Jeff ought to be a writer for Herr Garafalo. His suggested top 10 Janeane Garafalo lines on Bush are classic.
Remember when Garafalo actually seemed clever and interesting? Ah, those were the days my friend....
|
Dean's World Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy. |
|
March 31, 2004
Jeff ought to be a writer for Herr Garafalo. His suggested top 10 Janeane Garafalo lines on Bush are classic.
Remember when Garafalo actually seemed clever and interesting? Ah, those were the days my friend....
World's Most Dangerous Creature
1st look and see the shark under the water. Keep your cursor out of the picture until you see the shark. Then move your mouse cursor onto the picture, but stand back, you might get wet (it's like it's 3D). Hat Tip: Alice (Lil' Sis of All Evil)
He couldn't stand it anymore. Mark Adams has started a blog. We are adding him to the blogroll. Dispassionate Liberalism looks like great fodder for us evil Conservatives and Libertarians!
It's feeding time kids! Watch out for him, he can be very tricky, sometimes he uses "real" facts. Silly liberal! Facts are for conservatives...
Some researchers are claiming that music piracy does not hurt CD sales, but industry spokemen disagree.
Personally, I suspect that all factors considered, the losses due to piracy are marginal, and that if the music industry were smart they would find a way to make more money from file swappers without being so hostile. Goodness knows, it's not like book publishers are in the habit of suing libraries.
A California attorney was trying to get the pictures of Vince Foster's death. He thinks they might prove Foster was murdered as part of a White House cover-up.
Thankfully, the SCOTUS found that there was no reasonable evidence of that. With one voice they told the attorney to piss-off. The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the government does not have to release 11-year-old photographs from the suicide of Clinton administration White House lawyer Vincent Foster because it would cause his family pain and intrude on their privacy. It was a good decision. You wacky conservative conspiracy freaks need to go home now. Hat Tip: John Cole Psst, hey you conspiracy nuts! I hear that the Easter Bunny isn't really a bunny. In fact, he may not exist at all. Let me know if you "hear" anything...
Some anti-Bush obsessives have taken exception to Juliette's query:
One wonders whether the Congressional Black Caucus--the "Conscience of the Congress"-- will publicly (or privately) stand in Dr. Rice’ corner. Hey, God is a god of miracles. Apparantly, the CBC only stands up for the "voiceless" blacks. So they will never defend Condi Rice, as one Bush basher puts it: "Condoleeza Rice? Voiceless? When pigs fly." I agree with Señor Bush Basher. Besides the CBC has their hands full with the "slightly black & voiceless" accused child-molesting King of Pop.
You should view this comparison of Israel and the rest of the world. Then ask people who keep acting like Israel's presence in the Middle East is the "root cause" of terror or oppression or "a razor in the mind of the Arab street" or any of that other nonsense.
(Via Serenity, who could use some lovin'.)
Times is a bit tough in the Montezz home, and Momma's sellin' some original art prints.
I kinda dig the reindeer myself.
Remember this? Fight For Bovine Freedom.
That's a classic. Thanks to Dani for resurrecting it in the comments to the Bovine Depression thread.
Bill Hobbs' ongoing investigation in the explosive growth in small businesses continues, his tally now showing record small business growth in 22 out of 25 states in the last year, and the three remaining still showing strong growth.
These jobs don't generally make it into the "jobs growth" figures the government currently puts out. Which would go a long way toward explaining why unemployment is low and getting lower, but "jobs" supposedly aren't being created. Hobbs also pointed me to this unauthorized Bush economic ad which probably deserves wider exposure. If you keep constantly tell people that the economy is in the tank and falling apart, pretty soon they'll start to believe it. "Talking down the economy," as some would put it, can be pretty destructive for no good reason.
The Hill reports that Democrats are having trouble holding on to Jewish votes and donations. No surprise; Bush is stronger on Israel and Israeli defense and terrorism than any President in history, and Democrats keep waffling on the issue.
Two years ago I would have said a shift in Jewish votes to the GOP was unlikely, but learning that Jews went from voting 19% Republican in 2000 to 35% Republican in 2002 has me wondering. My buddy Moe notes that the best a GOP Presidenetial candidate ever got was 40%, but he predicts Bush will do even better among Jewish voters this year.
Writing a novel is an interesting experience. I go through these odd cycles where I can't do anything but think about it and talk about it, but little gets written, only little bits here and there. Then a bunch gets written over a period of a week or so. Then, I can't write another word, and can't think about what I want to do next--my creativity is compeltely spent.
50,000 words in the can though. I've never gotten anywhere near this far. Oh, and they're good words too. ;-)
March 30, 2004
My Knight of All Evil needs a date. Geoffrey is leaving in the morning. He will be in Pittsburgh for at least a week.
Anyone out there in the mood for a quickie? Or a beer? Stop by Dog Snot and let him know. Remember, he may be a man whore, but he does have standards. No Canadian beer.
It has long struck me as preposterous that we do not fund more of our space ventures as Dr. Pournelle suggests here: simply offer a bounty for the first company to deliver certain working technologies or complete certain well-defined projects.
Proposterous, but typical. No individual congressman or Senator's precinct or state can be said to benefit from the pork of this kind of spending, whereas everything NASA does winds up being pork for some member of Congress. Israelis sometimes complain that their elections are a mess because members of the knesset do not represent individual districts or regions, but are rather elected based entirely on ideological grounds. As a result, their elected representatives are not directly accountable to anyone but their political parties. But there are benefits: pork barrel spending is a byproduct of electing officials based on specific districts. That being the case, it seems still like it would merely take a visionary President--or Vice President, come to think of it, since the Veep is officially in charge of NASA--to make such a proposal. Or at least the start of one.
Alistair Cooke, age 95.
Peg C., who has a sick mind, says that this is funny.
Warning: foul and disgusting language, and thoroughly obnoxious in general. I would never laugh at such a thing.
Condi will tesify before the 9/11 commission publicly and under oath. Also, Bush and Cheney will meet with the entire 10 members of the 9/11 commission, for more than the agreed upon 1 hour.
I have a strange feeling. I keep expecting to hear check-mate. From Bush. We shall see. * Update from Dean *
It appears that the Turks & Caicos (which is the name of a chain of islands in the Caribbean north of Haiti) are talking to the Canadian government. The goal? To have the islands become a Canadian province, or at least a territory with the idea of possibly becoming a province in the future.
The editorial board of the Daily Rant feels this is a horrid idea, and would make Canada a competing Imperialist power and would subject the Caribbean to the vicissitudes of the Loonie. We at Dean's World, however, think this is a swimmingly good idea. Our Canadian brethren can supply the Turks & Caicos Island neighbors with decent Canadian beer, and the Islanders can supply the Canadians with some decent suntanning territory. The big fear, more seriously, will be how Canadians begin to react when Cuban refugees being fleeing to the Turks & Caicos in order to reach Canadian territory. Will Canadians have the stomach to return those poor folks back to Castro's prison-island? One wonders if it wouldn't create a serious crisis of conscience that the Canadians haven't had to deal with as yet. Which, come to think of it, may not be a bad thing at all, considering the over-friendly relations that Ottawa has had in the past few decades with Havana....
I've mentioned these ads before, but if you haven't seen the Trunk Monkey Ads, you should.
If you look at the site carefully, you can see the ads were created for this auto dealership. But frankly, they're so good, I think the dealership and the people who created the ads should try to make some kind of deal with other chains nationally. Ah, but anyway, in looking at the ads I found myself curious about who had created them. It turns out to be the R/West agency. It's worth visiting their site to see their other work. Just click their link and then click "Work." I especially like the image of the dancing girl, the jeans ad, and all the auto ads.
I am amused to note that the New York Times has begun fact-checking its columnists.
Blogosphere 2, New York Times 0.
It has long been my view that certain people are given to rant about "separation of Church and State" at great length, piously declaring it a core bedrock principle of the 1st amendment (even though those words appear nowhere in the entire Constitution) and using that phrase to bash politicians they don't agree with--and then stay silent when politicians they agree with exploit religion on the campaign trail.
Mind you, let me be clear: I think it is absolutely in keeping with democracy, absolutely in keeping with the Constitution in both letter and spirit, and absolutely in keeping with pluralism and tolerance, for politicians to discuss their religious views, to use their religious views as a guide to their decisions, and to campaign from the pulpit. It is also absoultely in keeping with all these things for members of the clergy to advocate politican positions. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of that--nothing Oppose capital punishment because you're Catholic? Okay. Oppose abortion because you're a Buddhist? Okay. Favor both because you're an atheist? Okay. Advocate more welfare spending because you're a Unitarian Universalist? Fine by me. Prayer in public by a politician? No problem with it whatsoever here. What really gets my goat, though, is the hypocrisy of people who bleat about "separation of Church and State" only against politicians they do not like.
Smash shows how it's done.
Yes, by the way, it generally really is that easy. If you don't believe it, pick up your phone book, look up your Congressman's local office#, and give them a call. If you're lucky enough to live in a very small state, you can probably do the same with either or both of your Senators.
God. It's hell being a woman, isn't it?
March 29, 2004
Veterans and family members coment on President Bush's WMD jokes. Good reading.
To no surprise--well, no surprise to me--the rate was positive by about 40 to 1.
Glenn Sacks notes that some gender feminists have been complaining because of studies which show that women do an average of 11 more hours of housework per week than their husbands--prompting some to suggest an "international women's strike" to teach men a lesson.
He also notes, however, that the same studies which show that women do all this "extra" work also happen to show that men average 14 hours a week more than women in the workplace, and suggests that it would be much more fair for the husbands of the world to go on strike until they are more appreciated for what they do. Hey ladies? You're welcome. By the way, Glenn's also one of the only national commenters to ever note in his columns that men suffer a rate of workplace injuries about ten times higher than women, and that the overwhelming majority of fatal injuries in the workplace are men. Or that men often work more hours per week for the same amount of pay as women who work fewer hours. Funny how you don't hear all those things more often, isn't it?
NEVER piss off a woman that has money. She knows how to use it.
There's More...
Here's probably the best overview of the anti-depressant issue I've come across. It's technical, but underestandable if you actually put some skull sweat into understanding it. And it's worth that skull sweat if you're dealing with someone (including possibly yourself) struggling with issues related to these drugs.
(That blog's got a great title too. Thanks to "Bill" for the link.)
The Carnival of the Capitalists has attempted to blockade Admiral Quixote. Will his valiant forces survive?
Joe Gandleman seems to be rather enchanted with an article I wrote last year on the weblog gift economy.
I knew there was a reason I liked that guy.
Complete the refrain to this un-PC but genuine three-chord glory:
Now ev'ry cheap hood strikes a bargain with the worldWhat a great band, eh? (Hey! You! No fair Googling it!)
Kate's got the caption contest of the week. My entry: "New Asian Ice-Skating Champ Barbie has extra-flexible legs!"
Now here's the best stress relief I've found all week.
I like to pretend they're all little John Kerrys and Howard Deans. (Via It Tastes Like Burning.)
Ariel Beery wonders why everyone is so silent about Sudan.
He'd also like to know if anyone is organizing protests or action for Sudan.
Joe Gandelman's "Moderate Voice" is the best new weblog I've seen in quite some time. It's both fair and thoroughly, genuinely non-partisan, not to mention funny. Although I call myself non-partisan, I'm not entirely; I do admit who I vote for, and have been very outspoken with just how unhappy I've been with Democrats the last few years, and how foolishly self-destructive they've been. But Joe's got me beat: he is thoroughly non-partisan, and in a friendly likeable, and thoughtful way (as opposed to my grumpy, irritable, snarly way).
He has been saying something fairly sensible for a while: that the Bush administration has every right to keep Condi Rice from testifying publicly to the 9/11 commission, and rightly pointing out that most administrations have done the same thing in the past: non-appointed White House staffers (like Rice) generally are not required to testify in public hearings, under the theory that there's a separation-of-powers issue and Presidents ought to be able to have off-the-record confidants (like a National Security Advisor). However, Gandelman has also pointed out, correctly, that sometimes, some administrations have gone against precedent and allowed such testimony to be given anyway. It's not the norm, but it has been done, usually for publicity reasons--and Gandelman says that the Bushies are making a publicity mistake not to have Rice testify in public. (She has spoken at length to the 9/11 commission in private, by the way.) Gandelman makes a good point: given everything we know about Condoleeza Rice, it's probably a slam-dunk to have her testify. Absent some very shocking revelation--which is highly unlikely--she could only do good by the adminisration. However, I think Gandelman's missing a point, and it's something that most observers, particularly Democrats, usually miss about how Bush operates. My own prediction for Joe and others is that Bush will allow Rice to testify, and fairly soon. Because he planned to all along, you see. He's just waited for the clamor to make him do it to grow to a loud enough racket. It's breathtaking to watch. There hasn't been a President this canny or able to outmaneuver his opponents since Lyndon Johnson. Bush waits for his opponents to work themselves into a fever pitch, an absolute froth, over something utterly trivial. Then he quietly gives them what they want, they crow in triumph that they "embarassed him into" doing what they demanded--then they look stupid. Democrats always fall for this when it comes to Bush. Every. Single. Time. In many ways, while I think Bush will probably lose in November, his best hope is to continue what I call his "Shoot Me Now" strategy, which he's used so effectively time and time again. It always looks like this: There's More...
The folks over at Maybe I Think Too Much are having a 2004 election contest: see if you can pick what the final results of the electoral college will be in this year's election. The winners will actually get prizes!
I already registered and made my prediction. One complaint for the contest-holders: after I finished making my state-by-state predictions, I was disappionted that the page did not tell me my totals. So after predicting how all 50 states plus D.C. would swing, I have no idea whether I picked Bush or Kerry to win! I'm pretty sure I picked Kerry to win, but I'm not sure. Kerry? Yes. Why is everybody surprised when I say this? I don't plan to vote for the man, and I'm still disgusted with his party's behavior the last three years. What I want to happen is not necessarily what I think will happen. Although I wish I had such magical powers, I don't. If I did, then Kerry would be dumped, and the Democratic ticket would be Lieberman/Clinton, and I just might vote for it. By the way, someone (I forget who) recently asked me why I think Kerry will win. The reason is simple: the Presidential election is entirely a state-by-state affair. Which is exactly as it should be--the electoral college is a beautiful thing, and I wouldn't change it for the world. Right now, the electoral college favors Kerry. If you look at it on a state-by-state basis, Bush has his work cut out for him. I can do a more in-depth analysis but I think it's too early to put that much energy into it just yet. I just note that Bush will probably pick up one or two small states this year but lose a couple of larger ones that he barely won last time, and that'll help Kerry eke out a razor-thin victory. Kerry might even lose the popular vote, but I think Kerry's going to win. It's just what I think. I may be wrong. In a way, I'm almost glad my old friend Gary Utter won't be around to see it. He was a member of Vietnam Vets Against The War alongside John Kerry, and couldn't stand Kerry. Somehow Gary's passing feels like an omen to me, even though I'm not superstutious. * Update * Hey, now that's service! They've updated the contest code to show you your own and other contestants' totals. Based on state-by-state predictions, here's what I wind up with:
It's interestng to note that in the last 30 years, American attitudes about family size have changed, with most people now thinking 2 or 3 kids is the appropriate family size, whereas prior to the '70s most people thought 3-4 was ideal.
I suppose the "zero population growth" types will be pleased with that shift. I'm not. Although there are concerns about finding energy sources to continue the expansion of high-tech civilization, beyond that there is simply no evidence that the world is particularly overpopulated: overpopulation has not caused any famine in decades and is, in fact, one of the rarest causes of starvation. Indeed, the vast majority of famines in the last 100 years were intentionally inflicted by despotic governments. In true free market economies (as opposed to oppressive dictatorships or heavily socialized and overregulated economies), increased population correlates with increased wealth and standards of living. In short, as much sense as Malthus makes, no one's been more consistently proven wrong by the last 100 years of human history. Yet so many young people believe we're overpopulated. This is a shame. In a free society like ours, more kids are a good thing, a blessing not just to their families but to the nation and to mankind as a whole. We need more kids, not less, for in the long run they enrich us as a nation and a species--and not just spiritually, but materially. Interestingly enough, more kids are also, in the long run, the most environmentally friendly policy. Free, democratic, open market societies with heavy populations generally have the best record of all when it comes to clean air, clean water, and wildllife conservation. Assuming we can continue to find new energy sources, the amount of land we use to feed the world poulation should continue to shrink--and by the way, it has been shrinking for decades, not increasing. The amount of land we can set aside for wildlife conservation, and the resources we can put to cleanup of pollution should also increase over time. But we need more people to help make that happen. We really need to get people to stop believing this nonsense that overpopulation is a looming threat. In a free society, more people are a good thing. The only thing that worries me about the future is that we'll be able to find enough energy sources to sustain ourselves. But I'm rather optimstic about that too.
According to Powerline, the Sunday Times reports that Bin Laden ordered attacks on Heathrow for revenge against Tony Blair. Interesting. Given that Al Qaeda has been so badly crippled over the last two years, it's not surprising that they never managed to pull it off. But they did manage to pull off something similar in Spain, where public anti-US sentiment was greater and where they have an easier time operating unnoticed. Hmmmm....
(Thanks Matt.)
John Eddy is asking for predictions for how many people will be killed at this summer's national Democratic and Republican conventions.
My bet would be 2 or 3 in Boston and upwards of 9 or 10 in New York. This is going to be the ugliest year since 1968. Although with any luck we won't have any latter-day Rubins, Hoffmans, or Haydens running around. You may want to go share your predictions with John.
Truly, the Japanese are far more advanced than us.
But not for long. Just wait until I finish MY giant robot exoskeleton. Then the world will see!
March 28, 2004
It has been my deepest belief that our government was just mistaken all these many years. I've always felt that they were convinced and correct about the WMD's. From Clinton on down. I never believed that they were intentionally deceitful about this issue.
I concede defeat. All those that said: Saddam had WMD's, was a threat to us, and was continuing to build WMD's ARE ALL LIARS. No exceptions. They all had access to intelligence that none of us had. All of them. THEY ALL LIED. THEY ARE ALL LYING BASTARDS. CAN I GET AN AMEN? One more thing... There's More...
Man, you know, sometimes they do a remake of a movie and you say "why?" But sometimes, the remake only improves the original.
They managed to get the whole script in there too! (Via Inkgrrl.)
Neurologists at Duke are up to some amazing stuff.
Those of us a certain age or older may remember a bizarre phrase from old commercials, which used to refer to "the heartbreak of psoriasis." Remember that? Did you even know what psoriasis is, or was, when you saw those commercials?
Well, it's a bizarrely cheeky yet appropriate phrasing. If you want to know how bad the condition can get, Medpundit has a genuinely hearbreaking description. Now one day I'll have to write an article on why I've come to strongly suspect that morbid obesity is an autoimmune disorder that works pretty much in the same sort of nearly-unbreakable vicious cycle....
In reading this eulogy for a pro-democracy advocate, I was both moved by the loss, and excited to learn about Center for the Study of Islam & Democracy, an organization formed in 1999.
I have known Muslims in my time, most of them decent, friendly, easygoing, and hardworking people. Through things I did with the Iraqi Democracy Project and Operation Give I also had friendly contacts with other Muslims who have a very pro-Western outlook. But somehow, learning that this organization exists, and is apparently quite serious and sincere, really made my day. Those of us in the West who want to see the world a better place should be encouraging groups like this as much as we can. Too much of the Islamic world is still stuck in the middle ages, but they don't have to be. They really don't.
Daniel Drezner looks at Kerry's economic proposals and comes away rather relieved and oddly encouraged. From what I've seen I'm with him. For all the over-the-top rhetoric, the fact is that Kerry's proposals, when you actually look at them, smack of Clintonian centrism, and aren't all that different at root from the Bush policies for that matter.
There is a very good chance that Kerry will be our next President. Indeed, I rather suspect that he will be. But this serves to remind me of something I've often said: underlying the rhetoric of so much in politics is the fact that many of the differences between us are smaller than we realize. We do, after all, live in a time when cutting the top marginal tax rate from 39% to 35% is portrayed as "massive tax cuts for the rich" that are destroying the economy, raising "record" deficits, and other such nonsense. So now Kerry plans to make "massive' changes to our business environment with.... a few tax breaks for businesses, and restructuring what businesses with foreign income pay in taxes to give a (very) slight advantage to keeping jobs here. Overheated, overdramatic rhetoric underlying tiny policy changes. It's the American way.
When you look at the opportunities lost due to Bush's obsession with Saddam, it's really quite stunning, isn't it?
Whoever said that American auto companies don't know how to innovate obviously doesn't know what he's talking about.
(Thanks Jerry.)
"The modern Republican woman?"
"Let Bush have them?" Remember ladies: if you dig makeup and enjoy shopping, Kerry and his fans view you with contempt, and don't want your vote. Reverend Brill's been on my blogroll for some time, and has a pretty nice left-leaning theological site. But it's hard for me not to see this outburst as part-and-parcel with the ongoing bout of madness that's infected the entire Democratic Party. Jack Kennedy would be mortified at the state of his party today. He really would be.
I have an odd technical glitch on my laptop that I cannot explain. Using Win 98 SE, my machine cannot access google.com. It has been going on for more than six months.
I have up-to-date anti-virus software and anti-spyware. I have the problem whether or not I have a firewall, and I have it with different NICs and different internet connections. The system just locks up going to www.google.com or accessing any materials on Google (except, oddly enough, news.google.com). Using ctrl-alt-delete, if I quit all background running processes except those needed to get online, the problem is still there. Has anyone seen anything like this? It's driving me nuts. * Update * Kathy Kinsley is brilliant. But then you all knew that already. In particular, however she pointed me to the problem. It is a particularly clever thing: a virus that changes your HOSTS file. Even if the virus is cleaned off your system, the HOSTS file is still changed. Indeed, my system doesn't even have the virus, it was obviously caught and killed long ago by Antivir. But not before it did its damage to the HOSTS file.
The X-43A's telemetry data was recovered, and that little demon cracked Mach 7 breathing air. Damn. What an achievement.
I will never forget watching that plane on the tip of its rocket. It cracked Mach 3 in about 30 seconds, then disengaged from its rocket, its jet fired up--and it took off like a bat out of hell, making Mach 3 look like an old lady driving to church on Sunday. Damn. Thanks to Samuel Tai for finding the link--and for helping out with the live-blogging of it all yesterday!
WXRT is having a Cure marathon this morning.
Man, I forgot all about The Cure. WXRT is worth loading up Internet Explorer for. Man I missed this station.
March 27, 2004
I've been curious about the median age of our readers for a while. Also, the astrological sign of our readers. Why? Because I'm bored to tears and I think it might be fun.
I would like to know the birthdate (month/day/year) of anyone with the guts to give it. I'll give ya mine first. I'm not age sensitive. April 25, 1968 - Taurus **Update** Someone pointed out the possibility of I.D. theft. If you are worried about it - just give me your birth year and astrological sign - if you know it. |