From the Los Angeles Times April 9, 2008
"When you have finite resources, you've got to define your goal rightly and modestly." - Barack Obama
"The U.S. must reject, as we did in 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces at the moment we are succeeding." - John McCain
"It's time to begin in orderly process of withdrawing our troops and rebuilding our military and focusing on other problems." - Hillary Clinton
The three quotes above are from our three main Presidential candidates' responses to the report by General David Petraeus concerning the Iraq situation.
I see two responses that are carefully worded. I see two responses that indicate the tone of fear and surrender. There are two candidates willing to leave a nation to the wolves (Iran) in order to serve their own self-interests. These two responses are representative of candidates who will say what they believe is what the majority of people want to hear.
The other response outlines a more difficult path, one that sticks to the principles of our nation even if it goes against the grain. This is leadership.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
A Man With Vision
One by one he would conjure up the world's major electronic papers, he knew the codes of the more important ones by heart, and had no need to consult the list on the back of his pad. Switching in the display unit's short term memory, he would hold the front page while he quickly searched the headlines and noted the items that interested him.
...yet in a few milliseconds he could see the headlines of any newspaper he pleased. (That very word "newspaper," of course, was an anachronistic hangover into the age of electronics.) The text was updated automatically on every hour; even if one read only the English versions, one could spend an entire lifetime doing nothing but absorbing the ever-changing flow of information from the news satellites.
excerpt from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Arthur Charles Clarke died last week. It was only December when I acknowledged his 90th birthday. As I blog on my personal computer, I realize that activities like this were envisioned 40 years ago. Note the quote above, it reads like someone using his iPhone and accessing cnn.com or something similar.
If there was ever a person I wanted to meet, it was Arthur Clarke. Of course if I had ever met him, I'm sure I would have been a bumbling fool without any idea of what to say to him so maybe, it's best that I didn't. Years ago, in reading his autobiographical book, The View from Serendip, I felt I had met a kindred spirit. He said things and did things that I imagined I wanted to do and say.
He was certainly the right man for his time. He grew up at the dawn of the modern technological age. Airplanes and automobiles were just entering the scene. Computers and spaceflight were in the minds of dreamers. Imagine how different the world was between 1917 and now. Never before in human history did an entire generation witness such change.
A Pioneer
Clarke served in the second world war. Apparently the RAF recognized Clarke's extraordinary intellect and he was assigned to help develop a budding technology called radar and use it to aid aircraft in landing in poor conditions. Clarke became one of the first air traffic controllers. His novel Glide Path is about this work.
After World War II, Clarke turned his interest back to an earlier love; outer space. In 1945, he published a small paper on how a satellite placed at an altitude of approximately 22,000 miles would remain stationary with respect to the Earth below. Arranging a ring of such satellites would allow instantaneous global communication by sending a signal to one satellite and having it relay around the globe to its desired destination. 17 years later, this speculation became reality with the U.S. launch of Telstar.
Most of Clarke's speculations and extrapolations would come from his short stories and novels. In addition to the Internet-like technology I mention above, his works speculate such ideas as:
Atomic Engines - spaceships powered by controlled nuclear explosions (2001: A Space Odyssey)
Mass Drivers - using the inherent energy in matter/plasma to propel spaceships (2010: Odyssey Two)
Space Elevators - An efficient means of getting payloads into space (The Fountains of Paradise)
I should note that none of Clarke's short stories or novels, with the exception of 2001: A Space Odyssey, used the convenient science fiction ploy of "hyperspace". Clarke strongly believed in stories that were based on science and true speculative science, not fantastical science that breaks laws of the universe.
An Explorer
While Clarke never made it into outer space, he was able to do the next best thing. He became an avid scuba diver in the 1950's. He and his then partner Mike Wilson (no relation) explored the Great Barrier Reef off of Australia as well as other places, primarily in the Indian Ocean. It was here where Clarke came upon the island of Ceylon (formerly Serendip and now Sri Lanka). Clarke lived the rest of his life on that island just south of India. It provided him with a great base in which to conduct his scuba diving expeditions. Clarke wrote some works concerning scuba diving (The Deep Range for one), but still concentrated the bulk of his writing on space.
A Screenwriter
Producer/Director/Screenwriter Stanley Kubrick decided to create a film concerning outer space. Someone told him to look up Arthur Clarke to which Kubrick only knew of as a "hermit who lives in India". Kubrick met Clarke while Clarke was visiting his homeland of England. They apparently took a quick liking to each other. For most of the year 1964, Clarke and Kubrick shuttered themselves in the Chelsea Hotel in New York to work on Journey Beyond the Stars. When they departed, a large part of the screenplay and novel for 2001: A Space Odyssey had been written. Kubrick would go on to tweak the screenplay further while Clarke added some polish to the novel so each got credit for one specific work.
In watching 2001 and reading the novel, it is fairly obvious where Kubrick went with it. The film's prominent mysticism is not in the novel. Yet the film obviously has Clarke's influence. Clarke, even then, was well known for his scientifically-grounded fiction. 2001 is to this day, is the most scientifically accurate space film ever made.
A Philosophizing Atheist
Clarke was always, paradoxically, the atheist who often wrote about God. He discarded any and all religious beliefs at an early age and strongly believed that science was ultimately the answer to everything. God, religion, and religious themes permeate his entire opus, however. My favorite short story of his is The Star. It's about a Jesuit priest who is losing his faith due to the discovery that an entire intelligent race had been wiped out by a supernova. The priest is on the edge of despair when he suddenly realizes that this killer supernova had served as the star of Bethlehem. I often think about this story, its incredibly irony, and what I'd think if this really had happened this way.
Childhood's End is my favorite novel. It is about a supreme entity, The Overmind, and the cast out creatures complete with horns and barbed tails who visit Earth to bring about the end of the human race. These creatures, known as The Overlords even inform the human race that they are not destined and not permitted to explore the universe. It is literally a story that portrays the opposite of Clarke's philosophy. Those who think that obviously didn't read the fine print. At the front of the novel, there is a disclaimer saying "The opinions expressed in this book are not those of the author."
An Aged Cynic
I remember interviews of Clarke where he believed he would walk on the Moon within his lifetime and possibly even go to Mars. In reflecting on those thoughts later, he lamented that humans were too fond of warfare and their own self-interests. It is really sad that on his 90th birthday this past December, his dreams were a bit more mundane. He wished for evidence of extraterrestrial life, for an end to the use of oil as fuel, and peace in perpetually war-torn Sri Lanka. At least he was fairly upbeat as it were. I remember recent interviews he gave where he came off as bitter and frustrated with humanity.
Clarke certainly got frustrated with the world's religions. It showed in all his recent writings, including his many collaborative efforts. Note that Clarke in his later years, suffered from Post-Polio Syndrome and couldn't move about very well. He wasn't able to do much writing himself so all his recent works were in collaboration with other authors. Clarke became convinced that religion is the cause of much, if not most of the evil in humanity. Personally, I disagree with him here as I think that religion is just used as a shield to justify an evil that is already in the heart of the evildoers, but I digress. Clarke went as far to say that he didn't want any iota of religion at his funeral.
For a man who was right on so many things, I hope he was wrong about there not being an afterlife. I'd hate to think he was really gone.
I'll re-post the link to his 90th birthday speech here.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
The Worst in Methodologies
11 Worst Cars - Consumer Reports
This is a little strange but somebody at CNN decided to research the 11 lowest scoring cars at Consumer Reports and write them up as the "11 Worst Cars".
Anybody who has read auto evaluations from Consumer Reports should know that they have a narrow view of what a car ought to be. Consumer Reports loves mid-sized sedans that have proven themselves reliable, affordable, and get good fuel mileage. If you have a family of 4 or 5 and drive them around on family picnics in addition to driving to work, then, by all means, take Consumer Reports to heart. Obviously, many do.
Consumer Reports, for the most part, hates sports cars, SUV's, and trucks. They like luxury sedans but often wonder why anybody should buy one when a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord can do the job. Speaking of the Camry and Accord, Consumer Reports for years has considered them the benchmarks, not just against other mid-size family vehicles, but everything else as well.
Knowing this, it's clear as to why the following vehicles fared as the worst.
Jeep Wrangler Unlimited: Never mind that this is a revered vehicle amongst off-road enthusiasts. Never mind that it goes places that others cannot. In fact, the article states "Consumer Reports performs off-road testing at its Connecticut proving grounds, but off-road ability doesn't factor into the final scores." Keep this in mind.
Hummer H3: Another off-road vehicle that, like the Jeep, is unique. Like the Jeep, it's not for cruising across the country on the Interstate. It's a special-purpose vehicle and certainly won't be mistaken for an Accord or Camry.
Jeep Liberty Sport: Now I'm biased here because I own a Liberty Limited (an upscale version of the Sport). Liberty's can out-tow any other small to mid-size SUV. That's valuable to some folk. Obviously not Consumer Reports, though. I wonder how well an Accord climbs over boulders.
Chevrolet Aveo5: The article doesn't bother to point out what's so bad about this car. I can only assume that it's not worth considering because its so much smaller than a Camry. It certainly costs less and gets better fuel mileage so what's the problem?
Dodge Nitro: It's actually hard to argue against this one but I have to laugh where it states the Nitro has no high points. In R/T form, it's quite powerful. Can't they at least point out its one of the fastest SUV's out there?
Toyota FJ Cruiser: Back to the off-road crowd. See Jeep and Hummer.
Toyota Yaris: Obviously, like the Aveo5, it's too small.
Suzuki Forenza: A valid entry here. It's a family sedan that doesn't come close to the Accord or Camry.
Jeep Patriot: Obviously Consumer Reports hates Jeeps. If the Patriot is so bad, why isn't the Dodge Caliber on the list? The Caliber is basically the same vehicle but it's not meant to go off-road. Apparently since Camrys and Accords don't go off-road, nothing should.
Chevrolet Trailblazer: Another valid entry here just because its on an aging platform.
Mercury Grand Marquis: This is a beloved, although aged platform. They are relatively cheap, powerful, comfortable, and are easy to find parts for and can run almost forever. All Consumer Reports likes is the large trunk.
With my disdain for Consumer Reports, I'm not really faulting them here. As I mentioned above, they have their particular criteria for judging the value of an automobile and anything that falls short of that criteria, regardless of what other strong points it has will fall short in their eyes.
I fault CNN for taking a quick and easy route of just taking results from another source and creating a headline stating their own conclusion based on those results. Shame on you CNN.
This is a little strange but somebody at CNN decided to research the 11 lowest scoring cars at Consumer Reports and write them up as the "11 Worst Cars".
Anybody who has read auto evaluations from Consumer Reports should know that they have a narrow view of what a car ought to be. Consumer Reports loves mid-sized sedans that have proven themselves reliable, affordable, and get good fuel mileage. If you have a family of 4 or 5 and drive them around on family picnics in addition to driving to work, then, by all means, take Consumer Reports to heart. Obviously, many do.
Consumer Reports, for the most part, hates sports cars, SUV's, and trucks. They like luxury sedans but often wonder why anybody should buy one when a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord can do the job. Speaking of the Camry and Accord, Consumer Reports for years has considered them the benchmarks, not just against other mid-size family vehicles, but everything else as well.
Knowing this, it's clear as to why the following vehicles fared as the worst.
Jeep Wrangler Unlimited: Never mind that this is a revered vehicle amongst off-road enthusiasts. Never mind that it goes places that others cannot. In fact, the article states "Consumer Reports performs off-road testing at its Connecticut proving grounds, but off-road ability doesn't factor into the final scores." Keep this in mind.
Hummer H3: Another off-road vehicle that, like the Jeep, is unique. Like the Jeep, it's not for cruising across the country on the Interstate. It's a special-purpose vehicle and certainly won't be mistaken for an Accord or Camry.
Jeep Liberty Sport: Now I'm biased here because I own a Liberty Limited (an upscale version of the Sport). Liberty's can out-tow any other small to mid-size SUV. That's valuable to some folk. Obviously not Consumer Reports, though. I wonder how well an Accord climbs over boulders.
Chevrolet Aveo5: The article doesn't bother to point out what's so bad about this car. I can only assume that it's not worth considering because its so much smaller than a Camry. It certainly costs less and gets better fuel mileage so what's the problem?
Dodge Nitro: It's actually hard to argue against this one but I have to laugh where it states the Nitro has no high points. In R/T form, it's quite powerful. Can't they at least point out its one of the fastest SUV's out there?
Toyota FJ Cruiser: Back to the off-road crowd. See Jeep and Hummer.
Toyota Yaris: Obviously, like the Aveo5, it's too small.
Suzuki Forenza: A valid entry here. It's a family sedan that doesn't come close to the Accord or Camry.
Jeep Patriot: Obviously Consumer Reports hates Jeeps. If the Patriot is so bad, why isn't the Dodge Caliber on the list? The Caliber is basically the same vehicle but it's not meant to go off-road. Apparently since Camrys and Accords don't go off-road, nothing should.
Chevrolet Trailblazer: Another valid entry here just because its on an aging platform.
Mercury Grand Marquis: This is a beloved, although aged platform. They are relatively cheap, powerful, comfortable, and are easy to find parts for and can run almost forever. All Consumer Reports likes is the large trunk.
With my disdain for Consumer Reports, I'm not really faulting them here. As I mentioned above, they have their particular criteria for judging the value of an automobile and anything that falls short of that criteria, regardless of what other strong points it has will fall short in their eyes.
I fault CNN for taking a quick and easy route of just taking results from another source and creating a headline stating their own conclusion based on those results. Shame on you CNN.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
The Obama Email
Yesterday, I received the following email from a colleague.
I think this is something we all should read!!!
Look this up on Snopes if you doubt it.
Who is Barack Obama? Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice.If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about it and share it.
We checked this out on "snopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself. probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHEIST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii.
When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school.
Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school."
Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical.
Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.
Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta.
Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran.
Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegiance nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.
Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy.
The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!!
While this makes interesting reading. I can't endorse such a tactic to sway my vote. First of all, the statements about Obama disrespecting the flag are suspect. Yes, I've seen the photos out there but I am not so quick to jump to a conclusion.
What I really object to, though, is the dangerous notion that one can make determinations about someone because of the beliefs or actions of a family member. In other words, if a certain individual is a terrible person, therefore his son or daughter must be a terrible person as well. It is wrong to judge Obama by the actions of his parents just as it would be wrong to judge anybody by anything other than an individual's own actions and words.
I am not going to vote for Obama but that is because I don't agree with his politics, not because I disapprove of his parents.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Blu-Ray Wins
Toshiba quits HD-DVD business
Like many, I have yet to invest a single penny into anything regarding high definition television. The biggest reason of course is due to financial limitations. Another reason, though, was that no distributable media format had established itself. That obstacle appears to have been hurdled.
I posted an article, The DVD Situation over two years ago mentioning the format battle primarily between Toshiba and Sony with their respective HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD formats. HD-DVD had the initial support but over the past year, it seems that Blu-Ray was taken over. That now appears confirmed. Too bad for those who invested in HD-DVD players and disks. You should have known you were taking a risk (just like those who invested in BetaMax 25 years ago.) Of course, your equipment still works and I'm sure HD-DVD disks will still be produced for a while. It does appear that Blu-Ray has the brighter and longer future, though. This will dismay some as there are those of you out there who don't like certain business practices of Sony. One of these business practices was incorporating rootkits - a form of spyware into its media.
With all this said, we have to also realize that things will never be as stable as they once were. Our standard-definition TV's are based on a standard developed in the 1940's. Yet, high definition television standards that were set less than 10 years ago are already being set up to be replaced. In the past, people often held on to their TV's for many years, decades even. Not any more. The industry apparently wants everybody to buy a new TV every 8 years or so. Think about it. To stay reasonably up to date, we need to purchase new computers every 3 years so this is nothing new.
What's more is that people (myself included) still have piles of VHS tapes that we never bothered to convert to or replace with DVD. Now the original (1996) DVD standard is dying, our tapes are going to be two generations of formats behind.
Just like in Men in Black where Tommy Lee Jones laments that a new music format will force him to buy the White Album again, I wonder how many times I am going to feel the need to re-buy 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Blade Runner, etc.
Like many, I have yet to invest a single penny into anything regarding high definition television. The biggest reason of course is due to financial limitations. Another reason, though, was that no distributable media format had established itself. That obstacle appears to have been hurdled.
I posted an article, The DVD Situation over two years ago mentioning the format battle primarily between Toshiba and Sony with their respective HD-DVD and Blu-Ray DVD formats. HD-DVD had the initial support but over the past year, it seems that Blu-Ray was taken over. That now appears confirmed. Too bad for those who invested in HD-DVD players and disks. You should have known you were taking a risk (just like those who invested in BetaMax 25 years ago.) Of course, your equipment still works and I'm sure HD-DVD disks will still be produced for a while. It does appear that Blu-Ray has the brighter and longer future, though. This will dismay some as there are those of you out there who don't like certain business practices of Sony. One of these business practices was incorporating rootkits - a form of spyware into its media.
With all this said, we have to also realize that things will never be as stable as they once were. Our standard-definition TV's are based on a standard developed in the 1940's. Yet, high definition television standards that were set less than 10 years ago are already being set up to be replaced. In the past, people often held on to their TV's for many years, decades even. Not any more. The industry apparently wants everybody to buy a new TV every 8 years or so. Think about it. To stay reasonably up to date, we need to purchase new computers every 3 years so this is nothing new.
What's more is that people (myself included) still have piles of VHS tapes that we never bothered to convert to or replace with DVD. Now the original (1996) DVD standard is dying, our tapes are going to be two generations of formats behind.
Just like in Men in Black where Tommy Lee Jones laments that a new music format will force him to buy the White Album again, I wonder how many times I am going to feel the need to re-buy 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Blade Runner, etc.
Friday, February 08, 2008
The Fate of the Union
(Yeah, I've been coasting a bit. I'll have some articles of my own soon now that football season is over and I'm no longer sick.)
I found this little goodie and thought I'd share it. It's author is unknown.
If Bush resigned today, this is what his speech would be.....
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans." Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer. I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.
The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out. Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that's despite record numbers of homeowners, including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.
Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security. We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq 's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell? And don't give me this 'Bush Lied; People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.
Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ' Clinton ' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you? You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to out spend and out-tech them.
That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe. You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor.'
Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops. Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.
In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol. I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.
I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads. So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.
Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008. So that's it. God bless what's left of America .Some of you know what I mean.The rest of you, kiss off.
I found this little goodie and thought I'd share it. It's author is unknown.
If Bush resigned today, this is what his speech would be.....
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans." Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer. I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.
The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out. Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And that's despite record numbers of homeowners, including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.
Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security. We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq 's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell? And don't give me this 'Bush Lied; People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.
Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ' Clinton ' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you? You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to out spend and out-tech them.
That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe. You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor.'
Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops. Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.
In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol. I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.
I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads. So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.
Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008. So that's it. God bless what's left of America .Some of you know what I mean.The rest of you, kiss off.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Patriots 49 Giants 17
That's my pick and I'm sticking to it. Every Supebowl, it's the same thing. The sports media tries hard the entire week to convince us that the underdog has a chance.
They are usually wrong.
Of course, I've been mostly wrong this whole season. I would love to be wrong again.
They are usually wrong.
Of course, I've been mostly wrong this whole season. I would love to be wrong again.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Another Silly "Who Am I?"
I find these more fun than informative. What is informative about these is the human need to be defined.
I Am A: Lawful Neutral Human /Ranger (3rd/2nd Level)
Ability Scores:
Strength-14
Dexterity-15
Constitution-15
Intelligence-13
Wisdom-14
Charisma-11
Alignment:
Lawful Neutral A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs him. Order and organization are paramount to him. He may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or he may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot. However, lawful neutral can be a dangerous alignment because it seeks to eliminate all freedom, choice, and diversity in society.
Race:
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.
Primary Class:
Monks are versatile warriors skilled at fighting without weapons or armor. Good-aligned monks serve as protectors of the people, while evil monks make ideal spies and assassins. Though they don't cast spells, monks channel a subtle energy, called ki. This energy allows them to perform amazing feats, such as healing themselves, catching arrows in flight, and dodging blows with lightning speed. Their mundane and ki-based abilities grow with experience, granting them more power over themselves and their environment. Monks suffer unique penalties to their abilities if they wear armor, as doing so violates their rigid oath. A monk wearing armor loses their Wisdom and level based armor class bonuses, their movement speed, and their additional unarmed attacks per round.
Secondary Class:
Rangers are skilled stalkers and hunters who make their home in the woods. Their martial skill is nearly the equal of the fighter, but they lack the latter's dedication to the craft of fighting. Instead, the ranger focuses his skills and training on a specific enemy a type of creature he bears a vengeful grudge against and hunts above all others. Rangers often accept the role of protector, aiding those who live in or travel through the woods. His skills allow him to move quietly and stick to the shadows, especially in natural settings, and he also has special knowledge of certain types of creatures. Finally, an experienced ranger has such a tie to nature that he can actually draw on natural power to cast divine spells, much as a druid does, and like a druid he is often accompanied by animal companions. A ranger's Wisdom score should be high, as this determines the maximum spell level that he can cast.
Detailed Results:
Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (28)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (24)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral - XXXXXX (6)
Chaos --- XXXXXXXX (8)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Evil ---- XX (2)
Race:
Human ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Dwarf ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Elf ------ XXXXXXXX (8)
Gnome ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Halfling - XXXXXX (6)
Half-Elf - XXXXXXXX (8)
Half-Orc - XXXXXXXX (8)
Class:
Barbarian - (-21)
Bard ------ (-25)
Cleric ---- (0)
Druid ----- (0)
Fighter --- XX (2)
Monk ------ XXXX (4)
Paladin --- (-21)
Ranger ---- XXXX (4)
Rogue ----- (-6)
Sorcerer -- XX (2)
Wizard ---- (-2)
Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus
I Am A: Lawful Neutral Human /Ranger (3rd/2nd Level)
Ability Scores:
Strength-14
Dexterity-15
Constitution-15
Intelligence-13
Wisdom-14
Charisma-11
Alignment:
Lawful Neutral A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs him. Order and organization are paramount to him. He may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or he may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot. However, lawful neutral can be a dangerous alignment because it seeks to eliminate all freedom, choice, and diversity in society.
Race:
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.
Primary Class:
Monks are versatile warriors skilled at fighting without weapons or armor. Good-aligned monks serve as protectors of the people, while evil monks make ideal spies and assassins. Though they don't cast spells, monks channel a subtle energy, called ki. This energy allows them to perform amazing feats, such as healing themselves, catching arrows in flight, and dodging blows with lightning speed. Their mundane and ki-based abilities grow with experience, granting them more power over themselves and their environment. Monks suffer unique penalties to their abilities if they wear armor, as doing so violates their rigid oath. A monk wearing armor loses their Wisdom and level based armor class bonuses, their movement speed, and their additional unarmed attacks per round.
Secondary Class:
Rangers are skilled stalkers and hunters who make their home in the woods. Their martial skill is nearly the equal of the fighter, but they lack the latter's dedication to the craft of fighting. Instead, the ranger focuses his skills and training on a specific enemy a type of creature he bears a vengeful grudge against and hunts above all others. Rangers often accept the role of protector, aiding those who live in or travel through the woods. His skills allow him to move quietly and stick to the shadows, especially in natural settings, and he also has special knowledge of certain types of creatures. Finally, an experienced ranger has such a tie to nature that he can actually draw on natural power to cast divine spells, much as a druid does, and like a druid he is often accompanied by animal companions. A ranger's Wisdom score should be high, as this determines the maximum spell level that he can cast.
Detailed Results:
Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (28)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (24)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral - XXXXXX (6)
Chaos --- XXXXXXXX (8)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Evil ---- XX (2)
Race:
Human ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Dwarf ---- XXXXXXXXXX (10)
Elf ------ XXXXXXXX (8)
Gnome ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Halfling - XXXXXX (6)
Half-Elf - XXXXXXXX (8)
Half-Orc - XXXXXXXX (8)
Class:
Barbarian - (-21)
Bard ------ (-25)
Cleric ---- (0)
Druid ----- (0)
Fighter --- XX (2)
Monk ------ XXXX (4)
Paladin --- (-21)
Ranger ---- XXXX (4)
Rogue ----- (-6)
Sorcerer -- XX (2)
Wizard ---- (-2)
Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus
Monday, January 14, 2008
SuperBowl Cancelled
I have to agree with the L.A. Times TJ Simers on this one:
The Chargers Just Ruined a Great Game
Thanks to the San Diego Chargers, the Superbowl that would have been played next week in Foxborough, Ma between the two best teams in the NFL - The Indianapolis Colts and the New England Patriots won't occur. I guess it shows you have to actually play the games instead of figuring it out on paper.
The Patriots must be happy because the one team that had a decent chance of killing their perfect season is gone.
Meanwhile, in the NFL's version of Division 2 - also known as the NFC, Packers' fans around the country should write [G]iant thank you notes to the New York Giants. New York's upset in Dallas yesterday all but put the Packers in the Superbowl (although, as mentioned above, they will have to go through the actual process of playing the game).
The Chargers Just Ruined a Great Game
Thanks to the San Diego Chargers, the Superbowl that would have been played next week in Foxborough, Ma between the two best teams in the NFL - The Indianapolis Colts and the New England Patriots won't occur. I guess it shows you have to actually play the games instead of figuring it out on paper.
The Patriots must be happy because the one team that had a decent chance of killing their perfect season is gone.
Meanwhile, in the NFL's version of Division 2 - also known as the NFC, Packers' fans around the country should write [G]iant thank you notes to the New York Giants. New York's upset in Dallas yesterday all but put the Packers in the Superbowl (although, as mentioned above, they will have to go through the actual process of playing the game).
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Stop Them (Please)
I don't care who it is, but somebody please beat the New England Patriots before they go 19-0 and I will never stop hearing Bostonians (and band wagoners) boast about their ultimate season.
I never had anything against the Patriots before this year. They are the team of the decade and I've had great respect for Bill Belichick and Tom Brady. I've lost much of that respect this season.
No, it's not because of the whole "cheating" thing. I'm sure just about every team does some form of play stealing that the Patriots got caught doing. I am talking about the pouring it on and the stat-padding.
They've been on TV quite a bit this year, obviously. Why do they never take Brady or any of their starters out in the last 5 minutes of the game when it's 42 - 10 or something like that? Why do they go for it on 4th down in these situations? Bellichick is showing he has no respect for the rest of the NFL. This team has no class. They don't deserve the acclaim.
I think Jacksonville has a small chance (really, I do). However, assuming New England wins today, I am looking for Indianapolis to end it next week.
I never had anything against the Patriots before this year. They are the team of the decade and I've had great respect for Bill Belichick and Tom Brady. I've lost much of that respect this season.
No, it's not because of the whole "cheating" thing. I'm sure just about every team does some form of play stealing that the Patriots got caught doing. I am talking about the pouring it on and the stat-padding.
They've been on TV quite a bit this year, obviously. Why do they never take Brady or any of their starters out in the last 5 minutes of the game when it's 42 - 10 or something like that? Why do they go for it on 4th down in these situations? Bellichick is showing he has no respect for the rest of the NFL. This team has no class. They don't deserve the acclaim.
I think Jacksonville has a small chance (really, I do). However, assuming New England wins today, I am looking for Indianapolis to end it next week.
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Thoughts on 2008
What to blog about in 2008?
Actually, I think I am mostly going to stay away from the election nonsense - at least directly. I have no idea of whom I want to win the next election. Just please let it not be Clinton or Obama.
I want to talk some more about the whole climate change subject. I will continue to assert that humans have very little to do with the Arctic ice melting and such until I read something really compelling and not fudged up, cherry-picked nonsense from ex-hippies and politicians. There's a lot more to this than whether or not it exists or is caused by humans. I intend to explore the benefits of global warming, (yes, there are benefits.) I also want to address the whole "sky is falling" mentality that is eroding our collective consciousnesses.
Ethanol is a good topic to discuss in 2008. It's ludicrous to think that it will take place of oil. At least, with the technology we have today. We may be substituting "Big Oil" with "Big Corn" but we will be paying more and polluting no less.
If not ethanol, then what?
Are hybrid cars all that?
The biggest problem in the world is people.
Guns, do they really kill people?
Health care. Raise your hand if you think the federal government could possibly provide it efficiently and with quality. Before you raise your hand, think about all the other wonderful government programs that are run well and within a reasonable budget.
Radical Islam. Is 2008 going to be the year they hurt us again or will they keep infiltrating and hold on for a bigger strike?
I'm wondering if Joe Torre will make any bit of difference to the Dodgers. Are we just in for another slightly above/below .500 year again?
With Georgia Frontiere not expected to live out the year, will Chip Rosenbloom move the Rams back to Los Angeles?
Actually, I think I am mostly going to stay away from the election nonsense - at least directly. I have no idea of whom I want to win the next election. Just please let it not be Clinton or Obama.
I want to talk some more about the whole climate change subject. I will continue to assert that humans have very little to do with the Arctic ice melting and such until I read something really compelling and not fudged up, cherry-picked nonsense from ex-hippies and politicians. There's a lot more to this than whether or not it exists or is caused by humans. I intend to explore the benefits of global warming, (yes, there are benefits.) I also want to address the whole "sky is falling" mentality that is eroding our collective consciousnesses.
Ethanol is a good topic to discuss in 2008. It's ludicrous to think that it will take place of oil. At least, with the technology we have today. We may be substituting "Big Oil" with "Big Corn" but we will be paying more and polluting no less.
If not ethanol, then what?
Are hybrid cars all that?
The biggest problem in the world is people.
Guns, do they really kill people?
Health care. Raise your hand if you think the federal government could possibly provide it efficiently and with quality. Before you raise your hand, think about all the other wonderful government programs that are run well and within a reasonable budget.
Radical Islam. Is 2008 going to be the year they hurt us again or will they keep infiltrating and hold on for a bigger strike?
I'm wondering if Joe Torre will make any bit of difference to the Dodgers. Are we just in for another slightly above/below .500 year again?
With Georgia Frontiere not expected to live out the year, will Chip Rosenbloom move the Rams back to Los Angeles?
Monday, December 31, 2007
Last Thoughts on 2007
For us Wilson's, 2007 was a tumultuous year. My mother suffered a heart attack on Valentine's day and had to go through open-heart surgery. One month later, my father passed away. It seemed like I spent the rest of the year in picking up the pieces.
In between all of this, I had some of the heaviest workloads I had seen in a while. I racked up a lot of overtime, which is good, especially when it's over. Then at the end of the year, business really slowed and I started to stress a little over that. Fortunately, it seemed to have been a temporary lull. While I haven't been putting in long hours, the work has been steady.
Well, most things are in order again. We found all of my Dad's important stuff and my Mom now is living comfortably 20 min. from my home. Goodbye monthly trips to Las Vegas! I won't miss them. I'm wondering what is coming next. One thing I know is that if one ever thinks he or she has a handle on things, it won't last. Something always changes. It's how we adjust that makes all the difference.
In between all of this, I had some of the heaviest workloads I had seen in a while. I racked up a lot of overtime, which is good, especially when it's over. Then at the end of the year, business really slowed and I started to stress a little over that. Fortunately, it seemed to have been a temporary lull. While I haven't been putting in long hours, the work has been steady.
Well, most things are in order again. We found all of my Dad's important stuff and my Mom now is living comfortably 20 min. from my home. Goodbye monthly trips to Las Vegas! I won't miss them. I'm wondering what is coming next. One thing I know is that if one ever thinks he or she has a handle on things, it won't last. Something always changes. It's how we adjust that makes all the difference.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Happy Birthday Sir Arthur C. Clarke
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLXQ7rNgWwg
Arthur C. Clarke is one a a very select few whom I would call a "hero" of mine. He celebrated his 90'th birthday today (really yesterday to me since he lives on the other side of the planet in Sri Lanka).
Clarke is primarily known as a science fiction writer, but he has been much more than that. He is one of the few sci-fi writers who really knew his subject matter really well. His stories are loaded with authenticity. There is really nothing he ever speculated about in his writings that could ever be considered impossible or even improbable. While many or really most writers conveniently ignore gravity, the speed of light, and other inconveniences of the universe so they can put their Earthbound stories in space, Clarke respects the laws of the universe and his novels and short stories reflect this respect.
Clarke will always be remembered for other things.
- One-Time Head of the British Interplanetary Society: In the 1930's, Clarke and others, would gather in pubs and talk about real spaceflight. No Buck Rogers, but real rockets and what it would take to get to outer space from scientific and engineering viewpoints. Many of their ideas became reality 30 years later.
- Clarke's Belt - Geo synchronized satellites that allow global communications including the Internet. Clarke drew this up in 1945 - 12 years before Sputnik. Clarke is considered the "Father of Global Communications"
- Clarke's Three Laws - Gems that are the basis for all good science fiction.
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Oscar Nomination for 2001: A Space Odyssey (With Stanley Kubrick)
- Predicting the Internet in the novel 2001: A Space Odyssey
- Calling the Space Shuttle Program "A Disaster waiting to happen" in mid-1985, half a year before the Challenger disaster. Clarke never was a fan of a space shuttle designed beautifully by NASA and destroyed by Congress.
There are Clarke speculations that have yet to come to pass, but I hope they will. These include the Space Elevator from his novel The Fountains of Paradise and energy derived from ordinary air.
Happy Birthday Dr. Clarke. I share in your hope for s space-faring human race.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Streeter and Dorrell
" Over several seasons, Dorrell has won about six out of 10 games. So did his predecessors. He's doing what football coaches do at UCLA.
I've long been skeptical about the heated, heavy anger directed at Karl Dorrell. I've wondered: Where does it come from? " - Kurt Streeter, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 30, 2007
There is a very good chance that today will feature Karl Dorrell's last game as UCLA's football coach. This man was probably hired because of his skin color and will most likely, be fired because he is a mediocre coach. Kurt Streeter, in the quote above, doesn't seem to realize that Dorrell's white predecessors who performed similarly, also were fired.
Go Trojans!
I've long been skeptical about the heated, heavy anger directed at Karl Dorrell. I've wondered: Where does it come from? " - Kurt Streeter, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 30, 2007
There is a very good chance that today will feature Karl Dorrell's last game as UCLA's football coach. This man was probably hired because of his skin color and will most likely, be fired because he is a mediocre coach. Kurt Streeter, in the quote above, doesn't seem to realize that Dorrell's white predecessors who performed similarly, also were fired.
Go Trojans!
Sunday, November 18, 2007
What's in a Name?
If you haven't seen the exchange involving the word "bitch" between John McCain and a Hillary hater or the remarks by CNN's Rick Sanchez, watch it here.
Crazy or Stupid?
I'm not a McCain fan but my initial reaction is that he handled it pretty well. Of course, CNN's Sanchez would like to think this finished the whole campaign but that's what I'd expect from CNN. That's not what I want to discuss, however.
Thinking about it some more brought me to an interesting hypothetical. What if the questioner was an African-American referring to Barack Obama asking:
"How do we beat the n*****?"
I wonder how it would have played had this been the case. I believe McCain would have reacted much more harshly and if he hadn't, then Sanchez would probably be right. McCain would be finished.
Notice how even I will print the "b" word and not the "n" word. The "n" word has certainly become quite the taboo in our society. It's interesting isn't it? How many women would think it's okay to use the "b" word and not the "n" word? Should we react upon hearing the words equally? If not, what makes one okay to use and not the other?
Crazy or Stupid?
I'm not a McCain fan but my initial reaction is that he handled it pretty well. Of course, CNN's Sanchez would like to think this finished the whole campaign but that's what I'd expect from CNN. That's not what I want to discuss, however.
Thinking about it some more brought me to an interesting hypothetical. What if the questioner was an African-American referring to Barack Obama asking:
"How do we beat the n*****?"
I wonder how it would have played had this been the case. I believe McCain would have reacted much more harshly and if he hadn't, then Sanchez would probably be right. McCain would be finished.
Notice how even I will print the "b" word and not the "n" word. The "n" word has certainly become quite the taboo in our society. It's interesting isn't it? How many women would think it's okay to use the "b" word and not the "n" word? Should we react upon hearing the words equally? If not, what makes one okay to use and not the other?
Friday, November 02, 2007
Rudolph Giuliani: Sports Analyst
Let's do this again.
Al Michaels: So Mr Giuliani, you probably are aware that on this coming up Sunday, there will be a battle between two undefeated teams, the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts. Who do you like in that one?
Rudolph Giuliani: Well Al, I remember when I was Mayor of New York, I cut down crime on the roads to the Meadowlands Stadium by 45%. I worked hard with our law enfo...
Al Michaels: (To himself) Here we go again
Al Michaels: Rudy, Rudy!, I'm here to talk about sports. I just want your prediction for the game.
Rudolph Giuliani: Oh, the game itself? It's going to be a struggle - kind of like the struggle during 9/11 when our firefighters had to battle the smoke, ash and falling debris to save thousands of lives. I expect the Colts and Patriots to be like my fire-fighting warriors as they battle each other.
Al Michaels: Care to actually make a prediction as to who will win?
Rudolph Giuliani: Oh, I'm rooting for Boston, er New England for sure.
New Yorkers: Boooooooh!
Al Michaels: So Mr Giuliani, you probably are aware that on this coming up Sunday, there will be a battle between two undefeated teams, the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts. Who do you like in that one?
Rudolph Giuliani: Well Al, I remember when I was Mayor of New York, I cut down crime on the roads to the Meadowlands Stadium by 45%. I worked hard with our law enfo...
Al Michaels: (To himself) Here we go again
Al Michaels: Rudy, Rudy!, I'm here to talk about sports. I just want your prediction for the game.
Rudolph Giuliani: Oh, the game itself? It's going to be a struggle - kind of like the struggle during 9/11 when our firefighters had to battle the smoke, ash and falling debris to save thousands of lives. I expect the Colts and Patriots to be like my fire-fighting warriors as they battle each other.
Al Michaels: Care to actually make a prediction as to who will win?
Rudolph Giuliani: Oh, I'm rooting for Boston, er New England for sure.
New Yorkers: Boooooooh!
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Hillary Clinton: Sports Analyst
Let's just imagine this for one minute.
Al Michaels: So Mrs. Clinton, you probably are aware that on this coming up Sunday, there will be a battle between two undefeated teams, the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts. Who do you like in that one?
Hillary Clinton: First of all, having two teams undefeated this late in the season indicates a lack of parity in the league. This can clearly be blamed on the current administration for setting up policies where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. When I am President, I am going to change that by increasing the ta...
Al Michaels: Eh, excuse me Hillary, I just want your prediction as to who's going to win the game.
Hillary Clinton: The Patriots are certainly a strong team. They are very democratic in the way they share the ball among so many players. The current administration doesn't play that way! The Patriots' style of play makes them unbeatable.
Al Michaels: So you pick the Patriots, then?
Hillary Clinton: Well, you also have the Colts, who have an African-American coach. Despite the current administration's running the country like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about, the coach has managed to overcome this and because of that, the Colts are unbeatable.
Al Michaels: Now wait a minute, you just said earlier that the Patriots are unbeatable. They both can't be.
Hillary Clinton: No Al, this is one of those situations where my opponents say "gotcha!". Don't misconstrue what I've said. Clearly this confusion can be blamed on the current administration!
Al Michaels: Let me ask this question, again... One more time. Who do you pick to win on Sunday, the Patriots or the Colts?
Hillary Clinton: I believe I've stated my position on this issue clearly.
Al Michaels: So Mrs. Clinton, you probably are aware that on this coming up Sunday, there will be a battle between two undefeated teams, the New England Patriots and the Indianapolis Colts. Who do you like in that one?
Hillary Clinton: First of all, having two teams undefeated this late in the season indicates a lack of parity in the league. This can clearly be blamed on the current administration for setting up policies where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. When I am President, I am going to change that by increasing the ta...
Al Michaels: Eh, excuse me Hillary, I just want your prediction as to who's going to win the game.
Hillary Clinton: The Patriots are certainly a strong team. They are very democratic in the way they share the ball among so many players. The current administration doesn't play that way! The Patriots' style of play makes them unbeatable.
Al Michaels: So you pick the Patriots, then?
Hillary Clinton: Well, you also have the Colts, who have an African-American coach. Despite the current administration's running the country like a plantation, and you know what I'm talking about, the coach has managed to overcome this and because of that, the Colts are unbeatable.
Al Michaels: Now wait a minute, you just said earlier that the Patriots are unbeatable. They both can't be.
Hillary Clinton: No Al, this is one of those situations where my opponents say "gotcha!". Don't misconstrue what I've said. Clearly this confusion can be blamed on the current administration!
Al Michaels: Let me ask this question, again... One more time. Who do you pick to win on Sunday, the Patriots or the Colts?
Hillary Clinton: I believe I've stated my position on this issue clearly.
Boo!
Just thought I'd list some of my favorite horror movies. Don't know what prompted that. Most horror films are pure crap. That includes just about all the teen slasher movies. I'm not the type who actually gets scared watching a movie so this is not a list of the scariest films. It's a list of the rare films in this genre that I think are worthwhile to watch.
In no particular order:
Psycho: The definitive work on audience deception. Hitchcock masterfully leads us into a story about a woman trapped in her own web of deception, then without warning, kills her off and reveals a new story about a man in his own trap.
Alien: The ultimate creature movie. This film has such a creepy tone. It doesn't hurt that it takes place in a cramped ship in an alien part of outer space.
The Shining: In the Overlook hotel where the winding endless hallways mimic the surrounding mountains, a family dwells in utter isolation. Does the terror come from outside unnatural forces or does the locale bring out the inner demons of each individual? The Kubrick film is great. The TV movie that is based more on the Stephen King book is weak.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956 & 1978), Body Snatchers (1993): A movie so good, they've re-made it three times. I haven't seen the one that came out this year (The Invasion), but the three predecessors are all very good in their own unique way. "They're coming, they're coming! You're next!"
A Nightmare on Elm Street: Let me explain this very carefully, only the first one is worth the trouble. The sequels are just along the same lines as the Halloweens and Friday the Thirteenth movies. The first one though, is very good as it puts a new twist on the teen slasher. This time, he comes in your dreams. How can you stop him? How can you make anyone believe you?
Count Dracula (1977 TV Movie): This version of the classic story actually follows the novel quite faithfully. It's far superior to the very tame Bela Lugosi flick and the over the top, ridiculous Francis Ford Coppolla version.
Frankenstein (1992 TNT Movie): This is reasonably faithful to the novel and it certainly captures its themes quite well. The more recent Kenneth Branaugh film isn't bad but it's over-acted.
SSSSS: This is a campy B movie all the way but it is very creepy. "Red touch yellow kills a fellow."
Beware, the Blob: Also, a very campy B movie. It is hilarious. The blob devours everything including hippies, priests, and policemen. This is Larry Hagman's one and only movie he directed.
The Howling: This came out almost exactly at the same time as An American Werewolf in London. The Howling is much better, in terror, effects, and campiness.
In no particular order:
Psycho: The definitive work on audience deception. Hitchcock masterfully leads us into a story about a woman trapped in her own web of deception, then without warning, kills her off and reveals a new story about a man in his own trap.
Alien: The ultimate creature movie. This film has such a creepy tone. It doesn't hurt that it takes place in a cramped ship in an alien part of outer space.
The Shining: In the Overlook hotel where the winding endless hallways mimic the surrounding mountains, a family dwells in utter isolation. Does the terror come from outside unnatural forces or does the locale bring out the inner demons of each individual? The Kubrick film is great. The TV movie that is based more on the Stephen King book is weak.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956 & 1978), Body Snatchers (1993): A movie so good, they've re-made it three times. I haven't seen the one that came out this year (The Invasion), but the three predecessors are all very good in their own unique way. "They're coming, they're coming! You're next!"
A Nightmare on Elm Street: Let me explain this very carefully, only the first one is worth the trouble. The sequels are just along the same lines as the Halloweens and Friday the Thirteenth movies. The first one though, is very good as it puts a new twist on the teen slasher. This time, he comes in your dreams. How can you stop him? How can you make anyone believe you?
Count Dracula (1977 TV Movie): This version of the classic story actually follows the novel quite faithfully. It's far superior to the very tame Bela Lugosi flick and the over the top, ridiculous Francis Ford Coppolla version.
Frankenstein (1992 TNT Movie): This is reasonably faithful to the novel and it certainly captures its themes quite well. The more recent Kenneth Branaugh film isn't bad but it's over-acted.
SSSSS: This is a campy B movie all the way but it is very creepy. "Red touch yellow kills a fellow."
Beware, the Blob: Also, a very campy B movie. It is hilarious. The blob devours everything including hippies, priests, and policemen. This is Larry Hagman's one and only movie he directed.
The Howling: This came out almost exactly at the same time as An American Werewolf in London. The Howling is much better, in terror, effects, and campiness.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Bush Hates Healthy Children! Read All About it!
House Sustains President’s Veto on Child Health
The headline of the New York Times article above is unbelievably slanted. Nevermind that federal government has no business in the health care business and the veto merely put some limits on the whole bad idea.
How about a headline slanted the other way.
The headline of the New York Times article above is unbelievably slanted. Nevermind that federal government has no business in the health care business and the veto merely put some limits on the whole bad idea.
How about a headline slanted the other way.
House Sustains Bush's Defense of the Constitution
Sunday, October 14, 2007
He Assaulted Truth. Now He Gets Awarded for Peace?
When Yasser Arafat received the Nobel Peace prize, the Nobel Peace committee lost all credibility for me. Now they award Al Gore the same award for his opinionated and biased attempt at explaining global warming. Well, at least they're consistent. Gore fudged data, made all sorts of inaccurate statements, and drew conclusions based on very little evidence. Yet, somehow, he gets an Academy award and a Nobel Peace Prize for his attack on the truth.
In a world gone mad, there is a little sanity. In Great Britain, it was ruled that An Inconvenient Truth, if it is to be shown in schools, must be accompanied by a disclaimer.
Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
Of course, I already did my own research on this earlier this year.
A Convenient Lie Part 1
I assert that Al Gore created his film for political reasons. I outline his primary arguments.
"The Debate is Over" (A Convenient Lie Part 2)
I point out that there is a huge amount of qualified people who dispute Gore's claims. The debate is hardly over.
The Case for Global Warming (A Convenient Lie Part 3)
I summarize Gore's arguments.
Why It's Wrong (A Convenient Lie Part 4)
There are many holes in Gore's arguments. I go over just a few.
The Truth (A Convenient Lie Part 5)
Global warming is caused by (gasp) the Sun!
Politics vs Science (A Convenient Lie Part 6 - FINAL)
Politicians seem to care more about this issue than scientists. They wouldn't have anything to gain from this fear-mongering, would they?
In a world gone mad, there is a little sanity. In Great Britain, it was ruled that An Inconvenient Truth, if it is to be shown in schools, must be accompanied by a disclaimer.
Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
Of course, I already did my own research on this earlier this year.
A Convenient Lie Part 1
I assert that Al Gore created his film for political reasons. I outline his primary arguments.
"The Debate is Over" (A Convenient Lie Part 2)
I point out that there is a huge amount of qualified people who dispute Gore's claims. The debate is hardly over.
The Case for Global Warming (A Convenient Lie Part 3)
I summarize Gore's arguments.
Why It's Wrong (A Convenient Lie Part 4)
There are many holes in Gore's arguments. I go over just a few.
The Truth (A Convenient Lie Part 5)
Global warming is caused by (gasp) the Sun!
Politics vs Science (A Convenient Lie Part 6 - FINAL)
Politicians seem to care more about this issue than scientists. They wouldn't have anything to gain from this fear-mongering, would they?
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
October's Best
Now that I've mostly gotten over my depression of the Dodgers' absolute collapse in September, I'll give my fearless picks for October.
Divisional Series
Rockies over Phillies
Diamondbacks over Cubs
Yankees over Indians
Red Sox over Angels
League Championship Series
Rockies over Diamondbacks
Red Sox over Yankees
World Series
Red Sox over Rockies
Divisional Series
Rockies over Phillies
Diamondbacks over Cubs
Yankees over Indians
Red Sox over Angels
League Championship Series
Rockies over Diamondbacks
Red Sox over Yankees
World Series
Red Sox over Rockies
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Position Available #2
Badly Wanted: A head coach with guts and a success-driven attitude for a badly under-performing football team in St. Louis. This football team has some of the most talented players in the NFL. They feature one of the most cool-headed, accurate and toughest quarterbacks, a young, emerging running back who is also an excellent receiver and blocker. An array of wide-receivers and tight ends with speed and great hands would be at your disposal.
Unfortunately, this team is so poorly coached that they appear utterly inept. This position is available immediately. Hurry and apply before it's too late. Bill Cowher and Marty Shottenheimer would make primary choices but anyone who is fiery, and can plan solid game strategies and not be prone to making sorry-ass excuses would be considered.
Unfortunately, this team is so poorly coached that they appear utterly inept. This position is available immediately. Hurry and apply before it's too late. Bill Cowher and Marty Shottenheimer would make primary choices but anyone who is fiery, and can plan solid game strategies and not be prone to making sorry-ass excuses would be considered.
Position Available #1
The Los Angeles Dodgers, a major league baseball team serving the Los Angeles community has an urgent need for a manager. They need a highly motivated, success-driven leader. Applicants must be willing to tirelessly train and drive personnel to perform at a high level. Applicants must be able to incorporate a work ethic stressing fundamentals, conditioning and toughness. Applicants will need to have a heavy hand when needed to motivate a team that comprises many young players. Applicants must inspire attitude in team that anything short of making the postseason will be regarded as a complete failure to fulfill objectives.
The Los Angeles Dodgers organization is a proud major league baseball franchise with a rich tradition of success. The position offered here has major benefits including working with some of the finest young talent in the league.
"Player's managers" need not apply. Send your resumes to Sick_and_tired_of_feeble_management@dodgers.com.
The Los Angeles Dodgers organization is a proud major league baseball franchise with a rich tradition of success. The position offered here has major benefits including working with some of the finest young talent in the league.
"Player's managers" need not apply. Send your resumes to Sick_and_tired_of_feeble_management@dodgers.com.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Now That's God
I've been away helping my Mom move from Las Vegas to La Verne. I received the following link from my Uncle and Aunt. It's a really special tale.
Now That's God
Now That's God
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Somehow, I Should Have Known
I just read the somewhat amusing speech by Osama bin Laden. He gives much praise to Allah, of course. He praises his soldiers of Islam for their hard work in the battle against the Imperial United States.
In between all this, he takes the time to condemn a few other things:
I wonder what political party bin Laden supports? Next month, I suppose he will lay out his platform for national health care.
In between all this, he takes the time to condemn a few other things:
- He blasts the United States involvement in an "unjust" war in Iraq.
- He says the United States is in the war based on "blatant lies" by the federal government.
- He essentially says that democracy doesn't work because it breeds greedy corporations.
- He says the United States is destroying the planet by not ratifying the Kyoto accord.
- He blames America's evil on capitalism.
I wonder what political party bin Laden supports? Next month, I suppose he will lay out his platform for national health care.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Okay, Here We Go
My absolutely fearless predictions for the 2007-2008 NFL season. You can take this to the bank.
...No, really.
...I'm serious, these predictions are dead on.
...Okay, so I wasn't so great last year, but this year will be different.
...I got a really good feeling this time.
...Fine, so don't believe me, you'll be sorry.
AFC East
This is my biggest surprise. After years of domination, the Patriot bubble will burst. They are due for a disappointing season and this will be it. They won't be bad but they won't be good enough to make the postseason. This division will be a fight between the Bills and Jets with the Bills winning the division and the Jets in the wild card. Just remember, you read it here first.
AFC North
The Bengals will run away with this with a solid season. The Ravens will be competitive but will fall short. This will be a disappointing season for the Steelers and the Browns will be, well... the Browns.
AFC South
My pick for this division will be ....(drumroll please)... The Colts! Okay, no surprise there. Some of the problems they had last year will turn up again but no one else in this division is going to compete with them.
AFC West
This is going to be a close one between the Chargers and Broncos. The Chargers will prevail. The Raiders will improve to respectibility and the Chiefs are in for a sorry season.
NFC East
Like their AFC counterparts, two teams will slug it out until the end. Eagles get the division, Cowboys get the wild-card. The Redskins and Giants will not be in the race in the second half. For once, this division will not be the 3 or 4 team race it usually is.
NFC North
The Bears! Was that so hard? No, they're the only good team in this otherwise, sorry division.
NFC South
The Saints will pick up where they left off last year and dominate this division. Carolina will stick near them for a while but will have to settle for a wild card. The Falcons and Buccaneers are going no where.
NFC West
This is now the NFL's most competitive division. The Seahawks are a little older but still a good team. The other three all improved. This division will be a mess. All four teams will look good at different times of the season. The division lead will change frequently throughout the season. The team that will end up on top when the dust has settled will be the Rams.
Postseason
AFC Division Winners = Bills, Bengals, Colts, Chargers
AFC Wild Card = Jets, Broncos
AFC Champion = Chargers
NFC Division Winners = Eagles, Bears, Saints, Rams
NFC Wild Card = Cowboys, Panthers
NFC Champion = Rams
NFL Champion = Chargers
Now you know. Do we need to actually go through the formality of playing the games?
HELL YES!
...No, really.
...I'm serious, these predictions are dead on.
...Okay, so I wasn't so great last year, but this year will be different.
...I got a really good feeling this time.
...Fine, so don't believe me, you'll be sorry.
AFC East
This is my biggest surprise. After years of domination, the Patriot bubble will burst. They are due for a disappointing season and this will be it. They won't be bad but they won't be good enough to make the postseason. This division will be a fight between the Bills and Jets with the Bills winning the division and the Jets in the wild card. Just remember, you read it here first.
AFC North
The Bengals will run away with this with a solid season. The Ravens will be competitive but will fall short. This will be a disappointing season for the Steelers and the Browns will be, well... the Browns.
AFC South
My pick for this division will be ....(drumroll please)... The Colts! Okay, no surprise there. Some of the problems they had last year will turn up again but no one else in this division is going to compete with them.
AFC West
This is going to be a close one between the Chargers and Broncos. The Chargers will prevail. The Raiders will improve to respectibility and the Chiefs are in for a sorry season.
NFC East
Like their AFC counterparts, two teams will slug it out until the end. Eagles get the division, Cowboys get the wild-card. The Redskins and Giants will not be in the race in the second half. For once, this division will not be the 3 or 4 team race it usually is.
NFC North
The Bears! Was that so hard? No, they're the only good team in this otherwise, sorry division.
NFC South
The Saints will pick up where they left off last year and dominate this division. Carolina will stick near them for a while but will have to settle for a wild card. The Falcons and Buccaneers are going no where.
NFC West
This is now the NFL's most competitive division. The Seahawks are a little older but still a good team. The other three all improved. This division will be a mess. All four teams will look good at different times of the season. The division lead will change frequently throughout the season. The team that will end up on top when the dust has settled will be the Rams.
Postseason
AFC Division Winners = Bills, Bengals, Colts, Chargers
AFC Wild Card = Jets, Broncos
AFC Champion = Chargers
NFC Division Winners = Eagles, Bears, Saints, Rams
NFC Wild Card = Cowboys, Panthers
NFC Champion = Rams
NFL Champion = Chargers
Now you know. Do we need to actually go through the formality of playing the games?
HELL YES!
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Property
There's been an interesting discussion on the last two Larry Elder radio shows. It concerns what should happen to Michael Vick, who now has pleaded guilty in charges of gambling and being involved in illegal dog-fighting.
Mr. Elder asserts that although he finds Vick's actions "disgusting" and "reprehensible", he doesn't feel that what he did should be considered illegal. He points out that if one were to take an axe and chop up one's own television set, it would be a stupid act but wouldn't be illegal as the TV was the property of that individual.
This riled up a few of his listeners. Last Friday, one guy called and said that his dogs are not property, but members of his family. Larry asked him if somebody came in to his house and killed his dog, would he treat that the same way as if it were his wife or his child? The man responded "yes", which I could tell just floored Larry. Yesterday, Larry reported that he had been inundated with emails from listeners who felt the same way as the Friday caller did. Larry tried to explain that we eat cows and chickens so what makes dogs and cats so special? Larry mentioned that he owns a cat but does not see the cat as an equal to other members of his family.
I can only add that I was as close to my dog as I had ever been to any other human being so I can relate to these callers. I know that not everybody feels this way (certainly not Michael Vick) and some people truly view their pets as "property".
Mr. Elder asserts that although he finds Vick's actions "disgusting" and "reprehensible", he doesn't feel that what he did should be considered illegal. He points out that if one were to take an axe and chop up one's own television set, it would be a stupid act but wouldn't be illegal as the TV was the property of that individual.
This riled up a few of his listeners. Last Friday, one guy called and said that his dogs are not property, but members of his family. Larry asked him if somebody came in to his house and killed his dog, would he treat that the same way as if it were his wife or his child? The man responded "yes", which I could tell just floored Larry. Yesterday, Larry reported that he had been inundated with emails from listeners who felt the same way as the Friday caller did. Larry tried to explain that we eat cows and chickens so what makes dogs and cats so special? Larry mentioned that he owns a cat but does not see the cat as an equal to other members of his family.
I can only add that I was as close to my dog as I had ever been to any other human being so I can relate to these callers. I know that not everybody feels this way (certainly not Michael Vick) and some people truly view their pets as "property".
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Worse than Hillary?
First we get Hillary Clinton attempting to pander to a predominantly black audience with her "I don't feel no ways tired" quotation. Never mind that it appeared more of an insult than anything else.
"Everybody here has looked after me for years, If it wasn't for these folks, I wouldn't be nowhere. ... This is my crew." - Presidential Candidate Barack Obama at Bud Billiken Parade Aug 11, 2007
This gem was said to a primarily black audience that included children. This from the same man who had stressed the importance of education. His own website states "Because education begins at home, parents must set high standards and inspirational examples for their children. "
Is this what he means by high standards?
"Everybody here has looked after me for years, If it wasn't for these folks, I wouldn't be nowhere. ... This is my crew." - Presidential Candidate Barack Obama at Bud Billiken Parade Aug 11, 2007
This gem was said to a primarily black audience that included children. This from the same man who had stressed the importance of education. His own website states "Because education begins at home, parents must set high standards and inspirational examples for their children. "
Is this what he means by high standards?
Monday, August 06, 2007
Utterly Ridiculous
Stop the Hatin', Hank
Dr. Todd Boyd, a professor at the University of Southern California calls Henry Aaron a "hater". Henry "Hank" Aaron has been a class act at least since he started playing Major League Baseball in 1954. In 1974, when he was being lambasted for breaking Babe Ruth's all-time home run record, he never said a word about the hate that was bestowed upon him.
Comparing Ruth and Aaron indicates two different players. Ruth compiled his 714 total home runs in bunches. For a 15 year period, he was a holy terror as he hit 666 home runs over that time. Aaron wasn't quite as dangerous per year or at bat as he took 18 years to hit 673 home runs during his prime. Considering he played 8 more games per year, it took Aaron considerably more at bats to accomplish what Ruth did. What gets lost in that it also means Aaron helped his team with his power over a longer period of time.
Dr. Boyd is clueless. He gets into racism. HELLO! Aaron and Bonds are the same race so why would anyone not want Bonds to break Aaron's record due to race? With the language this professor uses (Ebonics?) in the article, he is just pandering. Why ESPN used this article is beyond me.
What floored me even more was what I heard on KABC radio today. Some idiot called in and said that white people still think that Babe Ruth has the home run record. No one I know, of any skin color thinks that. That includes my wife who knows next to nothing about baseball records.
No, I think most people like myself who hate the fact that Bonds is breaking Aaron's record hate it because Bonds is a steroid-using asshole. I hope Alex Rodriguez breaks Bonds record soon.
Dr. Todd Boyd, a professor at the University of Southern California calls Henry Aaron a "hater". Henry "Hank" Aaron has been a class act at least since he started playing Major League Baseball in 1954. In 1974, when he was being lambasted for breaking Babe Ruth's all-time home run record, he never said a word about the hate that was bestowed upon him.
Comparing Ruth and Aaron indicates two different players. Ruth compiled his 714 total home runs in bunches. For a 15 year period, he was a holy terror as he hit 666 home runs over that time. Aaron wasn't quite as dangerous per year or at bat as he took 18 years to hit 673 home runs during his prime. Considering he played 8 more games per year, it took Aaron considerably more at bats to accomplish what Ruth did. What gets lost in that it also means Aaron helped his team with his power over a longer period of time.
Dr. Boyd is clueless. He gets into racism. HELLO! Aaron and Bonds are the same race so why would anyone not want Bonds to break Aaron's record due to race? With the language this professor uses (Ebonics?) in the article, he is just pandering. Why ESPN used this article is beyond me.
What floored me even more was what I heard on KABC radio today. Some idiot called in and said that white people still think that Babe Ruth has the home run record. No one I know, of any skin color thinks that. That includes my wife who knows next to nothing about baseball records.
No, I think most people like myself who hate the fact that Bonds is breaking Aaron's record hate it because Bonds is a steroid-using asshole. I hope Alex Rodriguez breaks Bonds record soon.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
The Value of Patience
With the Major League Baseball trade deadline approaching, I am hoping that my team, the Los Angeles Dodgers, don't - if you'll excuse the pun, bet the farm on some overpaid player another team wants to dump. As far as I'm concerned, Chad Billingsly, Joe Beimel, Jonathan Broxton, James Loney, Matt Kemp, Tony Abreu, Russell Martin, and Andre Ethier should be untouchable. Chances are one or two of these guys is going to be big stars, some are going to be solid players, and one or two may fizzle out into busts. The thing is that no one really knows who's going to end up being what.
This year is probably not our year. Let's give these guys more games to work together and hopefully make the playoffs. Then look out next year.
This year is probably not our year. Let's give these guys more games to work together and hopefully make the playoffs. Then look out next year.
Politics vs Science (A Convenient Lie Part 6 - FINAL)
ScienceIt takes very little in overall temperature change to melt glaciers and show the environmental impact that global warming alarmists love to show. An overall increase in solar radiation over the past 2 centuries certainly accounts for the 1 degree rise in temperature we've experienced. 250 years ago, we had a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age". 1,000 years ago, we had the "Medieval Warm Period", a very warm period where there is evidence that the northern polar ice caps were melted. Why do you think Greenland is called "Greenland"? The Vikings named it that a millennium ago because it was an expanse of green, grassy prairie in their time.
We spew all sorts of gunk into the air. The hazardous effects of pollutants such as sulphur dioxide (SO2) and carbon monoxide (CO) are well documented. Air pollutants cause health problems such as asthma and lung cancer. Air pollution leads to acid rain which means these pollutants are getting into the ground and causing even more problems. We are poisoning fish (and ultimately, ourselves) by dumping lead and mercury into the rivers and oceans. These problems are man-made and they are real.We should be addressing real issues, not chasing shadows. Also, note that people talking about global warming as real are politicians, not scientists - political organizations, not scientific ones. The Sierra Club sure believes in it. Check out Scientific American. The most respected public scientific journal/magazine is very neutral about the whole thing.
Politics
Democrats are doing their best to pin global warming on Republicans. Even though this pseudo-junk-science phenomenon, which, even by their own admission has been going on for decades, they are trying like crazy to blame it all on one George W. Bush. Their argument for this? - Because George W. Bush refused to ratify the Kyoto Treaty.
The Treaty of Anti-American Industry - aka Kyoto Treaty was essentially designed to benefit every nation on Earth except the United States. European nations, on the whole, don't have much heavy industry. Their small roads, high fuel prices have by economics, forced Europeans to get by with small, highly fuel efficient cars. They get much of their steel and other processed materials from South America, Africa, and parts of Asia that are not part of the Kyoto accord. So to them, the treaty was a slam dunk. They got to look good to their citizenry and wouldn't be very affected economically. American industry, on the other hand, would have been slapped with tons of new regulations and restrictions. Enough where what remaining industrial jobs would go to China.
China Overtakes U.S. as World's Biggest CO2 Emitter
Do you think China, perhaps, has an interest in the U.S. shutting down more industries?
Another Angle
The theory of man-made (anthropogenic) global warming is highly suspect. The whole global warming theory - man-made or not is not even universally accepted as the southern hemisphere of the Earth has actually been cooling. (The alarmists conveniently don't mention this.)
But, even if it was true! Even if the alarmists are right, they are still not telling us everything. Increased CO2 in the air has benefits. In case you didn't know, plants breathe Carbon Dioxide. Increased levels of CO2 means flora, on the whole, thrive. Plankton, the lowest link in the food chain, multiply. This is good news. Global cooling would be a much bigger problem. Witness the little ice age 250 years ago when much of Europe was starving due to low crop yields and a scarcity of fish.
Either way, human beings adapt. Let's get back to real problems like terrorism and real (non CO2) pollution.
China Overtakes U.S. as World's Biggest CO2 Emitter
Do you think China, perhaps, has an interest in the U.S. shutting down more industries?
Another Angle
The theory of man-made (anthropogenic) global warming is highly suspect. The whole global warming theory - man-made or not is not even universally accepted as the southern hemisphere of the Earth has actually been cooling. (The alarmists conveniently don't mention this.)
But, even if it was true! Even if the alarmists are right, they are still not telling us everything. Increased CO2 in the air has benefits. In case you didn't know, plants breathe Carbon Dioxide. Increased levels of CO2 means flora, on the whole, thrive. Plankton, the lowest link in the food chain, multiply. This is good news. Global cooling would be a much bigger problem. Witness the little ice age 250 years ago when much of Europe was starving due to low crop yields and a scarcity of fish.
Either way, human beings adapt. Let's get back to real problems like terrorism and real (non CO2) pollution.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
The Truth (A Convenient Lie Part 5)
If I had just crawled out of a cave and I was told that temperatures were rising, I'm pretty sure the first thing I would think of is the Sun. Call me crazy, call me hopelessly naive, but I tend to look for straightforward, even obvious answers to problems. Neither the IPCC nor Al Gore seem to want to do this, however. Instead, they came up with a contrived, complicated reason. Now of course, Climate Science is complicated, Gore used this to put on his smoke and mirrors act. To do this, he hardly mentions the Sun at all. The only time he really does is when he talks about how greenhouse gases trap it. The IPCC and Gore treat sunlight as some sort of universal constant.
The Sun has Weather too
Sunshine is not a constant. It varies year to year. One of the ways we track it is by sunspot activity. Essentially, the more sunspots, the more magnetically active the Sun is. The more magnetically active the Sun, the more energy it spews. We've been tracking sunspots since the 1600's - Galileo was the first to discover them in 1610. NASA has been collecting data on them.
I think the chart above speaks for itself.Still don't believe?
Mars has shrinking ice caps. We've known about them since 1671 (Huygens). Between then and now, there has never been a time where they are so small. In fact, at the rate they are shrinking, they might be completely gone in a few decades - much the same way the northern ice cap on Earth may disappear soon.
Are the Martians burning fossil fuels?
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Why It's Wrong (A Convenient Lie Part 4)
At the risk of being repetitive, let me summarize the entire global warming argument.
The Carbon Dioxide - Temperature Correlation
Let's look at the CO2 graph. This graph is based on the IPCC argument that CO2 levels are rising and are at record levels.
Notice anything unusual about this graph? One is the gap from 1900 to 1986. Why is there no data for these years?
Also, the data up until 1950 came from ice core samples taken in the Arctic. From 1986 on, the data comes from direct readings from the 13,000 ft Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii. That in itself is pretty interesting isn't it? To anyone who's not so eager to just swallow this graph up and accept it as "truth", it leads to the question; Why did they use two different types of data for two different time periods?
Let's look at another graph.
This is a graph showing CO2 levels up until 1960. The difference between this and the previous one is that this data comes from direct sampling from the Pacific. Notice how the CO2 levels are actually much higher in the 1800's. Also notice how some samples are at around 500 parts per million (ppm). In An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore specifically states that CO2 levels have never reached above 300 ppm until now.
For a full explanation of these graphs, look at this article.
Now let's take a look at the whole Carbon Dioxide - Global Temperature correlation. Here is a frame taken directly from An Inconvenient Truth:
This is from the part of the film where Gore is comparing global levels of CO2 (red) to global temperatures (white). Gore expects you to see this and immediately see the correlation that in general, when CO2 levels are high, so is the temperature. Now keep in mind that this shot is taken right from the movie. I'm going to show you something I'm sure Gore did not intend for you to see.
I drew in some vertical lines. You may have to click on the image to see my point here. Notice how as the lines show, temperatures change first, CO2 levels change later. In line #1, the white line is bottomed out. Notice the CO2 level has not bottomed out at this point. It's following the same general pattern as the temperature but seems to lag behind it. Line #2 is an example where the temperature has peaked, yet the CO2 is still rising. What does this graph show? It shows that temperature increases and decreases affect CO2 levels, not the other way around. In other words, raise the temperature and eventually, the CO2 level will rise. Al Gore and the IPCC want you to believe that changing the CO2 levels change the temperature. Gore's own graph contradicts this claim. I'll concede that not every single peak and valley indicate this, but look at the chart, most of them do.
Above is more of the same. This time, we're at the end of the chart (where Gore goes up in a crane to demonstrate the "off the chart" CO2 levels we're going to reach in 50 years or less). Even here, where the temperature and CO2 levels are rising as Gore strongly emphasizes, my point shows again. Look at line 6 where we have the current temperature/CO2 rise, the temperature began rising before the CO2 levels.
Al Gore is lying.
- -There has been an increase in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere over the past 150 years.
- -Global temperatures have risen over the same period of time.
- -From the two facts listed above, we can conclude that global warming is caused by human beings spewing CO2 since the Industrial Revolution has occurred over approximately the same period of time.
The Carbon Dioxide - Temperature Correlation
Let's look at the CO2 graph. This graph is based on the IPCC argument that CO2 levels are rising and are at record levels.
Notice anything unusual about this graph? One is the gap from 1900 to 1986. Why is there no data for these years?
Also, the data up until 1950 came from ice core samples taken in the Arctic. From 1986 on, the data comes from direct readings from the 13,000 ft Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii. That in itself is pretty interesting isn't it? To anyone who's not so eager to just swallow this graph up and accept it as "truth", it leads to the question; Why did they use two different types of data for two different time periods?
Let's look at another graph.
This is a graph showing CO2 levels up until 1960. The difference between this and the previous one is that this data comes from direct sampling from the Pacific. Notice how the CO2 levels are actually much higher in the 1800's. Also notice how some samples are at around 500 parts per million (ppm). In An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore specifically states that CO2 levels have never reached above 300 ppm until now.
For a full explanation of these graphs, look at this article.
Now let's take a look at the whole Carbon Dioxide - Global Temperature correlation. Here is a frame taken directly from An Inconvenient Truth:
This is from the part of the film where Gore is comparing global levels of CO2 (red) to global temperatures (white). Gore expects you to see this and immediately see the correlation that in general, when CO2 levels are high, so is the temperature. Now keep in mind that this shot is taken right from the movie. I'm going to show you something I'm sure Gore did not intend for you to see.
I drew in some vertical lines. You may have to click on the image to see my point here. Notice how as the lines show, temperatures change first, CO2 levels change later. In line #1, the white line is bottomed out. Notice the CO2 level has not bottomed out at this point. It's following the same general pattern as the temperature but seems to lag behind it. Line #2 is an example where the temperature has peaked, yet the CO2 is still rising. What does this graph show? It shows that temperature increases and decreases affect CO2 levels, not the other way around. In other words, raise the temperature and eventually, the CO2 level will rise. Al Gore and the IPCC want you to believe that changing the CO2 levels change the temperature. Gore's own graph contradicts this claim. I'll concede that not every single peak and valley indicate this, but look at the chart, most of them do.
Above is more of the same. This time, we're at the end of the chart (where Gore goes up in a crane to demonstrate the "off the chart" CO2 levels we're going to reach in 50 years or less). Even here, where the temperature and CO2 levels are rising as Gore strongly emphasizes, my point shows again. Look at line 6 where we have the current temperature/CO2 rise, the temperature began rising before the CO2 levels.
Al Gore is lying.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Finally, a Weekend
Yeah, I know it's been way too long. I've just not had the energy. I've had a huge project at work which is still going on, but it's no longer putting me in the frantic pace I've been at for the past few weeks. Couple that with helping my Mom in preparing to move back to California and I've just not had the will to blog.
I want to wrap up my Convenient Lie series (I've got 3 more chapters coming) and move on to some other stuff.
I want to wrap up my Convenient Lie series (I've got 3 more chapters coming) and move on to some other stuff.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Sunday, June 17, 2007
The Case for Global Warming (A Convenient Lie Part 3)
Let's take a look at the heart of the matter. I'll leave Gore alone for now and look at what the overall message is. Global warming alarmists make three basic assertions:
Above is the now famous "hockey stick" graph that indicates the correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature levels. The basic idea is: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas (a gas that traps heat). Human-caused pollutants since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution have been adding to the CO2 levels of the atmosphere. As a result of more of this heat-trapping gas, the Earth's climate has been getting warmer.
Evidence
Most major cities have been keeping daily temperature since the 1880's, some have records as far back as the 1860's. It is generally agreed that the United States and Europe have seen an increase in average temperature over this time by about 1 degree Fahrenheit. This can be significant enough to melt ice in northern regions or at high elevations up to a month early. Indeed, it is now believed that the glaciers in the lower 48 states (Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Oregon, Colorado, Utah, and California all have glaciers) will be completely gone before the end of the 21'st century, possibly by 2050.
In addition, the increase in large hurricanes has been attributed to the global warming effect. As ice melts into the oceans, the salinity goes down and cools the water. This cooler, less salty, ocean water will evaporate quicker and cause larger storms.
Disaster
The aforementioned increase in large storms is one of many potential disasters increased global warming will cause. Additionally, we will have to concern ourselves with:
- The Earth is getting warmer and warmer
- This warming is primarily caused by human activity
- The results of global warming are potentially disastrous if we don't change the way we do things now.
Notice how this is slightly different than the politically motivated 4 points that Gore makes (See A Convenient Lie Part 1). Politics aside, these are the arguments that the scientists who believe in global warming are making.
Of course, arguments 2 and 3 are meaningless unless you can demonstrate merit in argument number 1.
Above is the now famous "hockey stick" graph that indicates the correlation between carbon dioxide levels and temperature levels. The basic idea is: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas (a gas that traps heat). Human-caused pollutants since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution have been adding to the CO2 levels of the atmosphere. As a result of more of this heat-trapping gas, the Earth's climate has been getting warmer.
Evidence
Most major cities have been keeping daily temperature since the 1880's, some have records as far back as the 1860's. It is generally agreed that the United States and Europe have seen an increase in average temperature over this time by about 1 degree Fahrenheit. This can be significant enough to melt ice in northern regions or at high elevations up to a month early. Indeed, it is now believed that the glaciers in the lower 48 states (Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Oregon, Colorado, Utah, and California all have glaciers) will be completely gone before the end of the 21'st century, possibly by 2050.
In addition, the increase in large hurricanes has been attributed to the global warming effect. As ice melts into the oceans, the salinity goes down and cools the water. This cooler, less salty, ocean water will evaporate quicker and cause larger storms.
Disaster
The aforementioned increase in large storms is one of many potential disasters increased global warming will cause. Additionally, we will have to concern ourselves with:
- More disease as bacteria and insects that bear dangerous contagions tend to thrive in warmer weather.
- Increased ocean levels that can potentially flood coastal cities.
- Droughts will occur in certain areas, flooding in others as storms will tend to be fewer, but larger.
- More wildfires due to dry lightning and drought.
- Children and the elderly will have problems dealing with the hotter weather.
I want to note that I have read many articles on this subject. Some from other bloggers, others from scientific organizations. Here are some.
http://www.globalwarmingisreal.com/blog
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00007F57-9CE1-1213-9BEF83414B7F0000&pageNumber=1&catID=2
Sunday, June 03, 2007
"The Debate is Over" (A Convenient Lie Part 2)
"the debate in the scientific community is over." -Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth
The above statement is convenient, isn't it. Gore has plenty of people believing that most, if not all of the scientists in the world are all in agreement on global warming. I say convenient because that way, anybody who argues his points can easily get labelled as misinformed or being anti-science. That the debate is over is one of the most ridiculous things Gore says.
1n 1997, Frederick Seitz, a former president of the National Academy of Sciences convinced thousands of fellow scientists to sign the Oregon Petition, an act to urge the United States to not join the Kyoto accord. It's been alleged that some of the 19,700 signatures were fudged and duplicated. Point is that not all of them were.
More recently, many verified climatologists, who had at one time believed in global warming, have reconsidered their positions. They really took issue with a recent UN report that wasn't very scientifically-based. Look at the article Once Believers, Now Skeptics.
A November 2006 survey of environmental scientists indicated more evidence that the debate is not over. The poll resulted in the following:
One thing is sure though, this issue is far from the scientific consensus that Gore mentions - making his statement a convenient lie.
The above statement is convenient, isn't it. Gore has plenty of people believing that most, if not all of the scientists in the world are all in agreement on global warming. I say convenient because that way, anybody who argues his points can easily get labelled as misinformed or being anti-science. That the debate is over is one of the most ridiculous things Gore says.
1n 1997, Frederick Seitz, a former president of the National Academy of Sciences convinced thousands of fellow scientists to sign the Oregon Petition, an act to urge the United States to not join the Kyoto accord. It's been alleged that some of the 19,700 signatures were fudged and duplicated. Point is that not all of them were.
More recently, many verified climatologists, who had at one time believed in global warming, have reconsidered their positions. They really took issue with a recent UN report that wasn't very scientifically-based. Look at the article Once Believers, Now Skeptics.
A November 2006 survey of environmental scientists indicated more evidence that the debate is not over. The poll resulted in the following:
- 34 percent of environmental scientists and practitioners disagree that global warming is a serious problem facing the planet.
- 41 percent disagree that the planet's recent warmth "can be, in large part, attributed to human activity."
- 71 percent disagree that recent hurricane activity is significantly attributable to human activity.
- 33 percent disagree that the U.S. government is not doing enough to address global warming.
- 47 percent disagree that international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol provide a solid framework for combating global climate change.
One thing is sure though, this issue is far from the scientific consensus that Gore mentions - making his statement a convenient lie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)