July 27, 2007
Why is this man not running for President yet?
Swear to God, I'll write him in if I have to..........
Posted by Scott at 09:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackWho's a junior senator?
Is bias in the MSM so pervasive now that they not only show bias to the D's, but they are now comfortable revealing their primary picks?
See if you can pick up the subtle bias in Hillary's favor here:
By last night, senior aides to Clinton, who represents New York, and Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, were quarreling on television, their raised voices a measure of how competitive the 2008 presidential campaign has become with more than six months until the first votes are cast.
Catch that? Clinton represents New York, while Obama is just the "junior" senator from Illinois. Why doesn't it say, "Clinton, the junior Senator from New York, and Obama, who represents Illinois......"? Only the "journalist" who wrote the article knows for sure.
May 16, 2007
Everything?
The Hotline blog highlights this exhange between Barack Obama and George Stephanopolous:
STEPHANOPOULOS: You've also said that with Social Security, everything should be on the table.OBAMA: Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Raising the retirement age?
OBAMA: Everything should be on the table.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Raising payroll taxes?
OBAMA: Everything should be on the table. I think we should
approach it the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan did back in
1983. They came together. I don't want to lay out my preferences
beforehand, but what I know is that Social Security is solvable. It
is not as difficult a problem as we're going to have with Medicaid and
Medicare.STEPHANOPOULOS: Partial privatization?
OBAMA: Privatization is not something that I would consider....
So everything should be on the table except the stuff that I don't want to be on the table. Idiot. Why is this lightweight even being humored with support in the polls?
Posted by Scott at 04:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackJanuary 04, 2007
Just wondering......
Can we dispense with the "Charlie-Weis-is-a-genius" talk? Forever?
Thanks so much.
Posted by Scott at 07:35 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackJanuary 02, 2007
Best Headline of the Year
Well, this being January 2 and all, let's expand that to say, best headline of this college football season:
Wolverines go down with a whimper Rout by USC exposes Michigan as pretenders in national title picture
Amen, brother, amen!
Carr was asked whether USC could beat Ohio State. Who better to ask than the coach who had lost his last two games to them both?Carr, though, wasn’t biting.
“I’ll let you be the judge,” he said.
That's just Carr's way of saying, "There's no real way to tell, because we got way lucky to be able to score as many points as we did against Ohio State. If we had played them again, the result would probably have been the same as the USC game."
Posted by Scott at 11:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackDecember 05, 2006
Some disorganized thoughts on Michigan
How many times does OSU have to beat them for people to get that they can't beat us?
Why would you want a rematch of a game that was just played? An OSU/UM rematch is completely different than, say, an OSU/UT rematch, or God forbid, a UM/Notre Dame rematch. Each team is a different team than they were in September. Thus a rematch would be an interesting test of each team's improvements and exposed deficiencies that perhaps weren't obvious in September.
On the other hand, OSU just beat Michigan. We're both the teams we'll be on January 8. So what's the point?
And I am tired of the argument that Michigan deserves more respect than Florida because they came within 3 points of the #1 team on their home field? Don't kid yourself. If we had played Michigan again, they wouldn't have come within two touchdowns. Face it: We handed them 10 points on a silver platter. Our first turnover game them the ball on what? Our 25? Anyone recall how many yards they gained on that series? Anyone familiar with the expression "3 yards and a cloud of dust?" Well, there was no dust. Just the 3 yards. The best the "second best team in the country" could muster on that drive starting at our 25 was three points, or put another way, 1 point per yard. They scored again when we coughed the ball up on the 9 yard line. So for those 10 points, they had to gain a whole 12 yards. If we play them again, they don't score those 10 points. Suddenly, their 3 point loss is a 13 point loss in a gaime they were never really in. I think it was Pat Forde on ESPN.com that pointed out that for all Michigan's heroics, they only had one opportunity to take the lead in the second half, (it was 31-35) and they went three and out. We promptly drove the length of the field for a touchdown. Game over.
Bring on the Gators. Michigan showed a complete inability to stop us. No doubt the Gators effort will be just as futile. Then can everyone shut up about the SEC being the best conference in the nation?
Posted by Scott at 12:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackOctober 10, 2006
Unique baby names
I frequent an online forum that has a popular thread entitled "unique baby names." You'd have to read it to believe it. Some people really are idiots. This may be the quote to end all quotes from the thread:
My daughter's name is Lochlyn Blue. We too wanted something unique, but not too odd. I don't imagine we'll encounter many other Lochlyn's throughout her life!
Unique, but not too odd? And you think "Lochlyn Blue" hit the mark? For the love of God, people! Think before you act. And if you act before you think, at least think before you open your mouth about it.
Posted by Scott at 09:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackSeptember 26, 2006
And while I'm on the subject......
The latest argument against the President that's currently in vogue is the idea that we didn't do enough in Afganistan. That Iraq distracted from finishing the job in Afganistan. That because we changed our focus to Iraq so quickly, that the Taliban has been able to regain a foothold in Afganistan.
So tell me this. When was the last time a significant Al Queda operative was captured or killed in Afganistan?
Many people think that Osama is dead; those who think he's still alive say he's a lot of places, but not Afganistan. We bagged some of his cohorts in Pakistan, and bodybagged more than a few in Iraq. But we haven't found any in Afganistan. Why is that? Perhaps because we satisfied our objective in Afganistan, and it is now only marginally important to the war on terror?
We went to Afganistan because it was a haven for terrorists and OSB. Now it no longer is. Sounds like Mission Accomplished to me.
Posted by Scott at 09:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackAl Queda operative killed in Iraq?
Is that even possible? An Al Queda operative was in Iraq? But Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror does it? Does it?
[Update: Best of the Web agrees]
Posted by Scott at 09:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackSeptember 06, 2006
Fatuous bumperstickers
Something that really bugs me are sanctimonious prigs who cover their cars with left-wing bumperstickers. I saw one today that pious asked, "Who would Jesus bomb?"
What a stupid friggin' question. Why on earth would Jesus use a bomb when he could just wipe out every living creature on the planet (except, of course, anyone he thought was righteous enough) with a flood?
Morale of the story: Don't get all self-righteous and start throwing around stupid cliches unless you really consider what you are saying.
And while I'm on the subject, you might do will to consider what the Islamofacists believe their Allah requires of them. In their view, the question "Who would Allah bomb?" is easily answered: everyone and anyone, as long as it's in Allah's name.
In light of enemy's mindset in this regard, Jesus just might do well to start packing some heat, if he cares for his flock.
Posted by Scott at 02:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackRemember
Crystal Morning: September 11, 2001
Posted by Scott at 09:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackDisappointed!
Ever notice that when you see an MSNBC.com headline like:
"Croc Hunter's" death caught on tape | Video
The video link is never what you had hoped it would be? Or is that just me?
Posted by Scott at 09:15 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackAugust 21, 2006
What are the most common surnames in the United States?
This is a pretty cool website that tells you how common your last name is. Type it in and the website will give you its rank in the top 55,000 surnames in the United States.
My wife claims that she guessed the top four in only four tries. How many guesses will it take you?
Posted by Scott at 12:25 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBackAugust 14, 2006
Sometimes the headline just isn't adequate
Sometimes, the contraints of headline writing, brevity being the most important, don't allow for an adequate description of the story below. Take this one, for instance:
Pregnant woman crashes car, gives birth alone
Wow! That's amazing, you say. That must be an amazing story, you think. But to really convey how amazing this story is, the headline should have been
Pregnant woman crashes car, gives birth alone in a partially submerged car, despite broken leg.
Now THAT's a story!
Posted by Scott at 04:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackAugust 10, 2006
Failure of imagination?
British authorities said Thursday they thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up 10 aircraft heading to the U.S. using explosives smuggled in hand luggage, averting what police described as “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.”
"Unimaginable"? Sadly, no. If 9/11 taught us anything, it's that nothing is "unimaginable."
Posted by Scott at 10:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackAugust 09, 2006
Is Clarett the greatest flameout ever?
This article about Maurice Clarett's unbelievable new arrest provides (unwittingly, I think) an incredibly valuable insight into how Clarett became Clarett.
Let's set the scene.
Clarett is arrested after an L.A.-style police pursuit (trailing helicopter and all!) on the highways and byways of benign Columbus. The police had to use a spike strip to get him to stop his car. When he finally did, he refused to leave his vehicle, he had to be forcibly removed and subdued with mace (the stun-gun didn't work because of the protective vest Clarett was wearing).
That's right - Clarett was wearing a bulletproof vest. He had a loaded 9mm under his legs on the driver's seat. A loaded "AK-47 type assault rifle" was at his side on the passenger seat. Two other guns were found in a backpack on the passerger side floor.
That's the backdrop. Here's the insight:
Clarett was planning on playing football in an indoor football league for a team called the Mahoning Valley Hitmen. Oh my God, the irony is so rich I feel like I need angioplasty. But that's not even the insightful part. Upon learning the news, here's what his erstwhile coach said:
The arrest will not affect Clarett’s status with the team, Terry said.“We gave him a chance and now we’ll wait to see what happens,” he said. “I’ve seen far worse situations than this.”
Wha-Wha-WHAT? He's seen far worse situations? Like what, if I may be so bold? Clarett was wearing a bulletproof vest, sitting on a 9mm and had an assault rifle within reach. It's not too ambitious a conjecture to suggest that quite possibly, the Columbus Police prevented a massacre of some sort.
That blase statement about Clarett's arrest from his coach provides a telling insight into the mentality of the people that he grew up with, learned from, returned to. It is sad and pathetic. With that kind of thinking influencing his development, it is not suprising that, according to MSNBC's Mike Celizic, he is one of sports's greatest flameouts.
One last thing: You think the name of his erstwhile team is ironic? Check out its logo.
Posted by Scott at 07:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackAugust 08, 2006
Who knew?
Here are a couple of things I’ve learned recently.
1. Kids won’t eat anything, just because the food is endorsed by a famous celebrity.
2. Not even Hello Kitty.
3. Not even Hello Kitty Pop Tarts.
5. Meow-Berry is not an appealing flavor for kids.
4. At least one of my children won't eat anything with jimmies on it.
5. Not even Hello Kitty jimmies.
Who knew?
August 05, 2006
Cuba braces for U.S. attack
Well, obviously, Castro is dead. There's no other way to explain this bizarre turn of events, is there? By using the ricidulous claim that the United States is about to attack, Cuba can use the impending invasion as cover to mobilize the military throughout the country -- so that they can put down any resistance or any too joyous celebration when the truth about their dear leader comes out.
August 03, 2006
Mac guys are a hoot aren't they?
Love James Lileks. Read him every day. Agree with him on most stuff, as it turns out (except for his love of techno, of course). Anywho. He's a Mac guy. And like every Mac guy (sorry - Mac person), he's a bit, um, well, pious about Mac v. PC. Nobody's perfect (See, e.g., techo, supra). Anyway, his little rant today was a classic.
Here it is in a nutshell.
I installed the Gigawhatsis KT-18W5B3 software on the PC side of Gnat’s Macbook. This enabled me to ship my custom ringtones and wallpapers to the new phones.Did you plug the phone into the PC yet? Just wondering. 'Cuz if I were a PC, I'd be asking at this point, "why am I geting software for a Gigawhatsis KT-18W5B3 if I don't have a Gigawhatsis KT-18W5B3 installed? Oh well, people are stupid. Let me call up the wizard and install it anyway."
Set up was amusing, as ever: Windows is preparing to install a wizard that will prepare the installation of the installation wizard; please wait.You think Mac's don't do this only without announcing it? Perhaps the wizard should have just put on some jeans and a black t-shirt and lurked in the shadows sipping a grande latte.
The installation process included a screen with a warning: Warning! You may see this warning. Your computer may say that your computer is incompatible. Please disregard this message. You had to click a box that said, in effect, “I subscribe to this jury-rigged heap of code with the usual weary indifference,” after which you were permitted to continue.Windows is ubiquitous. Thus, gajillions of companies make bajillions of software applications for it. Not all of it is good or even always functional. Not Windows' fault. Apples are only used by [derogatory unfair generalization (a group to which Lileks doesn't belong in any case) omitted]. Thus, vastly fewer companies write code for it, and thus, the software that gets produced for it tends to be a little tighter. At this point someone who was less charitable might ask why Lileks wasn't installing the software on the Mac side of his Mac. Anyway....
When the Wizard was done I was presented with the Panasonic program for transferring files to the new phone. Spiffy! I plugged in the phone. Windows has detected something new; would you like to install the hardware for it? Well, I just did, didn’t I? Dismiss.
GGGGAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! NNNNNNNNNNNNOoooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!
This is precisely the point where every PC user lost interest in this particular rant. Who here doesn't know how this ends at this point? Show of hands? Because every PC user knows: Do not defy Windows. if it asks you to install something, you install it. Already installed it? Install it again! Period.
Sounds inefficient, I know. But its saves you from calling tech support for a phone.
I'm just sayin'.
P.S. I'd bet my mortgage that the directions instruct the user the connect the phone to the computer BEFORE installing the software. Again, I'm just sayin'.
Posted by Scott at 03:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 31, 2006
Bolton: His single-mindedness is good unless you don't like his single-mindedness
Here's a classic bit of thinking from Chuck Schumer.
New York's senior senator said he was weighing Mr. Bolton's backing of Israel against his unwillingness to work with other countries at the United Nations. "There's a good part of Bolton. He's been a staunch and very good defender of Israel," Mr. Schumer said on CNN's "Late Edition." "There's a bad part of Bolton. He seems to have a ‘go it alone' attitude at a time when we need the nations of the world on our side. We've seen that in Iran and North Korea."
Got that? Schumer doesn't like it when Bolton "goes it alone" when we need other nations on our side. But Bolton's "staunch defense" of Israel is great. WTF?
We've been busting our ass (successfully) to get the rest of the Security Council on board with hemming in Iran. Ditto with North Korea. In fact, about the only subject upon which we are actually "going it alone" is.......wait for it.......
ISRAEL! We are Israel's only "staunch and very good defender." On every subject and practically every vote, we are "going it alone" on Israel.
Do politicians ever think about what they are going to say before they open their mouths?
Posted by Scott at 10:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackJune 05, 2006
From the MSNBC.com "Sports" section:
Updated: 12 minutes ago SUMMIT, N.J. - Michelle Wie holed her chip from off the green on the 18th hole to shoot a 2-under 68 in the first round of her U.S. Open qualifier Monday, followed by a swelling gallery as she began her attempt to become the first woman to qualify for the U.S. Open.The 16-year-old star from Hawaii clearly was the headline attraction of this 36-hole sectional qualifier at Canoe Brook Country Club.
Wearing a coral sweater and olive capri pants, Wie was competing against 152 men for 18 spots available in the Open at Winged Foot in Mamaroneck, N.Y., in two weeks. She is tied for 11th, meaning she would currently qualify for a playoff to determine who qualifies.
. . .
Wie was greeted with polite applause by a couple of hundred spectators as she arrived at the 501-yard, par-4 No. 1 hole on the South Course. She pulled her drive left into the wet rough, and the crowd went silent.Wie chipped 80 yards short of the green and hit her third about 12 feet right of the hole. Her par-saver was right in the middle of the cup.
She removed her swe[a]ter and unveiled a lime-striped golf shirt for the par-4, 394-yard second hole and drove down the middle. Her second hit was from 9 feet, but she pushed her putt right. It never touched the cup, drawing groans from the crowd....
What the hell is going on here? Is this a sports page article about a golfer trying to qualify for the U.S. Open or a society page article about her cotillion?
When was the last time you read anything about what John Daly was wearing? David Toms? Davis Love III? Phil Mickelson? [Jesper Parnevik is an obvious exception.]
Normally you don't see sexism so blatently revealed in the MSM any more, but it sure is shamefully on display here.
Posted by Scott at 01:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackMay 08, 2006
Avian Flu Epidemic? I have three words for you....
Africanized Killer Bees. Remember this panic? Swarms coming up from Mexico and wiping us out by the thousands? Remember?
That's what I thought.
Stand down, people.
May 02, 2006
Newsflash: Organized Labor Assists Democrats!
From MSNBC.com's "First Read" column....
As we mentioned earlier today, one of the key primaries to watch in Ohio today is the Democratic contest for the congressional seat being abandoned by Rep. Ted Strickland (D), who's running for governor. In this race, establishment favorite Charlie Wilson (D) is trying to win the nomination as a write-in candidate because he amazingly failed to secure the 50 valid signatures needed to get on the ballot. And experts say that if Wilson isn't able to defeat his lesser-known Democratic opponents, that gives the GOP an almost sure shot of winning this seat -- making the Dems' chances of winning back the House even more difficult.But Democrats are working hard to ensure that Wilson wins the primary. And even organized labor has gotten into the act.
I LOVE that. "Even organized labor has gotten into the act." WOW! It has? Even the AFL-CIO is working hand-in-hand with the Democratic Party to affect the outcome of an election? Will wonders never cease! I just can't belive that even the union would help out with something like this. Just amazing!
Posted by Scott at 03:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackApril 12, 2006
Steyn on Iranian Nukes
Great piece explaining in detail why we cannot just shrug our shoulders at the fact that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
Back when nuclear weapons were an elite club of five relatively sane world powers, your average Western progressive was convinced the planet was about to go ka-boom any minute. The mushroom cloud was one of the most familiar images in the culture, a recurring feature of novels and album covers and movie posters. There were bestselling dystopian picture books for children, in which the handful of survivors spent their last days walking in a nuclear winter wonderland. Now a state openly committed to the annihilation of a neighboring nation has nukes, and we shrug: Can’t be helped. Just the way things are. One hears sophisticated arguments that perhaps the best thing is to let everyone get ’em, and then no one will use them. And if Iran’s head of state happens to threaten to wipe Israel off the map, we should understand that this is a rhetorical stylistic device that’s part of the Persian oral narrative tradition, and it would be a grossly Eurocentric misinterpretation to take it literally.
It seems like a no brainer that we should be taking this seriously and be seriously worried about the consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran. Is it just me, or does the West seem not that alarmed? It should. And we should act now.
The cost of de-nuking Iran will be high now but significantly higher with every year it’s postponed. The lesson of the Danish cartoons is the clearest reminder that what is at stake here is the credibility of our civilization. Whether or not we end the nuclearization of the Islamic Republic will be an act that defines our time.
Amen. So let's get on with it.
Posted by Scott at 11:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackApril 01, 2006
Thank you, Maria.....
..... for listening.
March 30, 2006
Most obvious headline of all time?
Lisa leaves ‘Idol,’ and viewers mostly agree
Um, isn't that the whole premise of the show?
Isn't that sort of like, "Stacy fired on The Apprentice: Trump agrees" ?
Posted by Scott at 05:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackMarch 20, 2006
Reality Gone Wrong
A runaway train killed seven people and injured at least 11, severing some of their limbs, during the filming of a TV show in Uruguay, police said.
Keep reading to the end, so you don't miss the part about the 3,000 schoolchildren that were watching.
Posted by Scott at 11:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackMarch 09, 2006
God Help Me. This is a rock icon from my youth?
Am I so old that this is what the rock stars of my era look like now?
Oh, and Eddie? Phil Specter called and he wants his hair back.
Posted by Scott at 09:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackSay it ain't so, Tootie!
It just occured to me that this year's Oscar winners featured not one, but TWO Facts of Life alums.
Seriously. What are the chances of that? Hell, if you had told me that after this year's EMMY'S that two winners were Facts of Life alums, I would not have believed it.
But Oscars? Good Lord!
Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay; Crash : Paul Haggis
Best Supporting Actor; Syriana: George Clooney
As a matter of fact, I challenge anyone out there to show me a year in which two Facts of Life alums won an Emmy in the same year. I'm thinkin' it can't be done.
But Oscars? 2006, chump.
Posted by Scott at 12:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackMarch 02, 2006
Typical Major Media Deception
This article is typical of the media's deceit when it comes to reporting the facts of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Headlined White House, Dems wrangle on Katrina video; Congressional leaders 'falsely attacking' Bush, president's spokesmen say the article goes on to restate all of the Democrats' falsehoods, while reporting that the White House issued a point-by-point memo refuting the Democrats.
Got that? The article repeats the falsehoods, but doesn't report the White House's counterpoints, just that it has some.
The most egregious of the outright lies in the article is this one:
But Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the video shows that the administration failed to prepare adequately for the possible breach of the levees protecting New Orleans.“This administration was told what Louisiana already knew: that our federally constructed levees could certainly fail,” she said. “But these concerns, and others made by disaster relief experts, fell on deaf ears.”
So what do you think the very next paragraph in the article is? What do you think is the next paragraph after this outrageous and overblown rhetoric from Landrieu? The White House's counterpoint? Or perhaps a completely unrelated point that makes the White House look squirrely and defensive? Hmmmm.......
Immediately after the release of the video on Wednesday, the White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public not to read too much into the footage.
When in fact, the White House's counterpoint relies directly on the footage, which isn't the least bit ambiguous on this very point. It isn't just a rhetorical counter based on spin, but instead relies on the videotape itself, which completely refutes Landrieu and proves her to be a liar. To wit:
In August 29th Videoconference, Gov. Kathleen Blanco Told The White House "We Have Not Breached The Levee At This Point In Time." GOV. BLANCO: "We keep getting reports in some places that maybe water is coming over the levees. ... I think we have not breached the levee. We have not breached the levee at this point in time. That could change, but in some places we have floodwaters coming in New Orleans East and the line at St. Bernard Parish where we have waters that are 8- to 10-feet deep, and we have people swimming in there, that's got a considerable amount of water."
In fact, as has been reported elsewhere, the word "breach" appears nowhere else in the transcript of the videotape. Not even the spectre of a breach is even suggested, other than the Louisiana Governor's assurances that the levees had not been breached.
Hack Job is right.
Typical Major Media Deception
This article is typical of the media's deceit when it comes to reporting the facts of the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Headlined White House, Dems wrangle on Katrina video; Congressional leaders 'falsely attacking' Bush, president's spokesmen say the article goes on to restate all of the Democrats' falsehoods, while reporting that the White House issued a point-by-point memo refuting the Democrats.
Got that? The article repeats the falsehoods, but doesn't report the White House's counterpoints, just that it has some.
The most egregious of the outright lies in the article is this one:
But Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said the video shows that the administration failed to prepare adequately for the possible breach of the levees protecting New Orleans.“This administration was told what Louisiana already knew: that our federally constructed levees could certainly fail,” she said. “But these concerns, and others made by disaster relief experts, fell on deaf ears.”
So what do you think the very next paragraph in the article is? What do you think is the next paragraph after this outrageous and overblown rhetoric from Landrieu? The White House's counterpoint? Or perhaps a completely unrelated point that makes the White House look squirrely and defensive? Hmmmm.......
Immediately after the release of the video on Wednesday, the White House and Homeland Security Department urged the public not to read too much into the footage.
When in fact, the White House's counterpoint relies directly on the footage, which isn't the least bit ambiguous on this very point. It isn't just a rhetorical counter based on spin, but instead relies on the videotape itself, which completely refutes Landrieu and proves her to be a liar. To wit:
In August 29th Videoconference, Gov. Kathleen Blanco Told The White House "We Have Not Breached The Levee At This Point In Time." GOV. BLANCO: "We keep getting reports in some places that maybe water is coming over the levees. ... I think we have not breached the levee. We have not breached the levee at this point in time. That could change, but in some places we have floodwaters coming in New Orleans East and the line at St. Bernard Parish where we have waters that are 8- to 10-feet deep, and we have people swimming in there, that's got a considerable amount of water."
In fact, as has been reported elsewhere, the word "breach" appears nowhere else in the transcript of the videotape. Not even the spectre of a breach is even suggested, other than the Louisiana Governor's assurances that the levees had not been breached.
Hack Job is right.
February 27, 2006
This is why I love The Corner
And you should too. Part political, part philisophical, part pop culture, part intellectual.
Where else on the web will you find posts like these. The first is a response by Derb to a post concerning a scientific article about how dogs track down balls that they chase
RE: DOG CALCULUS [John Derbyshire]Nothing much new, Jonah. All my adult life, every time I've seen a dog jump to catch a frisbee, I (in common with, I suppose, every other math geek) have been vexed by the thought: How on earth did he solve all those simultaneous differential equations so fast?
This is followed up by a post printing a response from a reader:
RE: DOG CALCULUS [John Derbyshire]We have readers in EVERY line of work:
"Mr. Derbyshire---In The Corner, you asked 'How on earth did he solve all those simultaneous differential equations so fast?' He doesn't. He does the same thing that we in the Ballistic Missile Defense world do – he approximates. In engineering, unlike math, there is such a thing as 'close enough.'
"Shooting down a missile and catching a Frisbee in the air are remarkably similar tasks. The size of the opening of the dog's mouth relative to the Frisbee's edge profile, and the ability of his head to maneuver when he gets close to his target means that he only has to jump in the general vicinity of the Frisbee to maneuver his head into the path of the disk and snatch it from the sky. In BMD, we estimate the path of the ballistic missile we wish to intercept and shoot the missile to a point close enough to the trajectory of the target so that the maneuvering seeker head of the interceptor can guide itself into the target. We also back that up by supporting a multiple shot model to reduce the probability of a miss, sort of like sending two dogs at different intervals to catch the Frisbee.
"Of course, dogs have been catching Frisbees for decades, while we've only really just figured out how to shoot down ballistic missiles in the last few years."
[Derb] Thanks for what you guys do. You hear a lot that rogue states, if they nuke us, will do so via truck or suitcase bombs. Possibly so. BM technology, however, like any other, gets cheaper and more available all the time. We need defending against it, and that need will only increase.
Where else are you going to get stuff like that? Where?
Posted by Scott at 04:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackFebruary 22, 2006
You Go, Girl!
How can you not love Sasha Cohen? I tried hard not too. I thought she was cocky and aloof and a bit full of herself (and redundant, I guess). But I was wrong. Really, how can you not love his girl?
Posted by Scott at 06:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackFebruary 15, 2006
Cheney Mania!
Howard Kurtz graciously encapsulated the media's idiocy on the Cheney incident into one convenient article. Thanks, Howie! Let the pithy commentary begin!
Other than the fact that a sitting vice president hasn't shot anyone since Aaron Burr dispatched Alexander Hamilton, why is Dick Cheney the non-sharpshooter getting so much coverage? Okay, other than the fact that the comics haven't had so much fun since President Bush choked on a pretzel. (Letterman: "We can't get Bin Laden, but we nailed a 78-year-old attorney.") Okay, other than the fact that the VP saw no reason to tell the press and immediately went into the metaphorical equivalent of a secret undisclosed location?What's metaphorical about the fact that he hasn't made a public statement?
And other than the this-isn't-so-funny-after-all news yesterday that the birdshot had caused Harry Whittington to suffer a minor heart attack?And yet, you led the article with a Letterman joke.
The reason this is such a crossover hit, I believe, is that it encapsulates everything we know, or think we know, about Vice President Cheney. So secretive that he even waited to tell Bush. So taciturn that he feels no need for a public apology. So insulated that he defers a police interview until the following morning. So defensive that he has not so much as acknowledged a mistake.What, should he have wiped out his cell phone while standing over Whittington out in the field?
At 2:47 p.m. yesterday, Cheney's office finally put out a statement, saying he had called Whittington and wished him well--but still not even a hint of public regret.What regret, exactly does he owe the public?
Part of the dynamic here is that the birdshot brouhaha gives everyone a chance to play their assigned roles. The White House press corps is outraged at the 21-hour delay in informing the world.21 hours? The local sheriff knew within an hour. It was public information at that point. The local media was contacted less than 14 hours later. If a tree falls in a forest, and no one is there to witness it, is it a secret?
Liberals say this is typical of the way the administration botched the war, and they wonder why journalists didn't get this exercised about being misled on WMD.Yea - I wonder that myself all the time: Why hasn't the media been exercised about the missing WMDs?
Conservatives say this is nothing but a common hunting accident, and they blame journalists for blowing it way out of proportion.I hate to sould like a shill, but: True enough.
I'm happy to report that Bill O'Reilly reads Media Notes online (or at least someone on his staff does). He responded last night to my observation that he led with Al Gore saying in Saudi Arabia that the U.S. has mistreated Arabs (no coverage in major newspapers, he's right about that) and inexplicably reduced the Cheney accident to the day's most ridiculous item. The veep's failure to come clean, says Mr. O, is because of his "well-known press phobia. . . . The vice president's hunting accident affects no one, means nothing, and the vice president's refusal to brief the press was predictable." O'Reilly did allow that "Dick Cheney's secret style hurts him." I would argue that Cheney's actions, while physically hurting no one other than poor Mr. Whittington, hurt the reputation of the vice president and the administration.So in your eyes, the vice president and the administration had a good reputation before? Right.
By the way, Scott McClellan exacerbated matters at yesterday's briefing by insisting he was "moving on" (standard practice in every administration under fire) but refusing to disclose what he knew, which was that Whittington had suffered a heart attack . I don't get it.Of course you don't. Here's a clue: McClellan isn't a spokesperson for the hospital or Whittington. He is under no obligation to reveal his medical condition; in fact, I would argue he was obliged not to reveal it until Whittington himself had authorized it. That's a pretty basic tenet of medical privacy laws.
Okay, the White House whispers have begun, as we see in this New York Times piece on "the latest example of the degree to which Mr. Cheney's habit of living in his own world in the Bush White House -- surrounded by his own staff, relying on his own instincts, saying as little as possible -- had backfired since the accident in Texas on Saturday. Mr. Cheney's staff members have kept their comments to chronological details and to repeating the vice president's written statements.Which, to any rational observer, has been sufficient.
Philadelphia Inquirer : "Dick Cheney's weekend 'peppering' of a 78-year-old hunting pal on a private ranch owned by wealthy Republican donors is threatening to become a metaphor for his tenure as America's number two. "It's not always easy for voters to track all the details of Cheney's documented preference for secrecy: his secret war planning (which circumvented the State Department and the intelligence community);..."Isn't war planning always a secret?
...his secret energy-policy meetings with Enron and other major GOP contributors (he was sued by public-interest groups, in a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court);...(a suit which he won)
...his ties to I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, the ex-aide (now indicted)..."his ties..." I love that. Makes it sound so seedy and ilicit, when in fact Scooter was his chief of staff.
who may have helped to discredit a whistle-blower;...Joe Wilson is a whistleblower now? Please. "Helped dicredit a charaltan" is closer to the truth.
...his insistence that secret warrantless surveillance of Americans is consistent with the U.S. Constitution."As usual, a bit of fudging the facts to make it sound as if the government is listening in on Grandma and little Cindy, when "warrantless surveillance of Americans in contact with suspected foreign terrorists" is in fact what was going on.
But "Here we have a case where Cheney chose (by his own inaction) not to inform his fellow Americans that the man who is one heartbeat away from the presidency had pulled a trigger and put somebody in intensive care."Well, the local sheriff is a fellow American, and he knew. The folks at the local paper are fellow Americans, and they knew. Is the problem that he didn't inform his fellow Americans, or that he didn't inform the Washington media elite?
The New York Post headline: "DICK DUCKS."Subhead: PRESS PREENS.
Cheney's boss also had a brush with a hunting mistake, as Slate's John Dickerson recalls: "Perhaps the even more apt analogy was Bush's own hunting incident in 1994. When the gubernatorial candidate accidentally killed a protected killdeer during a dove shoot, he wrote that he reacted this way: 'Karen [Hughes] and I looked at each other. What now? "We confess," we both said, almost simultaneously. Bush then called every reporter who had been on his hunting trip. He then announced it at a press conference. The lesson of the shooting, Bush wrote in his biography, is that 'people watch the way you handle things; they get a feeling they like and trust you, or they don't.' "Unfortunately for the president, Bush wasn't able to give his vice president this advice. (He learned about the shooting from Karl Rove, who talked to the ranch owner.) Cheney played his own press secretary after this incident, agreeing with the owner of the ranch that there would be no official notice and that she could release the information herself. Cheney's allies (and those are different than Bush allies in this case) argue that Cheney cared more about his hurt friend and his host than he did about informing the Beltway press. Maybe for the first hour or two, but to wait so long only points out what we always have known about the vice president: He doesn't give a damn about the public or press' right to know.That assumes that the public and the press have a right to know on a timeline established by the press. And by "the press," of course, they mean the Washington press. Notice that the local paper isn't complaining that they weren't notified in a timely manner.
The Huffington Post devotes much of its home page to the topic, with Arianna saying of McClellan and the media: "Talk about your dysfunctional relationship. The air of a love affair gone sour hung over the gaggle like a cheap perfume. It was actually very appropriate viewing for a Valentine's Day morning. The emotional intensity reminded me of many failed relationships I've witnessed -- and a few I've been part of. . . .So many bad metaphors.... so little time.......
"Channeling Dr. Phil for a moment, I couldn't help but wonder: is the press really this worked up about being kept out of the shooting loop for 18 hours or are there bigger issues at play? What the relationship gurus call 'baggage'. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this isn't a big story -- especially now that Cheney's victim has suffered a heart attack. But it was only a few days ago we learned that Cheney might have authorized Scooter Libby to leak classified information to reporters -- and that story didn't generate a tiny fraction of the coverage."What, Arianna makes a valid point? Mark your calendars. That's right Arianna - the Cheney/Libby story didn't involved the press themselves, so they weren't nearly as interested.
Lawrence O'Donnell gets a little tipsy in writing: "How do we know there was no alcohol? Cheney refused to talk to local authorities until the next day. No point in giving him a breathalyzer then. Every lawyer I've talked to assumes Cheney was too drunk to talk to the cops after the shooting."Does anyone still take this idiot seriously? If every lawyer he's talked to assumes that, he lives in a very interesting cocoon. It explains a lot about Larry, actually.
National Review posts a transcript of ex-senator Alan Simpson dissecting Cheney for Chris Matthews: "MATTHEWS: Doesn't he have a special responsibility as someone in line to be President and Vice President of the United States to let people know that something this serious happened this Saturday? "SIMPSON: Nothing happened to the Vice President, so what did the people of America need to know? Nothing happened to the Vice President, nothing. "MATTHEWS: But he was the shooter in an accident that shot a guy. "SIMPSON: That's right. "MATTHEWS: You don't think that's newsworthy? "SIMPSON: All I know, Chris, is after a life in Washington, Dick Cheney, and I'm not paranoid, is not popular with the media, they don't like him because he's aloof and he doesn't answer their questions and sometimes he tells them to stuff it, so any time Dick Cheney makes a fluff, it's going to be the news of the day. I have been called by 20 different news agency today as if they had bombed Iraq again. I mean, this is nuts, absolutely nuts."God, I love Alan Simpson. A national treasure.
Harry Shearer sees a case of delayed outrage by the press: "Of course, the Bush administration's media strategy--keep it secret, deny it if it leaks, fire the dissenters--has been practiced far more than thrice. But the first two major versions of the strategy--the runup to the Iraq War and the aftermath of Katrina--occurred as tragedy. Now the gods reward us with the Dick Cheney shooting story, in which the media strategy resurfaces as farce. "And, predictably, the White House press corps, which sat still and silent for the tragic versions, is up in arms over the farcical one."Again - you're saying the media has been silent about the runup to the Iraq War and the mishandling of the Katrina response? Really?
In the Charlotte Observer, North Carolina professor and hunter Scott Denham fears for the image of his pastime: "It is unfortunate that upland bird hunting has gotten this kind of bad press because of irresponsible hunting practices by a prominent member of the upper class. Hunting preserves open spaces for use by all; hunting connects younger generations with the land and with traditions; hunting is about conservation. As a hunter and conservationist, I feel misrepresented by Cheney and his ilk. They portray hunting as a sport for the rich, carried out on vast private lands, where pulling the trigger takes priority over everything else."ekno ,e wnwken.ske.... Sorry. The self-absorption there was a bit nauseating.... lost control for a minute....
Ed Morrissey rips The Post's Dana Milbank for appearing with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann in an orange cap and orange safety vest: "No, this isn't a tryout for America's Worst-Dressed Nerds; it's Milbank trying to be funny and only succeeding at being funny-looking. Since when do serious journalists pull stunts like this? Heck, most bloggers I know wouldn't be dumb enough to dress like this on national TV even as a joke, not if they wanted to maintain any credibility. "Memo to the Exempt Media: it was an accident. Report it and get over it, and then shut . . . up so that we can listen to the real comedians make fun of Dick Cheney. Anyone want to guess how much higher the ratings for Jay and Dave will be tonight?" I missed the memo. When did we become the exempt media, and what are we exempt from ? The normal rules of human discourse?Um, how about the normal rules of rational human discourse? And would it have been o.k. for reporters to discuss Ted Kennedy's, uh, accident, at Chappaquidick while wearing a life preserver?
Betsy's Page wonders if this is just Beltway myopia: "I suspect that the great majority of the American people realize that this was an accident. They know that Cheney must feel awful about injuring his friend. But they also know that the American people didn't suffer by having to wait a day over the weekend to learn the story. I wonder how many of the Washington press corps have ever been hunting in their lives." Actually, Cheney probably does feel awful about injuring his friend. But how would we know that since he hasn't uttered a syllable in public?Well, Howie, the fact is that he shot Whittington, and he surely expressed his feelings to Whittington, and that is all that is important in this tragic personal story. He doesn't owe the public an explanation or an apology. The fact that he undoubtedly will, on his own timeline, is a matter of grace that the press has no right to demand.
Sorry, but all that pith wore me out. I don't feel like including all the links in Kurtz's article. Please go there for links to his sources of this oh so rich material.
Hat Tip: The Professor.
Posted by Scott at 11:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackCheney's silence: Isn't it obvious?
This seems to be a classic Rove maneuver: stay silent for as long as it takes the democrats and their liberal media lapdogs to work themselves into a maniacal lather, wait for the crescendo, then have Cheney deliver a public beat-down.
Mark my words: He'll come out and personalize it, which is to say, explain that this was a personal tragedy between two men - a horrible accident that everyone truly regrets. Then, without even a hint of defensiveness, he will rip into the critics on the left and in the media who would rather politicize this than recognize it for the deeply personal and private tragedy that it is.
Cheney will come out of this looking more human than ever, and will indeed get a bump in the polls.
You heard it here first.
February 10, 2006
How much is your house worth?
This is very cool. It is a free real estate "appraisal" of your house. Though it doesn't use the MLS service used by real estate professionals, it culls information from a variety of sources, including tax records, recent sales of comparable homes, etc. to come up with an estimate of your home's value.
Check it out: www.zillow.com
Posted by Scott at 03:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackFebruary 02, 2006
GO STEELERS!!!!!
As the Super Bowl approaches, the WSJ column "The Daily Fix" has devoted today's column to their favorite Steeler-themed articles. Because the column is for subscribers only, I have taken out chunks that link to my favorite of their favorite articles. Enjoy.
Since 1969, the Steelers have had exactly two coaches: Mr. Noll and Mr. Cowher. That's typical of the Rooneys' quiet approach to their franchise, as Ira Miller notes in the San Francisco Chronicle:
"There are 456 pages in the Steelers' media guide," he writes. "Conspicuously absent from those pages is a biography or photo of the team's owner. Most owners can't wait to lead the parade, to make the most noise, to become the most prominent. Not Rooney.
The feel-good story will be Mr. Bettis. The running back, a 13-year veteran, will be looking to check out on top of the world -- a scenario that couldn't have seemed less likely as the 2004 AFC Championship Game ticked away to nothing with Pittsburgh beaten badly at home by the New England Patriots and Mr. Roethlisberger and Hines Ward in tears on the sidelines.
"[T]hrough the tears and his mumbled apologies, Roethlisberger made an emotional, completely irrational promise," writes Greg Garber on ESPN.com. " 'I said, "Jerome, if you give me one more year, I promise" -- I can't believe I said it, because I don't like making promises I can't keep, and I didn't know if I could keep it -- "that I'll get you to a Super Bowl in your hometown." ' "
Looking down from the stands will be Mr. Bettis's parents, Johnnie and Gladys. That's nothing new, as the Detroit Free Press's Mitch Albom writes: "Through high school, through college, through 13 years of his NFL career, Jerome Bettis' parents have not missed a game he has played on American soil."
And, finally, Pittsburgh radio personality Scott Paulsen has written a wonderful piece on how the end of an era created something lasting.
All around the NFL, the word is out that the Pittsburgh Steeler fans “travel well”, meaning they will fly or drive from Pittsburgh to anywhere the Steelers play, just to see their team. The one aspect about that situation the rest of the NFL fails to grasp is that, sometimes, the Steeler Nation does not have to travel. Sometimes, we're already there.Posted by Scott at 01:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackYes, the short sighted steel mills screwed our families over.
But they did, in a completely unintended way, create something new and perhaps more powerful than an industry.
They helped created a nation.
A Steeler Nation.
January 25, 2006
Almost identical!
Scientists spot a new Earthlike planet
Let's see:
It's 5 1/2 time larger than EarthIt is 2 1/2 times farther from its sun than Earth is
Its sun is 1/5 the size of our sun, and 50 times dimmer
Its surface temperature is -394 degrees
It sports a "rocky" surface
Gee - it's just eerie how "earthlike" it is.
January 19, 2006
I LOVE Peggy Noonan!
Her description of Joe Biden:
The great thing about Joe Biden during the Alito hearings, the reason he is, to me, actually endearing, is that as he speaks, as he goes on and on and spins his long statements, hypotheticals, and free associations--as he demonstrates yet again, as he did in the Roberts hearings and even the Thomas hearings, that he is incapable of staying on the river of a thought, and is constantly lured down tributaries from which he can never quite work his way back--you can see him batting the little paddles of his mind against the weeds, trying desperately to return to the river but not remembering where it is, or where it was going.
Eloquent, biting, and most important - melodious. It just rolls off the tongue with such amazing ease. My God, what I would give to be able to construct a sentence like that. (What? You didn't notice? It's one sentence!)
Posted by Scott at 09:08 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackJanuary 13, 2006
R.I.P., Taylor Made In Heaven
1995-2006
January 10, 2006
He can't be serious.....
Check out this tidbit from the L.A. Times:
Publishing: Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and children's publisher Scholastic Corp. will issue an illustrated book about a typical day in his life as told by Splash, his Portuguese water dog. Kennedy's proceeds from the 56-page book, due out in May, will go to charity.
Seriously? Senator Kennedy named his dog "Splash"?? Is "Splash" really the best name for Sen. Kennedy's dog?
Why not, instead of "splash," which is the sound that the car carrying Mary Jo Kopechne made when it hit the water, how about "Glub, glub" the sound it made as it sunk to the bottom of the river. Or how about "Crash" the sound the car made as it jumped the curb. Any other suggestions?
January 03, 2006
GO BUCKS!!!!
If there's anything I love more than beating the U of M, it's beating Notre Dame. And last night, the Buckeyes didn't just beat them, they punished them. Punished them for thinking they are back. As Mike Celizic says, not quite.
Here's another great article from CNNSI.com. One of his most interesting observations:
Every game story will note that the Buckeyes won with big-play TDs: Ginn's 56-yard reception and his 68-yard reverse, a play that left so many Irish defenders sprawled on the turf that I thought I was watching the climactic scene from Horse Feathers; Santonio Holmes' 85-yard reception; and, lastly, Antonio Pittman's 60-yard off-tackle run. What every story may not mention is that all four of those scores occurred on the very next play after the Buckeyes had converted a third-down try.
Pat Forde at ESPN.com has a great article about Smith and how OSU is aiming for a national title next year. And where will it be played?
After shredding the Fighting Irish, Smith was asked whether he knew where the '07 national title game will be played."The national championship game is here next year," Smith said, on cue, then smiled. "We like that."
The Buckeyes have to love that. They own the Valley of the Sun in a way the Cardinals and Sun Devils can only dream of.
I love that line.
Charlie "The Genius" Weis takes some pretty serious criticism in the Chicago Tribune.
The New York Times also has lots of good things to say about Ohio State.
Perhaps they shouldn't call it the Fiesta Bowl anymore. As the Wall Street Journal suggests, "Maybe they should just call it the Buckeye Bowl."
And finally, how could I comment on the game without mentioning the unseemly Brady-Laura-A.J. triangle? From the Dayton Daily News:
"Even before Thanksgiving, when both teams had two or three games left, I said, 'Have you heard we could possibly play you guys if we win out and you win out?' " Robin Quinn recalled. "And he said, 'Yeah, there's a rumor of that.' I said, 'That would be awkward because you would be sacking my son.' And he said, 'Yes, I would.'
December 21, 2005
Oh, The SHAME, THE SHAME.......
I admit it. It was me.
I am a broken man.
Of course, Jonah is still wrong. (Here's his original post, to which I had responded.) I mean how can you argue with this:
Kiss does begin with the letter K, but "Kay" is the name of the jewellers. Why else point this out? Why not offer the tagline "Every Hug Begins with H" or "Love begins El"? Or, for that matter, "We have armadillos in our trousers."?
The incoherence of it is baffling from an intellectual powerhouse like Jonah. Baffling and aggravating.
I knew this guy whose last name was Bee. No kidding. Now if he were a jeweler, I could totally understand Jonah's objection if the slogan was.... oh, nevermind. But my point is, that it's just a stupid pun!
You know what aggravates me more than Jonah's aggravation with this ad? The fact that I am so aggravated by his aggravation. GGGGGAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!
[Edited later (still stewing about this): When Michelin showed a little baby riding around on rain slicked roads and implored us to buy its tires "because so much is riding on" them, should we have taken them to literally mean that we're child endangering sociopaths if we don't? Nooooo. So should we take Kay literally to mean that we shouldn't expect a kiss if we don't bring the bling? Nooooo.
I guess my point is this: I can grant Jonah his premise that any woman who expects a bauble for every kiss is indeed a whore. But the premise is a total non-sequitur. That is not the intent or the inference to be taken from the ad. ]
[Edited still later: Welcome Cornerites! Thanks Jonah for sending everyone my way. Feel free to poke around, though posting has been awfully light lately. By the way - as Jonah's Military Guy attests in the comments below, Jonah's still wrong.]
Posted by Scott at 02:48 PM | Comments (15) | TrackBackCindy Sheehan is absolutely insane
Newsweek has posted a quick interview with this wacko in which she makes two simply incredible claims: 1) the media hurt her peace movement by failing to give it adequate coverage. 2) The media has never questioned Bush about his "lies" about WMD's in Iraq.
Wait. Make that three: 3) She is responsible for bringing the Iraq war to the "forefront of American consciousness."
The woman is crazy. C-R-A-Z-Y!!! In anwers to 3 of only 4 questions, she demonstrates that she is completely unhinged and doesn't have even the slightest grasp on reality. Which is actually kind of sad, I guess.
December 19, 2005
The latest attacks on W are shameful....
These posts on The Corner pretty well crystallize what I've been thinking about the spying relevations, etc.
From Mark Levin:
Finally, with allegations of lying about pre-war intelligence, exposing prison "rendition" in Europe, demanding withdrawal from Iraq, undermining aggressive interrogation of al-Qaeda terrorists, killing key aspects of the Patriot Act, and now eavesdropping, is it just me, or is there an unrelenting attack on core aspects of our post-9/11 homeland security efforts? I have no doubt we will win the war on terrorism overseas, as long as we succeed in overcoming the same domestic elements--among them, media, academia, anti-war left--which brought defeat in Vietnam. After all, 9/11 was no distant act of war, the polls indicate the American people see much of this as partisan politics by the Democrats, and it reinforces the view that Democrats are weak on national security.Perhaps it's time to more aggressively scrutinize the motives and tactics of the war's opponents--rather than mostly react to their allegations. So far, the opponents have largely received a pass. It is often assumed that they mean well, that they want us to win the war, that they would never put politics before country, and so forth. Yet, many on the Left--including Democrat leaders in Congress--feel no similar obligation when they accuse the president of lying, authorizing torture, and violating the Constitution. Besides, they are undermining our war effort.
And Michael Ledeen:
Mark:Posted by Scott at 10:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBackHow right you are. It reminds me of the outrage expressed by Senator Kennedy when news of the mining of the Nicaraguan harbors (with non-lethal devices) broke in the press. The State Dept guy in charge of Latin America at the time, Tony Motley, sat and listened to TK emote for a while and then said "just remember one thing, Senator. More people died at Chappaquiddick than in Puerta Managua." Of course the committee had been briefed over and over again, but the press wasn't interested in pointing fingers at the Democratic legislators, any more than they are today.
People with children and spouses fighting terrorists around the world have no trouble understanding what is going on here; it's a systematic attempt to destroy the Bush presidency, regardless of the cost to the nation or to the cause of liberty on the planet. It's disgusting.
December 09, 2005
Words to live by.....
"No matter how deeply you distrust the government's judgment, you are too trusting."
For those of you wondering, "What will happen when all television signals are transmitted digitally? What about people with analog televisions?" Fear no more. The goverment is here to help.
December 05, 2005
Best. Christmas Lights. Ever.
Seriously. And it's right down the road in Mason, Ohio.
And some have doubted the authenticity of this video. Some think it's edited; some think it's completely fake. It's not.
Still have doubts? Check out the Today Show feature.
Posted by Scott at 11:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBackOUTRAGE!!!
The Victoria's Secret Fashion Show is not being broadcast in HD! WTF?
I am outraged. And as a show of my disgust, I am officially boycotting CBS starting @ 11:00 pm ET, tomorrow. For a full 24 hours. NO CBS watching at all. None.
UPDATE: Call off the boycott. The show was broadcast in yummy HD goodness. Kudos to CBS for their wisdom.
Posted by Scott at 05:09 PM | Comments (0) |