Whither Art Thou?
Mr. Davies?
Does anyone know where the hell D2 has been for the last month? His last post was August 6th. He hasn't even posted at Crooked Timber since August 5th.
I will be very upset with him if he is dead or something.
(Oh, the irony of my being annoyed at someone for having an erratic posting schedule...)
Tuesday, September 02, 2003
Andrew Sullivan - Finally Seeing The Light?
"THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING: Can we all now agree that that was the dumbest political gesture of the last two years?"
Wait a minute...scroll down a few paragraphs...
"SONTAG AWARD NOMINEE: [blah blah blah]"
Nope. Still a prick.
"THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER LANDING: Can we all now agree that that was the dumbest political gesture of the last two years?"
Wait a minute...scroll down a few paragraphs...
"SONTAG AWARD NOMINEE: [blah blah blah]"
Nope. Still a prick.
Thursday, August 21, 2003
Friendly Reminder (best post ever)
I just think that it's good to be reminded from time to time about things one may have forgotten.
Like, say, the borderline-subliminal "Rats" ad that the RNC ran during the 2000 campaign. You know, the one that flashed the word "rats" when talking about Al Gore?
"[Ad designer Alex] Castellanos said he flashed the word -- part of "bureaucrats" -- so it would look more visually interesting, and that it was just a coincidence that the letters appearing first spelled out 'rats.'"
It's not that I don't believe Castellanos (liar), it's just that it seems that in a Presidential election (stolen), one should be a bit more careful about the image one projects (bumbling idiot). After all, what does it say about your potential Presidency (disaster) if it looks to people like you're trying to manipulate them (state of the union)? That's just no damn good (dick cheney). Granted, this was several years ago (surpluses), but I don't see any evidence (WMDs) that this administration has chosen to take the moral high road (kissinger) since it came into office. Bush should do what's right (go back to texas) and actually start living up to the "straight-shooter" image that so many people (inbreds) seem to have of him.
I just think that it's good to be reminded from time to time about things one may have forgotten.
Like, say, the borderline-subliminal "Rats" ad that the RNC ran during the 2000 campaign. You know, the one that flashed the word "rats" when talking about Al Gore?
"[Ad designer Alex] Castellanos said he flashed the word -- part of "bureaucrats" -- so it would look more visually interesting, and that it was just a coincidence that the letters appearing first spelled out 'rats.'"
It's not that I don't believe Castellanos (liar), it's just that it seems that in a Presidential election (stolen), one should be a bit more careful about the image one projects (bumbling idiot). After all, what does it say about your potential Presidency (disaster) if it looks to people like you're trying to manipulate them (state of the union)? That's just no damn good (dick cheney). Granted, this was several years ago (surpluses), but I don't see any evidence (WMDs) that this administration has chosen to take the moral high road (kissinger) since it came into office. Bush should do what's right (go back to texas) and actually start living up to the "straight-shooter" image that so many people (inbreds) seem to have of him.
The Mighty Banality Man
One of the things I've noticed when arguing with conservatives is that more than a few of them seem to be angry at George Bush for not being conservative enough.
This kind of talk always makes me want to take a backhoe to the street leading up to these peoples' houses and scream "Get the Invisible Hand to fix it, fucker!" And then mail their diaries to John Ashcroft. And then replace their condoms with pocket Bibles. And then send their paychecks to Steve Forbes (assuming they make less than $100,000).
Regardless, one argument for Bush's "centrism" (or liberalism, if you're a complete idiot) that I have seen repeatedly: the massive spending increases that have taken place on his watch.
"How can you guys hate him so much? He's spending, spending, spending away, just like a liberal!"
I'd like to take this opportunity to issue a blanket rebuttal to this, and any of the hundred variations of it which I have seen (and for the record, I cannot believe that this needs saying): This may surprise some of my conservative friends, but liberals don't actually like big budget expenditures for big budget expenditures' sake. The only good things about big budget expenditures are the benefits that come from the programs that they fund. And so, if Bush is spending lots and lots of money on things we don't like, then of course we aren't going to like him. In fact, we're going to like him even less for not only doing things we don't like, but for putting our country in dire financial straits by so doing.
Seriously, it's like being mystified because Jerry Falwell doesn't enthusiastically approve of your donations to an Episcopalian gay rights group. "But Jerry, don't you like it when people donate to religious organizations?"
I hope that clears things up. I know it gets too confusing to use actual "thinking" when valiantly battling us evil Statists. Godspeed.
Pre-emptive Response to the Obvious Smartass Remark About The Title of This Post: You're right, that does perfectly describe me! Don't I feel stupid! Ha ha!
One of the things I've noticed when arguing with conservatives is that more than a few of them seem to be angry at George Bush for not being conservative enough.
This kind of talk always makes me want to take a backhoe to the street leading up to these peoples' houses and scream "Get the Invisible Hand to fix it, fucker!" And then mail their diaries to John Ashcroft. And then replace their condoms with pocket Bibles. And then send their paychecks to Steve Forbes (assuming they make less than $100,000).
Regardless, one argument for Bush's "centrism" (or liberalism, if you're a complete idiot) that I have seen repeatedly: the massive spending increases that have taken place on his watch.
"How can you guys hate him so much? He's spending, spending, spending away, just like a liberal!"
I'd like to take this opportunity to issue a blanket rebuttal to this, and any of the hundred variations of it which I have seen (and for the record, I cannot believe that this needs saying): This may surprise some of my conservative friends, but liberals don't actually like big budget expenditures for big budget expenditures' sake. The only good things about big budget expenditures are the benefits that come from the programs that they fund. And so, if Bush is spending lots and lots of money on things we don't like, then of course we aren't going to like him. In fact, we're going to like him even less for not only doing things we don't like, but for putting our country in dire financial straits by so doing.
Seriously, it's like being mystified because Jerry Falwell doesn't enthusiastically approve of your donations to an Episcopalian gay rights group. "But Jerry, don't you like it when people donate to religious organizations?"
I hope that clears things up. I know it gets too confusing to use actual "thinking" when valiantly battling us evil Statists. Godspeed.
Pre-emptive Response to the Obvious Smartass Remark About The Title of This Post: You're right, that does perfectly describe me! Don't I feel stupid! Ha ha!
Tuesday, August 19, 2003
It's Not Like We Didn't Know...
That the InstaPundit would be unable to resist the temptation to make a UN-bashing joke while reporting the bombing of the UN headquaters in Baghdad that has killed at least 17 people:
"Maybe the bomb was planted by environmentalists, angry at the U.N.'s complicity in ecological devastation under Saddam"
Fuck Glenn Reynolds and the blog he rode in on.
That the InstaPundit would be unable to resist the temptation to make a UN-bashing joke while reporting the bombing of the UN headquaters in Baghdad that has killed at least 17 people:
"Maybe the bomb was planted by environmentalists, angry at the U.N.'s complicity in ecological devastation under Saddam"
Fuck Glenn Reynolds and the blog he rode in on.
Monday, August 18, 2003
A Definitive Post On Political Ideology
MY IDEOLOGY: For those of you who care to know, I'm a Godtoldme-ist. It means exactly what it says.
-God told me that Fox News is biased.
-God told me that people who scoff at the charges of human rights organizations like Amnesty International but then self-righteously wag their fingers at those who opposed the war when justifying the invasion of Iraq based on Saddam's murderous record are not "humanitarians", they are "crass opportunists who should be ashamed of themselves."
-God told me that a lot of Republicans are arrogant pricks.
-God told me that Bush is a very, very bad President.
-God told me that so much opinion on the Right is based more on Clinton hatin' than on intelligence.
Should give you an idea of what a "Godtoldme-ist" is.
Oh, and God told me that Michael Demmons is a dipshit.
MY IDEOLOGY: For those of you who care to know, I'm a Godtoldme-ist. It means exactly what it says.
-God told me that Fox News is biased.
-God told me that people who scoff at the charges of human rights organizations like Amnesty International but then self-righteously wag their fingers at those who opposed the war when justifying the invasion of Iraq based on Saddam's murderous record are not "humanitarians", they are "crass opportunists who should be ashamed of themselves."
-God told me that a lot of Republicans are arrogant pricks.
-God told me that Bush is a very, very bad President.
-God told me that so much opinion on the Right is based more on Clinton hatin' than on intelligence.
Should give you an idea of what a "Godtoldme-ist" is.
Oh, and God told me that Michael Demmons is a dipshit.
Thursday, August 14, 2003
Taking Advantage
I'm watching Gov. Bill Richardson on Larry King Live right now, talking about all things blackout.
Here's the funny thing: he seems to be stressing rather forcefully the need for the President to propose a massive energy bill, and is saying that it is absolutely critical for Congress to pass such a bill.
I will refrain, for the moment, from pointing out the sudden flood of drool issuing forth from the President's major financial backers at the prospect of massive national support for a comprehensive energy bill drafted by the current administration.
Instead, let us focus on the major soundbites Gov. Richardson has been desperately attempting to imprint on my mind. Our infrastructure is massively out of date. We're barely wheezing by. We need to massively overhaul our infrastructure. We have a woeful lack of capacity. We need to increase energy production and build all kinds of new modern production facilities. We need to fight the local utilities tooth and nail in favor of...well, that part isn't quite clear.
These seem reasonable enough. But something about his manner piqued my curiosity. He seemed far too eager to convince me to demand that Congress immediately pass massive legislation with huge potential ramifications (and massive payouts to various players in the energy business), the necessary public discussion of which could not possibly take place in any but the most superficial form were Congress to actually pass it as quickly as he seems to want.
So I decided to take a slightly closer look at Mr. Richardson.
Courtesy of Disinfopedia.org, I see that the Governor has some very interesting friends. When he ran for Governor of New Mexico, he resigned from a number of corporate boards, among them American Energy Group, Inc., Energy Investors Fund Group, Diamond Offshore, Valero Energy Group, TerraSolar (a solar power company), and Venoco (an oil and gas company).
Hmm. Interesting. But those were probably just honorary positions. No big deal.
So let's look at sources of income over $5,000 (the disclosure of which was required by New Mexico state law): Terra Solar, Intersate Natural Gas Association (trade association of the natural gas pipeline industry), EIF Management (Energy Investment Fund), Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc., and Valero Energy Corp. [among others]
Fucking shameless.
I'm watching Gov. Bill Richardson on Larry King Live right now, talking about all things blackout.
Here's the funny thing: he seems to be stressing rather forcefully the need for the President to propose a massive energy bill, and is saying that it is absolutely critical for Congress to pass such a bill.
I will refrain, for the moment, from pointing out the sudden flood of drool issuing forth from the President's major financial backers at the prospect of massive national support for a comprehensive energy bill drafted by the current administration.
Instead, let us focus on the major soundbites Gov. Richardson has been desperately attempting to imprint on my mind. Our infrastructure is massively out of date. We're barely wheezing by. We need to massively overhaul our infrastructure. We have a woeful lack of capacity. We need to increase energy production and build all kinds of new modern production facilities. We need to fight the local utilities tooth and nail in favor of...well, that part isn't quite clear.
These seem reasonable enough. But something about his manner piqued my curiosity. He seemed far too eager to convince me to demand that Congress immediately pass massive legislation with huge potential ramifications (and massive payouts to various players in the energy business), the necessary public discussion of which could not possibly take place in any but the most superficial form were Congress to actually pass it as quickly as he seems to want.
So I decided to take a slightly closer look at Mr. Richardson.
Courtesy of Disinfopedia.org, I see that the Governor has some very interesting friends. When he ran for Governor of New Mexico, he resigned from a number of corporate boards, among them American Energy Group, Inc., Energy Investors Fund Group, Diamond Offshore, Valero Energy Group, TerraSolar (a solar power company), and Venoco (an oil and gas company).
Hmm. Interesting. But those were probably just honorary positions. No big deal.
So let's look at sources of income over $5,000 (the disclosure of which was required by New Mexico state law): Terra Solar, Intersate Natural Gas Association (trade association of the natural gas pipeline industry), EIF Management (Energy Investment Fund), Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc., and Valero Energy Corp. [among others]
Fucking shameless.
Power Outage
So far, things seem to be going as well as can be expected given the situation. This is good.
But I'm curious. Every news report seems to stress the fact that it was not the result of a terrorist attack. Well, fair enough. I'll admit that that was the first thing I thought of, and it's good that they are trying to reassure the public.
When we think of a terrorist attack on a power plant or a power grid, we think "bomb." As in, somebody bombed a key chokepoint in the grid.
But here's my question: Am I the only one whose first thought was "computer attack"?
Here's why I think that a computer attack (not necessarily terrorist-related) is not completely outside the realm of possibility:
- 21 seperate power stations went down in a three minute period. That just seems strange to me. I know that everyone's talking about cascade reactions from an overload on the Mohawk grid, but that seems somewhat implausible. I mean, these places have safeguards to protect against this sort of thing. Right?
- Power demand could not have been at record levels- it's summer, and it's hot, but there aren't any major heatwaves anywhere. The temperature in New York today was in the low 90s; hot, yes. Unusual, no.
- No one has been able to point to a specific place and say "There! This is the power station/node/ relay station that started it all." I'm not saying that those in charge should already know the exact cause, but doesn't it seem unlikely that they don't at the very least know where the problem occurred?
Anyway, I don't claim to have any special knowledge here...in fact, it's because of my lack of knowledge that I'm asking questions.
As the internet grew in prominence during the late 90's, talk of securing our "electronic frontiers" grew more and more frequent; after 9/11, we heard about it a bit more, but the possibility of an electronic attack was largely glossed over in the media in favor of coverage of things that seemed more personally threatening (nukes, anthrax, dirty bombs, etc). But one of the primary focuses of any discussion about digital terrorism was the threat it posed to our power networks.
So why isn't anyone on any of the major networks at least raising the possibility, especially given the lack of any real information coming out of the government as to what actually caused this?
Edit: For the record, I'm not saying that I think that it is definitely an electronic attack of some sort (again, terrorist or no). I don't even know if it's at all likely. I'm just wondering why I haven't heard anyone even ask about the possibility, when this is a scenario that has been put forward before when discussing America's electronic vulnerabilities.
So far, things seem to be going as well as can be expected given the situation. This is good.
But I'm curious. Every news report seems to stress the fact that it was not the result of a terrorist attack. Well, fair enough. I'll admit that that was the first thing I thought of, and it's good that they are trying to reassure the public.
When we think of a terrorist attack on a power plant or a power grid, we think "bomb." As in, somebody bombed a key chokepoint in the grid.
But here's my question: Am I the only one whose first thought was "computer attack"?
Here's why I think that a computer attack (not necessarily terrorist-related) is not completely outside the realm of possibility:
- 21 seperate power stations went down in a three minute period. That just seems strange to me. I know that everyone's talking about cascade reactions from an overload on the Mohawk grid, but that seems somewhat implausible. I mean, these places have safeguards to protect against this sort of thing. Right?
- Power demand could not have been at record levels- it's summer, and it's hot, but there aren't any major heatwaves anywhere. The temperature in New York today was in the low 90s; hot, yes. Unusual, no.
- No one has been able to point to a specific place and say "There! This is the power station/node/ relay station that started it all." I'm not saying that those in charge should already know the exact cause, but doesn't it seem unlikely that they don't at the very least know where the problem occurred?
Anyway, I don't claim to have any special knowledge here...in fact, it's because of my lack of knowledge that I'm asking questions.
As the internet grew in prominence during the late 90's, talk of securing our "electronic frontiers" grew more and more frequent; after 9/11, we heard about it a bit more, but the possibility of an electronic attack was largely glossed over in the media in favor of coverage of things that seemed more personally threatening (nukes, anthrax, dirty bombs, etc). But one of the primary focuses of any discussion about digital terrorism was the threat it posed to our power networks.
So why isn't anyone on any of the major networks at least raising the possibility, especially given the lack of any real information coming out of the government as to what actually caused this?
Edit: For the record, I'm not saying that I think that it is definitely an electronic attack of some sort (again, terrorist or no). I don't even know if it's at all likely. I'm just wondering why I haven't heard anyone even ask about the possibility, when this is a scenario that has been put forward before when discussing America's electronic vulnerabilities.
The End Of The Line
After reading a certain Freeper thread, I got into a bit of a groove. The need to mock foolish people was like a primal urge...I just had to keep coming back to the computer, interrupting a damn fine viewing of "Field of Dreams." I'm better now. To fully appreciate the last two hour's worth of posting, I suggest you start here and scroll up. Chronological order and all.
Jesus, Freepers suck.
After reading a certain Freeper thread, I got into a bit of a groove. The need to mock foolish people was like a primal urge...I just had to keep coming back to the computer, interrupting a damn fine viewing of "Field of Dreams." I'm better now. To fully appreciate the last two hour's worth of posting, I suggest you start here and scroll up. Chronological order and all.
Jesus, Freepers suck.
Drunken Messages On God's Answering Machine
Sometimes it's best to just let it ring...
"I will literally be on my knees praying tonight that people learn about this neo-socialist being appointed by the Bloomberg Candidate."
Sometimes it's best to just let it ring...
"I will literally be on my knees praying tonight that people learn about this neo-socialist being appointed by the Bloomberg Candidate."
Doesn't Iran Have Enough Weapons?
Freeper advice for handling life's little problems:
"WWRD (What Would Reagan Do)"
Freeper advice for handling life's little problems:
"WWRD (What Would Reagan Do)"
"Round" Two: "Fight"!
Freepers v. History:
"The U.S.S.R. had plenty of "Rich" guys that endorsed the "system", they were protected."
Freepers v. History:
"The U.S.S.R. had plenty of "Rich" guys that endorsed the "system", they were protected."
The Horror
"People should know that most of [Buffett's] wealth doesn't come from shrewd investing, but cleverly avoiding taxes and as I said, those insider connections into government and business."
Irony slashes Freepers' tires on the way out of the stadium.
"People should know that most of [Buffett's] wealth doesn't come from shrewd investing, but cleverly avoiding taxes and as I said, those insider connections into government and business."
Irony slashes Freepers' tires on the way out of the stadium.
Round One: Fight!
Freepers v. History:
"I would compare Buffett to the industrialists of WWII Germany...getting rich by means of capitalism, but utterly owned by the socialists and their ideology."
Freepers v. History:
"I would compare Buffett to the industrialists of WWII Germany...getting rich by means of capitalism, but utterly owned by the socialists and their ideology."
Instant Campaign Commercial
"Maybe I could get behind Arnold. I love his movies, and one never knows what can happen once someone gets in office."
"Maybe I could get behind Arnold. I love his movies, and one never knows what can happen once someone gets in office."
Shit! They're Breeding!
"Okay. I hereby revoke any positive statement made regarding Ahnold. Warren Buffett is a socialist. WTF is going through that guy's head?" [emphasis mine]
"Okay. I hereby revoke any positive statement made regarding Ahnold. Warren Buffett is a socialist. WTF is going through that guy's head?" [emphasis mine]
If God Loved Me, He Would Grant This Man's Wish
"At least its not Jimmy Buffett, although that would be cool, we could all get drunk, listen to music and forget about it." [emphasis mine]
(Help me, I can't stop...)
"At least its not Jimmy Buffett, although that would be cool, we could all get drunk, listen to music and forget about it." [emphasis mine]
(Help me, I can't stop...)
Game, Set, Match
"Wonder how [Buffett] weathered the Enron debacle."
Irony leaps over net, smashes Freepers with racket, runs into stands to wild cheers of adoring crowd, walks off with supermodel on each arm.
"Wonder how [Buffett] weathered the Enron debacle."
Irony leaps over net, smashes Freepers with racket, runs into stands to wild cheers of adoring crowd, walks off with supermodel on each arm.
Thank God Arnold Can't Be President!
"The other consideration is that he will use Buffett's extensive knowledge of the electric ultility industry (and monopoly in the West) to try to turn around California's energy mess. I sure hope this isn't going to lead to firesales whereby [Berkshire Hathaway] gets first dibs..."
Irony 1, Freepers 0.
"The other consideration is that he will use Buffett's extensive knowledge of the electric ultility industry (and monopoly in the West) to try to turn around California's energy mess. I sure hope this isn't going to lead to firesales whereby [Berkshire Hathaway] gets first dibs..."
Irony 1, Freepers 0.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
