanes-Oxley, this has been most consistently growing economy in almost 20 years.

Not only that, the US economy has NEVER had a streak of more than 7 quarters of 3.0% or greater annualized growth at any other time in the 58 years that quarterly GDP statistics have been kept! (besides the ones already mentioned: i.e., the current streak of 10, the 1990s streak of 8, and the 1980s streak of 13–Added Nov. 3 for clarity)

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:16 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 10, 2005

I, for one, welcome our new spineless Overlords

Fortunately, the aforementioned Overlords won't be in power much longer. My money is that they'll be handed their Minority Party papers sometime in early November, 2006. There is a downside, of course, to this: jackasses like Charlie Rangel and Ted Kennedy will be setting the tone for all economic and environmental decisions made in DC. Then again, I'm not certain that the nation will notice the difference.

Michelle Malkin displays some e-mails from pissed off GOP voters. As for me, I'd say that I'm pissed off, but I'd be lying. I fully expected the GOP to cave on this issue. Why anyone would expect our feckless, cowardly GOP elected officials to finally display any backbone is beyond me.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 09, 2005

Required reading

Stephen Green typed a masterpiece. Read it all right now.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

A disaster waiting to happen

I knew that San Francisco was run by idiots, but I didn't expect the actual residents to be stupid enough to vote against their own interests. Silly me. Anyway, it looks like almost 60% of San Fran residents voted to make owning a handgun illegal. After the civilization meltdown during the Katrina aftermath, you might have thought that even the liberal-pinko-commies would have given some thought to self-preservation. You'd be wrong. Here is Neal Boortz's take on it:


The voters of San Francisco, that's who. By a 58% to 42% margin they voted to make the ownership of a handgun illegal in San Francisco, and to require that every resident of San Francisco who owns a handgun to turn it in to the government by April 1st. April 1st, by the way, is more commonly known as "April Fool's Day." Even voters in San Francisco should be bright enough to figure out that law-abiding citizens will be the ones to turn over their guns, while the lawless, the criminal element, will not. The number of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens will go down. The number of guns in the hands of criminals will not.

It is particularly amazing that 58% of the San Francisco voters would support this foolish measure after New Orleans. San Francisco faces the prospect of a natural disaster far worse than Katrina. Do the people of San Francisco think that the criminal element will just stay home and behave after the earthquake hits? There will be no violence? No looting? After the experience of the victims of the lawless in New Orleans it is hard to believe that any logical group of Americans would voluntarily disarm. But ... I did say logical, didn't I?

Here's a question: how many people actually believe that all of the gun-owning liberal wussies in the city(there are bound to be large number, despite the local politics) will voluntarily give up their guns? I'm going to guess that the number is low. Certainly much lower than the actual number of legal handguns currently owned in SF.

Look for San Francisco to become the Britain of the Left coast. Criminals will be able to rob, maim and kill with impunity. Any citizen caught defending himself will be punished severly.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

November 07, 2005

My prediction

Despite one poll showing Kaine with an 8-point lead over Kilgore, I predict that tomorrow's VA gubenatorial election will be decided by 1-4 points. And despite Potts pulling a robust 4% from Kilgore's column today, I also predict that most of those voters will end up pulling the lever for Kilgore. And, for what it's worth, election polls traditionally underestimate the votes for a Republican. However, that usually happens at the federal level, not the state level. So here's my prediction:

Kaine: 48%
Kilgore: 47%
Potts: 1%

Kaine benefits from a popular Democrat governor, although that popularity is, as far as I can tell, undeserved. To his credit, Mark Warner has been a pretty moderate Democrat, which is the only type that this state will elect, except for the I-promise-I-won't-raise-taxes-so-what-I-did broken promises on taxes. However, the Republican majority in the state legislature gets most of the blame for that, and rightfull so, as the Democrats didn't have the votes to enact an increase without Republican help. There will be enough disaffected Republican voters who believe that it doesn't really matter who's in office anymore.

Update: After mulling over matters last night, I've decided to be a bit more optimistic based on several factors:

1) Back in 1989, Doug Wilder was predicted to blowout Marshall Coleman. He ended up winning by around 5,000 votes.

2) The 2004 national elections proved that Republicans could get out the vote as well, if not better, than the Democrats.

3) Mark Warner was up big in the polls against a tepid candidate who he had outspent by an enormous margin going into election day 4 years ago, but managed only a 4%-5% victory.

4) As I mentioned, Potts 4% in the polls won't translate into 4% of the actual voters. Many of those voters will end up voting for Kilgore.

5) Virginia is, buy and large, a pretty Republican state. Ask Joh Kerry how he did last year. I do understand the differences between state and federal elections, though.

I'm callling it a tossup.

One caveat: Virginia voters should beware the dreaded Democrat bias in early exit polls. Around 3:00 p.m. on election day last year, John Kerry thought that he was president. I can already the NBC/CBS/ABC/CNN talking heads trumpeting "IT'S OVER!!!!" before the polls close, which would make some people simply avoid voting altogether.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

In rare form

Mike has the latest draft of our living Constitution. Excerpt:


We hold these truths to be open to interpretation, that all Men, Wymyrns, Chyldryns, and Animals are created Equal and must remain exactly so throughout the course of their Lives, especially in an economic sense; that they are endowed by the Government of their Betters with certain negotiable Rights, ripe for Dialoguing, that among these are Life (in the Collective), Liberty (to a point), and the pursuit of Happiness (to be defined by us at a later date, and to specifically preclude the practice of Christianity and Judaism) –That to define these rights, Governments are instituted among Men by their Betters, deriving their absolute powers from the consent of the Enlightened, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of Individual Liberty, it is the Right of the Elite to expand it, and to institute new Rules incessantly, laying their foundation on such principles and organizing its powers as Political Correctness shall demand, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Seeming Surface Harmony and Balance with Gaia.
...
Bill of Malleable Particulars

Article [I.] Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Christian or Judaic religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of Islamism, Wiccanism, or Paganism; or abridging the freedom of speech of the Enlightened, or of the Mainstream Press, such term understood to specifically exclude Wingnut Bloggers or any and all aggregations of Americans organized to redress grievances not involving Environmentalism, Racial Preferences, or any other Cause the Enlightened approves of (such aggregations hereafter to be known as Special Interests); or the right of the Enlightened to assemble and riot if necessary, in protest or other attempt to Speak Truth to Power, and to petition the Government for a redress of Imagined Grievances.

Article [II.] There is no Article II. There never was. Look, over there! A lion! No, really! Look!

Go there. Now.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 31, 2005

Don't piss of the Queen

You don't want to make her mad; you wouldn't like her when she's mad. Excerpt:


A weak President Bush would never have nominated Alito. Never. As I said earlier, it doesn't matter if YOU think he is weak, it's what Bush thinks about Bush that matters.

He doesn't think he's weak. He doesn't think he needs to work with the Dems. They fucked him when they suggested Miers and then didn't fight for her. Bush won't be listening to Harry Reid's bullshit advice anymore.

Okay, she isn't really angry in this post, but you get the idea.

Posted by Physics Geek at 07:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Uh oh

Someone's been leaking Senator Feinstein's private notes to Jeff Goldstein. Mheh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 28, 2005

My real, absolute, final words on Miers

I'll admit that I was glad to see Miers withdraw her name. However, I think that the reaction of some is over the top. Jonathan Hawkins, one the of the bloggers I've read the longest, put a dancing Snoopy image at the top a post and, essentially, posted a "Yippee! She's gone! Good riddance!" type blog entry. I disagree with the tone. While I don't believe that Miers was a good choice for SCOTUS, I do however believe that she's a fine attorney, a decent person and a good friend of the president, the last item being obvious by her willingness to pull her name from the hat and limit the damage being done to Bush. Gloating over her withdrawal is petty and serves no purpose. Yes, conservatives should be glad that we're likely to get a strict constitutionalist with a paper trail and stronger credentials nominated and confirmed now, but I don't like it that some on the right are gleeful and giddy at what is likely a disappointment to Harriet Miers. She deserves better.

Update: Dale Franks takes Hugh Hewitt to task for his uncharacteristically whiny response to Miers' withdrawal. Excerpt:


Was it unfair to point out her dearth of experience, or lack of writing on Constitutional issues? Was it unfair to point out that a stellar host of law professors, judges, and long-time public officials with impeccable credentials were passed over in order to nominate her? Was it unfair to wonder, since no evidence of a fixed judicial philosophy could be found, if she was another Souter or Lewis Powell in the making?

Apparently Mr. Hewitt's position is that, since the president spoke, mutatis mutandis ex cathedra, in declaring her to be the candidate of choice, our responsibility was to remain silent little serfs, and if milord assures is that she is the person for the job, our proper role is to ignore any doubts about her qualifications and lack of clear judicial philosophy, and doff our caps and tug our forelocks.

Well, here's a little whack with the clue-bat: I have a perfect right to express my opinion on the president's nominees. I can call for the nominee's withdrawal. I can call on senators to vote the nomination down. Fortunately, I still live in a free country where can express my opinions, and if Mr. Hewitt doesn't like it, tough.
...
Well, anyway, at least that's over. I'm sure Mr. Hewitt will stop sulking over Ms. Miers the second the president announces a replacement nomination, just as I'm sure Mr. Hewitt will provide the president's nominee with unqualified support. No matter who it is.

Update: John Cole weighs in:


There was not going to be a defeat on the Senate floor. She was not going to get out of committee, and she was going to humiliate everyone in the process. And that is what Senators were relaying to the White House all week.

As to Hugh’s suggestion that this was somehow an ‘unconstitutional’ result, I would suggest Hugh doesn’t know what is in the Constitution if he thinks anything unconstitutional happened. The President nominated Miers. It became clear that she was unqualified and would not pass a vote. She withdrew her name from consideration. I will leave it to Hugh to demonstrate how this is a violation of either principle, precedence, Senate Rules, or the Constitution. Good luck with that, Hugh.

In short, Hewitt is simply lashing out at people who chose not to ‘trust’ the President to the degree that Hugh did. His charges have no merit, and his animosity is carelessly targeted. If he wants to be mad at anyone, it shouldn’t be the people who pointed out the flaws in this candidate. Perhaps after he cools down, Hugh will stop tilting at windmills and recognize that the person he should be mad at is Bush, who made this flawed nomination in the first place, putting his allies and poor Harriet Miers in an unfortunate position.

What he said.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:10 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Quote of the day

And it's from Bill Quick: The Bush Administration: Cutting its throat to spite its base.

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 24, 2005

Forget the presidency

While I was on vacation, a junior Senator named Tom Coburn had the audacity to force his colleagues to vote "Yes" publicly for their pork barrel projects, instead of earmarking those particular funds for hurricane relief. Not surprisingly-that is, if you're not an imbecile- most Senators votes against the Coburn Amendment, including the majority of Republicans. Not coincidentally, those Republicans kissed any presidential aspirations goodbye. Here is the roll call for the vote on the Coburn Amendment, courtesy of Mark Tapscott :


FOR THE RECORD: The Yeas and Nays on the Coburn amendment

YEAs ---15
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bayh (D-IN)
Burr (R-NC)
Coburn (R-OK)
Conrad (D-ND)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (R-SC)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Sununu (R-NH)
Vitter (R-LA)

NAYs ---82Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:04 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 23, 2005

My actual last words on Harriet Miers

I've gone through my issues at length before, so I see no point in expounding on them further. However, in deference to the TTLB's effort, I submit the following: I oppose the Miers nomination.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Quote of the day

And it comes from George Will:


As for Republicans, any who vote for Miers will thereafter be ineligible to argue that it is important to elect Republicans because they are conscientious conservers of the judicial branch's invaluable dignity. Finally, any Republican senator who supinely acquiesces in President Bush's reckless abuse of presidential discretion -- or who does not recognize the Miers nomination as such -- can never be considered presidential material.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 13, 2005

My last word on Miers

Actually, the words belong to John Cole. Excerpt:


The blame for this nomination, quite simply, starts and stops with the White House. It is not, as Jeff points out, because conservatives are ‘sexist’ or ‘elitist,’ charges that infuriate me to no end. It is not because a bunch of weak-kneed moderates would vote down a conservative judge. It is not because the vetting process showed that there were skeletons in the closet of great minds like Luttig, McConnell, etc. It is not because, pace Dobson/Rove, conservative legal scholars everywhere were cowed into submission and terrified of a vicious confirmation process.

It is because this White House dropped the ball, and continues to offend and bungle at every opportunity. It is because, rather than fulfill their promise and appoint a qualified conservative with impeccable credentials and a solid judicial philosophy, they reached yet again into the inner circle to find someone Bush felt ‘confortable’ with and someone they thought would be confirmed without incident.

In short, it was an act of monumental cowardice, and the finger-pointing and smears, rather than help the cause of Harriet Miers and the White House, serve as a giant blinking neon sign pointing to the incompetence of the current White House and their reliance on short-term political calculations rather than exhibiting a quality most conservatives admire.

Principle.

Posted by Physics Geek at 12:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Fish this plane

Remember the airplane that pork-barrel politics paid $500k to paint a fish on the side of? The Farkers have made their own contribution to this discussion. Here are a couple of my favorites:

Fark1

Fark2

Fark3

Good stuff. Check out the rest here.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 11, 2005

More Miers

Captain Ed types a thoughtful piece for the Washington Post, wherein he enumerates the 3 groups that the GOP has split into: The Loyalist Army, the Rebel Alliance and the Trench-Dwelling Dogfaces. Actually, I think Mark Tapscott has the fourth group identified pretty well: Long-time Loyal GOPer Looking for a New Party.

Is the GOP eating its own? Maybe. But I'm tired of the party that I voted for governing like the minority party that they were for 40 years. Then again, maybe they liked it so much, the party is doing its damndest to relive the past. Trust me when I tell you that they're on the right path.

I wonder how many people are more likely to believe my "trust me" statement in the previous paragraph than the implicit one given by the President by nominating Miers?

Update: Jonah weighs in:


Fed by what are to me very cheap arguments by RNC spokesmen and independent stalwarts of the administration -- chiefly, it seems, Hugh Hewitt -- there is now this permanently established belief in some quarters that people around here and elsewhere oppose Miers based purely on bad motives -- elitism, cowardice, sexism etc. I find this horribly disappointing and the sort of thing I normally expect from leftwingers.
...
Regardless, whoever started the name-calling, all of it is beneath a movement and a philosophy which is supposed to pride itself on dealing with uncomfortable facts. I don't mind arguments within the conservative camp. I relish them, as should be obvious. They are a sign of intellectual health and integrity. "Unity above all" may at times be a political imperative but it is a philosophical cancer. Those of you who argue Miers' rightwing opponents are hurting the cause have a fair political point to make, even if it shows evidence of a misunderstanding of conservative journalism's role generally and National Review's in particular (See for example, Ramesh's "The Case Against Silence"). But they too are hurting the cause when they impugn the motives of those they will undoubtedly wish to fight alongside in some future battle.

Update: Ouch!

Update: It appears that the White House has enlisted the First Lady to continue the tactic of smearing its own base. Nice.

Hey, GOP! Start packing. You're likely moving to the minority party in 2006. Dickheads.

Final update: Richard Brookheiser weighs in:


Conservative defenders of the Miers pick attribute such violent and visceral reactions to snobbery: Our wise President is being second-guessed by a bunch of Beltway elitists and Ivy Leaguers who disdain the horny-handed daughter of toil nurtured at Southern Methodist University. But this charge is boob bait. Many leaders come from nowhere before rising to the top. Ronald Reagan went to Eureka College; Richard Nixon went to Whittier College; Abraham Lincoln went to no college. Ms. Miers had as many advantages as these men, or more. She only has fewer achievements.
...
The real reason her nomination sticks in the craw is the brass-and-leather whiff of the Praetorian Guard house. The ancient Praetorian Guard was an elite military unit that guarded Rome’s emperors and sometimes murdered them. The modern Praetorian Guard is the penumbra of family and cronies that, under the American imperial Presidency, is accorded unseemly attention and respect. Some Presidents look to it for actual officeholders. Bill Clinton put his wife in charge of health-care policy. John Kennedy put his brother in charge of the Justice Department. Mr. Bush seems to find the Praetorian Guard especially seductive. There were the Texas League Texans he sent to FEMA—Joe Allbaugh, Michael Brown. There was the way his running mate emerged from a search committee headed by—Dick Cheney. Look no further! Harriet Miers emerged in the same way, helping to vet judicial nominees. At least she tapped John Roberts before herself; gentlemen first. This is an elitism far more restrictive than anything Ms. Miers’ critics are charged with. Beltway/Ivy League elitism embraces anyone who works in the federal government, or who graduated from one of seven old colleges. The President’s elitism embraces anyone who works down the hall. He looked out over what Tom Wolfe calls “this wild bizarre unpredictable hog-stomping Baroque country of ours” and whom did he see? The woman sitting next to him.


Posted by Physics Geek at 01:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 10, 2005

For what it's worth

I just received a comment to a post of mine by a lefty bemoaning how un-funny conservatives are, and wondering why the only comedians are on the left. Okay, I'll wait while you catch your breath; my sides still hurt from laughing.

I'll grant you that - in print- I'm not a laugh riot, but claiming that conservatives aren't funny, while simultaneously stating that the left is the sole repository of humor, defies belief. I give you the following:

On the right
---------------
Protein Wisdom
Ace
IMAO
Harvey
Hog On Ice

On the left
-------------
Daily Kos
Shakespeare's sister
Atrios
Oliver Willis
(Sorry, no links to the dipshit gallery)

If this were baseball, they'd have implemented the slaugher rule before it began. Some of my leftist friends are funny, funny guys, but by and large, the vast majority of lefties are humorless, ill-mannered twits, whose only source of amusement seems to be saying "Chimpy BusHitler...BWAHAHA!" as if it's best joke ever, and who believe, lack of evidence notwithstanding, that Al Franken is actually amusing. He once was, of course, but now he's just boring.

It's a bummer that I can't classify my commenter as a troll, because it was a fairly polite, if off the reservation insane. I look forward to more moonbattery in the future; I need the occassional laugh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:47 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Elitist my ass

The recent spate of "you're sexist and elitist if you oppose Harriet Miers' nomination" have been sprouting up everywhere, even in places where people should know better. I was crafting a reasoned response to this crapola when I stumbled on this editorial by John Fund, who is far more eloquent than I. Excerpt:


Conservatives shouldn't care about her personal views on issues if they can convince themselves that she agrees with Chief Justice John Roberts's view of a judge's role: that cases should be decided the way an umpire calls balls and strikes, without rooting for either team. But the evidence of Ms. Miers's views on jurisprudence resemble a beach on which someone has walked without leaving any footprints: no court opinions, no law review articles, and no internal memos that President Bush is going to share with the Senate.

It is traditional for nominees to remain silent until their confirmation hearings. But previous nominees, while unable to speak for themselves, have been able to deploy an array of people to speak persuasively on their behalf. In this case, the White House spin team has been pathetic, dismissing much of the criticism of Ms. Miers as "elitism" or even echoing Democratic senators who view it as "sexist." But it was Richard Land , president of the Southern Baptist Convention, who went so far as to paint Ms. Miers as virtually a tool of the man who has been her client for the past decade. "In Texas, we have two important values, courage and loyalty," he told a conference call of conservative leaders last Thursday. "If Harriet Miers didn't rule the way George W. Bush thought she would, he would see that as an act of betrayal and so would she." That is an argument in her favor. It sounds more like a blood oath than a dignified nomination process aimed at finding the most qualified individual possible .
...
But that ignores the fact that every Republican president over the past half century has stumbled when it comes to naming nominees to the high court. Consider the record:

After leaving office, Dwight Eisenhower was asked by a reporter if he had made any mistakes as president. "Two," Ike replied. "They are both on the Supreme Court." He referred to Earl Warren and William Brennan, both of whom became liberal icons.

Richard Nixon personally assured conservatives that Harry Blackmun would vote the same way as his childhood friend, Warren Burger. Within four years, Justice Blackmun had spun Roe v. Wade out of whole constitutional cloth. Chief Justice Burger concurred in Roe, and made clear he didn't even understand what the court was deciding: "Plainly," he wrote, "the Court today rejects any claim that the Constitution requires abortions on demand."

Gerald Ford personally told members of his staff that John Paul Stevens was "a good Republican, and would vote like one." Justice Stevens has since become the leader of the court's liberal wing.

An upcoming biography of Sandra Day O'Connor by Supreme Court reporter Joan Biskupic includes correspondence from Ronald Reagan to conservative senators concerned about her scant paper trail. The message was, in effect: Trust me. She's a traditional conservative. From Roe v. Wade to racial preferences, she has proved not to be. Similarly, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation recalls the hard sell the Reagan White House made on behalf of Anthony Kennedy in 1987, after the Senate rejected Robert Bork. "They even put his priest on the phone with us to assure us he was solid on everything," Mr. Weyrich recalls. From term limits to abortion to the juvenile death penalty to the overturning of a state referendum on gay rights, Justice Kennedy has often disappointed conservatives.

Most famously, White House chief of staff John Sununu told Pat McGuigan, an aide to Mr. Weyrich, that the appointment of David Souter in 1990 would please conservatives. "This is a home run, and the ball is still ascending. In fact, it's just about to leave earth orbit," he told Mr. McGuigan. At the press conference announcing the appointment, the elder President Bush asserted five times that Justice Souter was "committed to interpreting, not making the law." The rest is history.

Harriet Miers is unquestionably a fine lawyer and a woman of great character. But her record on constitutional issues is nil, and it is therefore understandable that conservatives, having been burned at least seven times in the past 50 years, would be hesitant about supporting her nomination.

So go ahead, stick your fingers in your ears while shouting "LALALALA!" This president has asked me to "trust him". Well, in this instance, I don't. Color me a skeptic, but I don't wish to spend the next 20 years discussing the Miers' Mistake.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:48 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Waiting for Columbus

With Columbus Day upon us, I thought that it would be a good idea to link to a story that encapsulates much of today's consensus about said day. Excerpt:


"Well, Billy, an unfortunate part of human history involves countries invading their neighbors to take control. This has happened in many parts of the world, including Europe, which has a long history of war. But remember that Indigenous Peoples were also prone to war and fighting to expand their control well before Europeans arrived."

"Well, Columbus is also responsible for many germs and diseases that Europeans brought to America, causing untold suffering and death among the people who were here before us."

"Have you been drinking too much caffeine lately, Billy?"

"America's history of environmental destruction can also be laid at Columbus' feet, dad. As soon as the Europeans colonized America's pristine lands, they cut down the trees and plowed up the fields. Can you say soil erosion, dad?"

"Son, did I ever tell you that you take after your mother's side?"

"And what about slavery? It was the Europeans who created a flourishing slave trade in America. They did it to develop the land cheaply, so they could make giant profits. Columbus even made slaves out of some of the Indigenous Peoples who attacked him and his men."

"Son, do you remember where your mother hid the bourbon?"

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:49 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 07, 2005

When they pry my blog from my cold, dead hands

So the UN's attempt to gain control of the Internet is about to become a fait accompli. Why? Because they want it? Or because they hate the US? Excerpt:


A number of countries represented in Geneva, including Brazil, China, Cuba, Iran and several African states, insisted the US give up control, but it refused. The meeting "was going nowhere", Hendon says, and so the EU took a bold step and proposed two stark changes: a new forum that would decide public policy, and a "cooperation model" comprising governments that would be in overall charge.

Much to the distress of the US, the idea proved popular. Its representative hit back, stating that it "can't in any way allow any changes" that went against the "historic role" of the US in controlling the top level of the internet.

But the refusal to budge only strengthened opposition, and now the world's governments are expected to agree a deal to award themselves ultimate control. It will be officially raised at a UN summit of world leaders next month and, faced with international consensus, there is little the US government can do but acquiesce.

I call bullshit. Who, exactly, is going to force the US to acquiesce to this power grab? France? Cuba? Iran? Sure. Let me know when Joan of Arc rises from the dead to lead their armies to victory. However, the issue is even more troubling than it appears on the surface. Neal Boortz weighs in:


Where can this go? Let's consider for just a moment that document that Bill Clinton called the greatest document ever written by man in support of human rights and freedom. That would the the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This document is supposed to be the great international blueprint for human rights around the world. The document says that it represents "a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations." Does the UN Declaration of Human Rights protect free speech? Freedom of the press? Well ... in a word, yes it does. Article 19 says that everyone has a right to freedom of opinion and expression. So far so good. The declaration also says that everyone has a right to rest and leisure and a right to a standard of living. Interesting. It also says that all mothers and children are entitled to "special care and assistance."

Problematic, to say the least. But, let's cut to the chase. Let's go to Article 29 Paragraph 3. "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations."

Do you need to read that again? Please do. It's critical. This one clause negates every single right recognized in this so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." You have no freedom of speech. You have no freedom of expression. You have no right to own property. You have no right to your precious standard of living ... you have nothing ... not one thing if your exercise of those rights interfere with the goals of the United Nations.

Now ... back to the Internet. When the United Nations gains control just how far will it go? Will it start censoring the Internet to make sure that nobody posts any information or opinions that might interfere with the "purposes and principles of the United Nations?There is talk, for instance, of a world-wide income tax on the wealthy to fund UN operations. Would anyone be allowed to post an opinion in opposition to this scheme?

Update: The Emperor weighs in, as only he can. Mheh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:04 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 06, 2005

And idea whose time has come

I second the nomination. Smart, funny and a looker to boot.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:52 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

October 04, 2005

My response

So Miers is the choice, eh? Glad to hear it; now I don't have to worry about voting for a Republican in the 2006 elections. Not that I'll end up voting for a Democrat. Even here in the Old Dominion, a reasonable Democrat is pretty rare. A write-in vote for Mickey Mouse is always an option, though.

Many people, myself included, choked on the ridiculous spending during the 2005 campaign, but supported Bush for one of two reasons, maybe both:

1) the War on Terror
2) putting another conservative on the SCOTUS bench

Bush's selection of Miers is probably going to send the Republicans back into minority status. If the combination of a Republican President and Senate aren't sufficient to put a strict constructionist on the bench, many conservatives and libertarians are going to watch reruns of Cop Rock on election day.

By the way, would someone please tell Hugh Hewitt to stop acting like a know-it-all grandfather, lecturing to woefully ignorant children? I like Hugh. He's a smart guy, and a tremendous asset to the Republican party. But his 3 monkey Republicanism has worn pretty thin. Sometimes, it's required to See and Say evil about your party.

Update: BWAHAHA!

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:50 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Only in California

At least for now, anyway. This national craze of "everything I want is a fundamental right" is going to ruin this country. It's funny, though. I don't remember free wifi access being mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. I must have the racist, Pale Penis version. Excerpt:


Last week, San Francisco closed a 45-day request for information period in which companies could offer their ideas about blanketing the city with wireless Internet service, known as Wi-Fi. Newsom believes that such connections will add to San Francisco's technology credentials and help propel residents -- especially poor ones -- into the digital age.

"This is inevitable," Newsom said. "This is long overdue. This is a fundamental right."

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 27, 2005

Color me surprised

Not. Really, really not.

Does anyone else notice the complete absence of someone holding a sign saying "I'm a Democrat and I'm ashamed of my party"? I guess to the MSM's way of thinking, it'd be as realistic as a Bigfoot photo.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:33 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 26, 2005

Best analysis

JPod on Andrew Sullivan:


ANDREW SULLIVAN...
...is one of the most humorless people on earth, Jonah, in case you haven't been able to tell. He watches "South Park" for the politics, after all.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 20, 2005

And the winner is...

John Cole correctly analyzes the position of Harry Reid and finds it wanting. Excerpt:


Judge Roberts is no fire-breathing ideologue, and if the Democrats do everything they can to block his nomination, and mount a strident and contentious opposition, they are sealing their own fates. If someone like Roberts is going to get 30-40 votes against from Democrats, I see no reason why Bush doesn’t appoint a fire-breathing ideologue. Let ‘em filibuster.

If Roberts is unacceptable, the simple fact is Democrats can’t deal with a Republican appointee. Period.

I think that he's onto something here.

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:54 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 11, 2005

What planet are they from?

Editorial writers for my local paper, the Times-Dispatch, asked what planet George Bush was from for stating that the levee breach wasn't anticipated. Uh, it wasn't. Maybe thw opinion pundits are from the planet Outofthinairea, or possible Madeitupbecauseitsoundsgoodurn.

Appears to be only in the print edition for yesterday.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 08, 2005

Quote of the day

And it's from James Taranto:


"What the American people have seen is this incredible disparity in which those people who had cars and money got out and those people who were impoverished died."--Ted Kennedy on Hurricane Katrina

""--Mary Jo Kopechne on Hurricane Katrina

Posted by Physics Geek at 08:40 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

September 06, 2005

Some advice

Don't piss off Moxie

My contempt for Sean Penn's latest ill-fated photo-op was so profound that I simply couldn't bring myself to blog about it. Fortunately, Moxie is able express her distaste for Madonna's former plaything quite forcefully.

Posted by Physics Geek at 04:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 29, 2005

Another nanny state death

They're from the government and they're here to help you.

Yeah, sure they are.

An outstanding warrant for a f**king seatbelt violation? WTF?!

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 19, 2005

Justice delayed

Can still be pretty damned funny, to me anyway. Looks like Justice Souter's home might still get plowed under. Excerpt:


Logan [the developer] will visit Weare, New Hampshire from August 20th to the 23rd. He will talk to local supporters who are planning to use ballot initiatives to seize the land at 34 Cilley Hill Road and clear away other local laws that may hinder the project. It appears that an initiative can be placed on the March 2006 Weare N.H. ballot with only 25 signatures and can win with between 1,020 and 2,777 votes. Whoever said this project "will never happen" might find themself sitting in the Just Deserts Cafe eating crow pie next to David Souter.

Freestar Media will hold an open meeting to discuss the Lost Liberty Hotel project on Monday August 22nd at the Radisson Hotel at 700 Elm Street, Manchester NH 03101. Mention "The Lost Liberty Hotel project" for $1 parking. The meeting will go from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm in salon D. Logan will discuss the purpose of the project and why it is an important step in the struggle against statism. Free copies of Ayn Rand's revolutionary capitalist manifesto ATLAS SHRUGGED will be provided to the first 25 people who attend.

Thanks to Claire Wolfe for the link.

Unrelated update: If you're not reading Backwoods Home Magazine, you're doing yourself a disservice. This article alone contains lots of useful information to help prepare you for the future. I've been reading Claire's Hardeyville columns since she was writing for WND and they're always entertaining and educational.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:26 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

August 02, 2005

Quote of the day

And it's from Dean Esmay:

I used to despise Howard Dean. Now I just consider him the biggest floppy-shoed, bright ball-nosed clown in Washington.

I'm thinking of posting this on my PC screensaver to drive the lefty moonbats I work with completely batshit insane.

Posted by Physics Geek at 03:54 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 18, 2005

Rhetorical question

Have all of our elected officials in DC gone completely batshit insane? No? Then how do you explain retarded speeches such as this one from Rep. Tancredo. Excerpt:


A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.

Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

"Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.

"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.

"Yeah," Tancredo responded.

Thanks, dickhead. You've just written the slogan for Al Qaeda's recruiting poster.

I've ceased to be amazed at the ridiculous quantites of horseshit that politicans vomit forth every day. The brain-asshole filter doesn't work too well, apparently, when your head is shoved completely up into your ass.

Rep. Tancredo, I give you credit: you've exceeded the fault tolerances for asshats AND asshelmets and moved into the next generation of idiocy: ass-turtlenecks. You dumbass.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:51 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

The voice of reason

And it isn't Paul Begala. Excerpt:


Young liberals this week flocked to the nation's capital to hear, among other things, liberal television pundit and Democrat political strategist Paul Begala accuse Republicans of wanting to kill him and his children to preserve tax cuts for the rich.

Damn straight. How else am I going to be able to afford a bigger yacht?

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 14, 2005

Rick Santorum is a knob

Sure, he's a genuine conservative. He also tends to give the rest of us conservative types a bad name because Senator Santorum suffers from an acute case of Foot In Mouth disease. Excerpt:


What drew the concentrated ire of the Bay State's congressional delegation was Santorum's decision this week to repeat his three-year-old comment that liberalism was at the root of the scandal over child sex abuse in the church.

"Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture," Santorum wrote in a July 12, 2002 article for the Web site Catholic Online. "When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm."

Moron. Now I find myself agreeing with a crapweasel such as Ted Kennedy. Ugh. Well, blind squirrel, nut, etc..

Update: Captain Ed is of the same opinion:


As a Catholic and a conservative, nothing would please me more than if we could blame the sexual-abuse scandals of the Church on a permissive society. Unfortunately, it simply isn't true. Pedophilia has nothing to do with liberal sexual mores. The sexual abuse of children involves illnesses without cures, and the scandals have to do with a church hierarchy that refused to recognize that and keep sick priests away from vulnerable boys and girls.

Normally I would rather eat raw squid with mushrooms and beets than agree with Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. Neither of these men conducted themselves with much honor during their political careers. Both owe so many apologies to so many people that hearing them call for someone else to apologize almost makes me spit out my beverage over my laptop screen.

In this case, however, they're right.

Update: Michelle Malkin agrees that Ted Kennedy is right which, by my reckoning, means that the seas should be turning to blood any second, or maybe it'll rain frogs. Then again, cats and dogs have been known to live together on occassion, so maybe I'm jumping to an unwarranted conclusion. We should know soon enough.

Posted by Physics Geek at 01:36 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Is our children learning?

Who cares? Certainly not the NEA. Okay, that's not exactly fair: the fifteenth most important item mentions educating our children. Captain Ed has the horrid scoop. Excerpt:


Five of the top 20 have to do with Social Security politics. Only two items in the top 30 have anything directly to do with educating children. As Michelle Malkin points out, however, they made room during their efforts to demand a withdrawal from Iraq (number 61), oppose CAFTA, (number 63), and support the boycott of Gallo Wines (number 47).

If I wanted to parody the NEA, I couldn't draft a better list than this. Anyone arguing that this special-interest group has the welfare of children as its first priority should read this list carefully and often.

Posted by Physics Geek at 11:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

Hi! I'm a money hungry whore, only with fewer scruples

"Look ma! No hands(because I blew them off the infidel bastards)!"

So terrorist Abdurahman Khadr's story is being made into a movie. Holy crap! And I thought that having Oliver Stone make a 9/11 movie was a bad idea. I can already see the MSM fawning over this picture. And it's already begun. Excerpt:


Vincent Newman, president of Vincent Newman Entertainment, who bought the rights, is quoted hailing Khadr’s “a classic black sheep story—a story about the rebel of the family.” Khadr meanwhile has reserved the rights to develop the screenplay. Variety notes that “it appears it will follow the storyline that makes him look best....”

I guess getting his tongue pierced was too last century for Khadr. Maybe the movie will tell of his new career selling T-shirts with eye-catching slogans:

1) "Mom and dad blew up a busload of tourists and all I got was this loust T-shirt"

2) "My other car is an exploding suicide Deathmobile"

3) "Infidels? I LOVE the infidels. PULL!!"

Posted by Physics Geek at 09:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 11, 2005

Quote of the day

Courtesy of Argghhh! comes this little gem:

Frankly, I sometimes think the New York cocktail crowd thinks Dr. Strangelove was a documentary.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:02 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 06, 2005

Instant classic

Iowahawk created quite the furor when he posted Stop Questioning My Patriotism. Apparently, some lefty idiots ceased drooling long enough to shit their pants and screech nonsensically like monkeys. Some lessons are best learned the hard way. Excerpt:


Man, I just don’t get it. There are lots of other American groups who are joining us against Bush’s crusade, like David Duke and Fred Phelps and Stormfront. But who do I get automatically lumped in with? East Village Rage Against My Allowance fuckwits in Fred Perry tracksuits who can’t figure out the controls on an iPod, let alone an international revolution.

I love the smell of lunacy in the morning. But not hippies. I mean really. Ugh.

Posted by Physics Geek at 02:54 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

From the wayback machine

Found an interesting historical tidbit in the Corner this morning. I remember the Rigg-King tennis match. Bobby Riggs showed up with a 6-foot candy bar and told Billy Jean King that it would be something for her to eat during her imminent retirement(something like that- I was young and it was over 30 years ago). However, Roger Clegg mentioned something that I did not know. Excerpt:


An article on Title IX in the Wall Street Journal today includes a brief discussion of how Billie Jean King’s defeat of Bobby Riggs in a September 1973 tennis match was a milestone in women’s sports. Maybe so, but it is less and less noted that, just a few months before, the 55-year-old Riggs had defeated in straight sets the then number-one ranked women’s player, Margaret Court. (And of course there is the school of thought that Riggs, a notorious hustler, threw the match to King, either because he had bet against himself, or because he wanted to be able to hype a rematch. Riggs denied this.) Just trying to keep this out of the memory hole.

Posted by Physics Geek at 10:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

July 05, 2005

On the menu

Tonight's taste-tempting creationg is Roasted Chickenhawk Meme, courtesy of Rev. Donald Sensing. Excerpt:


  • I am a veteran and my son is now serving. By your lights these amounts to a “double credit” for me to speak about the war. Also by your lights, you yourserf suffer from a double deficit, since you have never served and have no immediate family member serving. Therefore, your logic would inexorably find that my opinion is of magnitudes greater value than yours.

    Do you agree? If not, why not?

  • I support a vigorous prosecution of the war in Iraq and have written several times (i.e., here) that it is the actual focal point of the war against Islamist terrorism.

    Do you now, therefore, consider yourself well instructed and will you, therefore, bow to my experience and insights (which by your own standards are far superior to yours) and now fully support prosecuting the Iraq war until victory is achieved? If not, why not?

  • Finally, on what basis can you persuade me that you, personally, are not simply a coward of the most craven kind who hides behind anti-war cliches merely to keep intact your own precious skin?

  • Posted by Physics Geek at 05:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

    StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

    June 30, 2005

    Quote of the day

    Times article found via a bazillion links. Money quote:


    In person Mr Bush is so far removed from the caricature of the dim, war-mongering Texas cowboy of global popular repute that it shakes one’s faith in the reliability of the modern media.

    No, really?!

    Posted by Physics Geek at 09:17 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

    StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

    June 29, 2005

    Advice for Democrats

    Howard Dean is exactly the wrong person to put forward as the face of the national Democrat party. What he says might make the party faithful happy, but it pretty much turns off everyone else. What your party needs is a spokesperson who can clearly articulate the goals and/or vision of your party, and what path one should take to achieve those goals. Screeching that the other party is evil, calling them a bunch of hypocrites(even when warranted) and just saying "NO!!!!" to everything your opponents offer is a losing proposition. The last decade should have taught the Democrats this. There are many reasons why the group called former Democrats continues to grow.

    In any event, Megan McCardle provides some thoughtful analysis on the current state that the Democrats find themselves in. Excerpt:


    A lot of Democrats think that they can reach for the goodies without building the platform, a belief that should have been thoroughly dispelled by the last three election cycles. That means compromise, and coming up with programmes that are bold without attempting to force the rest of America to embrace a value system they clearly dislike. So far Democrats are good on either bold (national health care) or agreeable (job training!), but little in their idea-basket is both.

    That, I think, springs from a larger problem within the liberal progressive movement--even larger than the belief that if they change their name, somehow people will like the brand better. (Memo to progressives: didn't work for Anderson Consulting Accenture, won't work for y'all. It wasn't the name that people objected to).

    On the one hand, you've got the folks who think that if Democrats can just turn themselves into Republican Lite--one third less dour moralism than regular GOP!--they will storm the storied "middle" and seize the reins of power. This is unlikely--the mathematics of winning an election without a motivated base are unappealing, which is why 3rd party candidates do so poorly. Worse, it's pointless. The moderate middle, almost by definition, produces little in the way of big ideas, and its little ideas generally end up as muddy messes--if you start compromised, what you generally end up with is pork-laden monstrosities. And why should people put out the phenomenal amount of energy it takes to get people elected in order to get 2% more spent on teacher salaries?

    The other wing of the progressive movement appears to think that all they really need to do is shout louder, since America seems to be getting a mite deaf. I watched Howard Dean on The Daily Show last night, and rarely have I seen a major political figure so thoroughly, even painstakingly, inept at appealing to voters. His remarks elicited cheers from the true-blue supporters in the audience, but only at the expense of alienating every single other person in the country. If he wasn't making ham-fisted attempts to prove Democratic moralistic superiority* by selective and theologically shallow quotation from the bible--an activity that even bible-thumping Republican congressmen undertake with more caution (and erudition) than Mr Dean did--he was claiming that his was the party of real moral values. Cringe. When was the last time you heard an RNC chair say something like that? Answer: you don't, because the "Family values" guys know that you do not garner votes by saying "Everyone who voted for the other guy is immoral" . . . especially when the other guy got a majority. You get votes by talking about what your values are, which (other than gay marriage) Howard Dean had a hard time doing.


    Posted by Physics Geek at 03:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

    StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

    Reporting from an alternate history

    After listening to Bush's speech last night, and then the subsequent caterwauling from the usual suspects, I was reminded of the following "news report". Neal Boortz also linked to it this morning. Like him, I cannot place the origin of the story.

    HOW THE D-DAY INVASION

    WOULD BE REPORTED BY TODAY'S

    PRESS


    NORMANDY, FRANCE (June 6, 1944) Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more were wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children. Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops. Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated, and that reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason, "said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."

    The invasion also caused severe environmental damage. American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, thus threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought," said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all about corporate greed."

    Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded, said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows that President Roosevelt has ties to 'big beer'," said Pierre LeWimp. "Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."

    Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon -- a so-called "atomic bomb". Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before, and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending two long weekends in Germany. Shortly after the invasion began, reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by American soldiers. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at their so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored, but so far this remains unproven.

    Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion, and French officials are concerned that the uncollected corpses will pose a public-health risk. "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess, and we don't intend to help clean it up."


    Posted by Physics Geek at 08:48 AM | Comments (0)

    StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!

    June 28, 2005

    Cue evil laughter

    Heh. Ha ha. BUAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Is it wrong that I hope this story is absolutely true?

    Update: Captain Ed has a link that will allow you to email the city. Go on, offer your support for this most worthy of projects.

    Posted by Physics Geek at 02:50 PM | Comments (2)

    StumbleUpon Toolbar Stumble It!