Mistuh Know-it-all, he dead
I killed him. It just got too annoying, it was more of a nuisance than those irritating Al Qaedas, having this comprends-tous (sait-tout?) in my head. See, that's proof. I don't even have a clue if the French really have an expression corresponding to "know-it-all" in their silly language, which has now almost completely surrendered to me, {Only Compiegne and the Haute-Savoie are holding out, along with a few mountain villages in the Pyrenees} or if "comprends-tous" is used, how it should be spelt (wait a minute. Shouldn't that be "spelled"? Doesn't "spelt" have something to do with fish and their utterly irresponsible and Clintonian mating processes? Or is that smelt?) But I went ahead and put it down anyway, because darn it "comprends-tous" sounds better than "know-it-all" and I don't even care if some mindless truffle-snorters use or don't use a particular expression, or how they spell it. It serves my needs and so there you feckless foie-gras fanciers.
This is so liberating you just don't know. For 56 years now old monsieur (actually, far more likely to be mamselle!) comprends-tous has been beating me about the head and shoulders when I write or say anything that doesn't correspond to what dimwit wrote in some book around the time of the Flood, which may or may not have happened and I don't know and even care. More later, if I care to and if the Scotch doesn't do for me entirely and disenfranchise me by rendering me unable to vote for Bush on Tuesday, the result, obviously of a conspiracy between McEdwards and MacKerry. If I look really hard and drink a real lot I'm sure I can find those names somewhere on the bottle. Like it matters.
Saturday, October 30, 2004
This fever will break
Saturday before the election, dear Diary, and here I am in a sweat, because this darn weather hasn't broken and I bought a half-gallon (no, I WON'T call it a "1.75-Liter" even though that's what it is) of Scotch (Duggan's Dew, 86.8 proof) to get me through the election. And by the way, couldn't they have just evened it out to two liters? If Bush wins, I celebrate, if he loses I drown my sorrows as I watch Kerry turn the keys of the country over to Osama. Either way the rapacious international Scotch merchants win and I turn up for work with a hangover.
And I know it doesn't really matter. I've been through this so many times before and it has never actually changed my way of living, except for that idiot Carter. The more I think about it I don't think I did vote for Carter in 1980, so 1976 was the last time I voted. Carter had broken his promise to run the govt. on "zero-based budgeting", which was the only reason I voted for him in '76. There was also that little matter of the hostages and the idiotic Olympic boycott. That's what Kerry would have done if he had been Prez in 1990. "Now, Saddam, you pull out of Kuwait or else the US will pull out of any Olympics that Iraq participates in and by the way the UN - and the entire Olympic Committee - except for you and probably Kuwait - is going to really, really punish you for killing your Olympians who don't perform properly. Oh, you're going to be so sorry!"
Saturday before the election, dear Diary, and here I am in a sweat, because this darn weather hasn't broken and I bought a half-gallon (no, I WON'T call it a "1.75-Liter" even though that's what it is) of Scotch (Duggan's Dew, 86.8 proof) to get me through the election. And by the way, couldn't they have just evened it out to two liters? If Bush wins, I celebrate, if he loses I drown my sorrows as I watch Kerry turn the keys of the country over to Osama. Either way the rapacious international Scotch merchants win and I turn up for work with a hangover.
And I know it doesn't really matter. I've been through this so many times before and it has never actually changed my way of living, except for that idiot Carter. The more I think about it I don't think I did vote for Carter in 1980, so 1976 was the last time I voted. Carter had broken his promise to run the govt. on "zero-based budgeting", which was the only reason I voted for him in '76. There was also that little matter of the hostages and the idiotic Olympic boycott. That's what Kerry would have done if he had been Prez in 1990. "Now, Saddam, you pull out of Kuwait or else the US will pull out of any Olympics that Iraq participates in and by the way the UN - and the entire Olympic Committee - except for you and probably Kuwait - is going to really, really punish you for killing your Olympians who don't perform properly. Oh, you're going to be so sorry!"
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Naked spin
It was cool to see all the spinmeisters on TV utterly naked, without any clothes at all, not even clothed in plausibility. The spin-meter has gone off the scale and bears no relation to reality. I watched part of the debate and read liveblogging on the rest of it. I thought Bush clearly did better, calling out Kerry-bot 2004 on his opposition to the First Gulf War (what, not enough allies?) and his plans which contain no details except spending even more than the supposedly conservative Bush administration.
The Main Stream Media has abandoned any pretense of objectivity. Kerry-bot's weird mannerisms, his botching of the Bible and blathering about "Native American" (don't get me started) religions and his answering a question about his wife by talking about his mother and his ridiculously obvious "wink, wink" reference to Mary Cheney's lesbianism make this by far his worst performance. And yet the MSM call it a "draw" or even a win for Kerry. Absurd. Disgraceful. Inexplicable except by bias. I'm glad they're being so obvious. This is going to come back to haunt them big time, even if Bush loses. Which I have a feeling - heck, let's make it a prediction - that Bush is not going to do. I predict 52% for Bush, with 290-300 electoral votes. See, it's in print now, on the Web. It's at least as accurate as anything Taegan Goddard's ever said.
Much substance will come out of this debate to haunt Kerry, too. It's just the beginning of the most intense and interesting part of the campaign. Bush should be loaded for bear now. And, after last night, Kerry-bot's got nothing left.
It was cool to see all the spinmeisters on TV utterly naked, without any clothes at all, not even clothed in plausibility. The spin-meter has gone off the scale and bears no relation to reality. I watched part of the debate and read liveblogging on the rest of it. I thought Bush clearly did better, calling out Kerry-bot 2004 on his opposition to the First Gulf War (what, not enough allies?) and his plans which contain no details except spending even more than the supposedly conservative Bush administration.
The Main Stream Media has abandoned any pretense of objectivity. Kerry-bot's weird mannerisms, his botching of the Bible and blathering about "Native American" (don't get me started) religions and his answering a question about his wife by talking about his mother and his ridiculously obvious "wink, wink" reference to Mary Cheney's lesbianism make this by far his worst performance. And yet the MSM call it a "draw" or even a win for Kerry. Absurd. Disgraceful. Inexplicable except by bias. I'm glad they're being so obvious. This is going to come back to haunt them big time, even if Bush loses. Which I have a feeling - heck, let's make it a prediction - that Bush is not going to do. I predict 52% for Bush, with 290-300 electoral votes. See, it's in print now, on the Web. It's at least as accurate as anything Taegan Goddard's ever said.
Much substance will come out of this debate to haunt Kerry, too. It's just the beginning of the most intense and interesting part of the campaign. Bush should be loaded for bear now. And, after last night, Kerry-bot's got nothing left.
Saturday, October 09, 2004
Quote of the day - er - month
From Graham Greene's The Comedians:
"I get scared sometimes, too. I lose the way. It's frightening to be lost, isn't it, in a strange city, but when you get lost inside yourself ... Have another lager."
Easy forgetting
I've been finding it very easy to forget things lately, which is a great blessing. I forget my limitations, my grievances, my sins. I also forget about this little blog. But then when I remember, it's a good smiling memory and I find my way here easily.
Last night's debate was by all accounts a Bush "win". I didn't listen to it, having been ennui-ed out of my mind by the last one. I wonder if anyone else has ever verbified "ennui". I wonder if anyone else has ever used the word "verbified". Ah, enough innovation. And wondering. Kerry's positions do seem to be coming apart, unfolding and drooping like his face would if he stopped with the Botox. He seems to be out of ammunition. He's used "Halliburton, AWOL, WMD" (repeated ad libitum endlessly whether any of it makes any sense or not) and the other slogans until they're all used up. He really needs another one to get him to election day.
I didn't listen to or watch the debate, but I read it, on Hugh Hewitt and Ann Althouse. Even the puppy blender was liveblogging. It reminded me of "watching" the Fischer-Spassky championship in 1972 on PBS from Iceland when the moves would come in on a teletype and be recreated by an "expert" on a big board with slots and cardboard pieces. It's much more calming than having to look at the protagonists and wonder whether the odd drop of sweat or nervous tic was going to keep one of them out of the White House. From now on I'll read all the debates - oops, there's only one left. Maybe I'll read all real-time live events instead of relying on talking heads and deceptive video. Anything for equanimity.
From Graham Greene's The Comedians:
"I get scared sometimes, too. I lose the way. It's frightening to be lost, isn't it, in a strange city, but when you get lost inside yourself ... Have another lager."
Easy forgetting
I've been finding it very easy to forget things lately, which is a great blessing. I forget my limitations, my grievances, my sins. I also forget about this little blog. But then when I remember, it's a good smiling memory and I find my way here easily.
Last night's debate was by all accounts a Bush "win". I didn't listen to it, having been ennui-ed out of my mind by the last one. I wonder if anyone else has ever verbified "ennui". I wonder if anyone else has ever used the word "verbified". Ah, enough innovation. And wondering. Kerry's positions do seem to be coming apart, unfolding and drooping like his face would if he stopped with the Botox. He seems to be out of ammunition. He's used "Halliburton, AWOL, WMD" (repeated ad libitum endlessly whether any of it makes any sense or not) and the other slogans until they're all used up. He really needs another one to get him to election day.
I didn't listen to or watch the debate, but I read it, on Hugh Hewitt and Ann Althouse. Even the puppy blender was liveblogging. It reminded me of "watching" the Fischer-Spassky championship in 1972 on PBS from Iceland when the moves would come in on a teletype and be recreated by an "expert" on a big board with slots and cardboard pieces. It's much more calming than having to look at the protagonists and wonder whether the odd drop of sweat or nervous tic was going to keep one of them out of the White House. From now on I'll read all the debates - oops, there's only one left. Maybe I'll read all real-time live events instead of relying on talking heads and deceptive video. Anything for equanimity.
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Debate thoughts
Kerry held his own, but came up with nothing new that I could detect. The "global test" meme could be his worst moment. He really let it be known that there's one thing he does believe in and that's the necessity for getting international permission before the US does anything to safeguard itself. That's the only time he showed any passion, when he was talking about getting the UN involved in all the conflicts of the world, as if they've ever done anything positive about any conflict they ever got into. He even had the nerve to mention "global warming" but didn't dare bring up the ICC, which Bush used to some effect. That could come back to haunt him and should be showing up in an RNC commercial - soon!
Bush hit all the right themes, but could have been more forceful about the connection between 9/11 and Iraq and the War on Terror. There was too much about Iraq. I thought Lehrer would have a little more imagination. Does he really think Iraq deserves ninety percent of a foreign policy debate? Unless - you don't think! - he was purposely trying to hammer home what a terrible job he thought Bush was doing. There really isn't that much to say about Iraq any more. And Kerry never did say in any detail what his "secret plan" was.
Overall, it was the War of the Stump Speeches. On North Korea, I thought Kerry stumbled badly by appearing to come out against the multilateral talks. Bush said, "That's just what Kim Jong-Il wants to happen" and of course he's right but I don't delude myself that anyone's really going to notice. On Iran and the sanctions Bush caught Kerry out with the comeback that they hadn't started on his watch and Kerry never replied to that.
Bush now knows that Kerry's a worthwhile opponent and with any luck can boost his preparation a bit and hit back harder next time. Time for the gloves to come off.
Kerry held his own, but came up with nothing new that I could detect. The "global test" meme could be his worst moment. He really let it be known that there's one thing he does believe in and that's the necessity for getting international permission before the US does anything to safeguard itself. That's the only time he showed any passion, when he was talking about getting the UN involved in all the conflicts of the world, as if they've ever done anything positive about any conflict they ever got into. He even had the nerve to mention "global warming" but didn't dare bring up the ICC, which Bush used to some effect. That could come back to haunt him and should be showing up in an RNC commercial - soon!
Bush hit all the right themes, but could have been more forceful about the connection between 9/11 and Iraq and the War on Terror. There was too much about Iraq. I thought Lehrer would have a little more imagination. Does he really think Iraq deserves ninety percent of a foreign policy debate? Unless - you don't think! - he was purposely trying to hammer home what a terrible job he thought Bush was doing. There really isn't that much to say about Iraq any more. And Kerry never did say in any detail what his "secret plan" was.
Overall, it was the War of the Stump Speeches. On North Korea, I thought Kerry stumbled badly by appearing to come out against the multilateral talks. Bush said, "That's just what Kim Jong-Il wants to happen" and of course he's right but I don't delude myself that anyone's really going to notice. On Iran and the sanctions Bush caught Kerry out with the comeback that they hadn't started on his watch and Kerry never replied to that.
Bush now knows that Kerry's a worthwhile opponent and with any luck can boost his preparation a bit and hit back harder next time. Time for the gloves to come off.
Pre-debate frenzy
So O'Reilly is doing his best to keep me from watching the debates on Fox. I just don't like the fake neutrality he espouses. Before too long that attitude is going to look so pre-blog! Maybe it will be a good thing when all commentators declare their allegiance before they start to pontificate. I find it very handy to have someone declared as a liberal. Then I can stop listening to him. I no longer delude myself that any liberal has anything interesting to say. I saw Instapundit on Kudlow and Cramer earlier. Thought he did pretty well, although the blogger segment was awfully short. Now Instapundit is regarded as neutral by most anti-collectivist bloggers like me, but he seems to have come to that position honestly, from his gut, not just to get people to read him, but to get to the truth. My only problem with that attitude is that he has not yet realized that liberals really do have nothing real to say. But he's young yet. He'll learn.
I'll be looking for Bush to stay steady and on course. He knows exactly what he has to say and how he needs to say it. Kerry, if experience is any guide, will essentially go in winging it, hoping to score points like a boxer who knows he's behind in the judges' scoring and can only hope for a knockout. I just hope they aren't allowed to recycle their stump speeches.
So O'Reilly is doing his best to keep me from watching the debates on Fox. I just don't like the fake neutrality he espouses. Before too long that attitude is going to look so pre-blog! Maybe it will be a good thing when all commentators declare their allegiance before they start to pontificate. I find it very handy to have someone declared as a liberal. Then I can stop listening to him. I no longer delude myself that any liberal has anything interesting to say. I saw Instapundit on Kudlow and Cramer earlier. Thought he did pretty well, although the blogger segment was awfully short. Now Instapundit is regarded as neutral by most anti-collectivist bloggers like me, but he seems to have come to that position honestly, from his gut, not just to get people to read him, but to get to the truth. My only problem with that attitude is that he has not yet realized that liberals really do have nothing real to say. But he's young yet. He'll learn.
I'll be looking for Bush to stay steady and on course. He knows exactly what he has to say and how he needs to say it. Kerry, if experience is any guide, will essentially go in winging it, hoping to score points like a boxer who knows he's behind in the judges' scoring and can only hope for a knockout. I just hope they aren't allowed to recycle their stump speeches.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Cars - again?!
Doesn't it burn you up when you see the ads this time of year from new car dealerships? They all say, "Hey, we've got 2005 models coming in and no room to put them anywhere! We've got to move out the 2004's pronto! Come in and get your best deal now!"
Wait a minute. How dumb do they think we are? Well, considering these ads play every year, they must work, so they must think we're plenty dumb, and I guess we are! But really, who believes that new car salesmen are sitting around in the summer with a lot full of cars, saying to each other, "Wow, it's a good thing we've got all this room for all these 2004 cars. Sure hope the manufacturers don't send us a whole passel of new 2005 models. Nah, that's not gonna happen."? Then October approaches, when new cars have been sent out from the factories for, what a HUNDRED YEARS NOW?? And trucks start showing up full of cars and the dealers expect us to believe they're SURPRISED???!!! So the best they can come up with is to put ads in the paper complaining that something that happens every year has happened again, darn it? Nope, no way they could have, for instance, only ordered the number of new cars they actually had room for! No way. Then the ads wouldn't work and they wouldn't be able to create in the prospective buyer's mind the image of car dealers stacking up cars three deep and desperately slashing prices in half to get rid of the old ones. The most amazing thing is that some buyers actually fall for this nonsense. The older I get, the dumber people get. And the sleazier car salesmen get.
Doesn't it burn you up when you see the ads this time of year from new car dealerships? They all say, "Hey, we've got 2005 models coming in and no room to put them anywhere! We've got to move out the 2004's pronto! Come in and get your best deal now!"
Wait a minute. How dumb do they think we are? Well, considering these ads play every year, they must work, so they must think we're plenty dumb, and I guess we are! But really, who believes that new car salesmen are sitting around in the summer with a lot full of cars, saying to each other, "Wow, it's a good thing we've got all this room for all these 2004 cars. Sure hope the manufacturers don't send us a whole passel of new 2005 models. Nah, that's not gonna happen."? Then October approaches, when new cars have been sent out from the factories for, what a HUNDRED YEARS NOW?? And trucks start showing up full of cars and the dealers expect us to believe they're SURPRISED???!!! So the best they can come up with is to put ads in the paper complaining that something that happens every year has happened again, darn it? Nope, no way they could have, for instance, only ordered the number of new cars they actually had room for! No way. Then the ads wouldn't work and they wouldn't be able to create in the prospective buyer's mind the image of car dealers stacking up cars three deep and desperately slashing prices in half to get rid of the old ones. The most amazing thing is that some buyers actually fall for this nonsense. The older I get, the dumber people get. And the sleazier car salesmen get.
Sunday, September 12, 2004
Metaphors
The long-overdue Day of the Blogosphere may finally be dawning. How predictable was this? But, then, who predicted the rise of Protestantism out of the new technology of printing? Hmm. Everybody can read and comment on the original text and therefore see how stupid and vicious the hierarchy's reading of it is. And perhaps how irrelevant the "authentic" text itself is to everyday life. And then there's Open Source, the god of some lefty-types, but now serving as a model for the self-correcting blogosphere, inexorably crushing the idols of left and right. It IS a good thing for thousands of bloggers of every conceivable political and cultural orientation to see and comment on news events, isn't it? And for such comment to be instantly available to everyone with an internet connection? Or, at least, it has to be an improvement on a few rich white male Democrat "journalists" putting out the only "authoritative" texts of such events. We do all believe in diversity, don't we?
The long-overdue Day of the Blogosphere may finally be dawning. How predictable was this? But, then, who predicted the rise of Protestantism out of the new technology of printing? Hmm. Everybody can read and comment on the original text and therefore see how stupid and vicious the hierarchy's reading of it is. And perhaps how irrelevant the "authentic" text itself is to everyday life. And then there's Open Source, the god of some lefty-types, but now serving as a model for the self-correcting blogosphere, inexorably crushing the idols of left and right. It IS a good thing for thousands of bloggers of every conceivable political and cultural orientation to see and comment on news events, isn't it? And for such comment to be instantly available to everyone with an internet connection? Or, at least, it has to be an improvement on a few rich white male Democrat "journalists" putting out the only "authoritative" texts of such events. We do all believe in diversity, don't we?
Monday, September 06, 2004
Becalmed in a hurricane
Here at ground zero it's barely raining, blowing a bit. I had a power outage last night, annoying only because the AC and fan went off. Storms make for cool days but warm nights, for some reason. I keep seeing pictures on TV of trailers blown to pieces and think "Gulp!" The rain and wind I've had so far, though, is barely sufficient to move the surrounding trees around. I'm looking more carefully at those trees. They seem to be tall and thin and far away from the trailer. Good. A large decrepit tree right over the bedroom would be worrisome. At least no one's ordered me to evacuate. I'd rather stay right here and read about Perkin Warbeck and Lambert Simnel.
Here at ground zero it's barely raining, blowing a bit. I had a power outage last night, annoying only because the AC and fan went off. Storms make for cool days but warm nights, for some reason. I keep seeing pictures on TV of trailers blown to pieces and think "Gulp!" The rain and wind I've had so far, though, is barely sufficient to move the surrounding trees around. I'm looking more carefully at those trees. They seem to be tall and thin and far away from the trailer. Good. A large decrepit tree right over the bedroom would be worrisome. At least no one's ordered me to evacuate. I'd rather stay right here and read about Perkin Warbeck and Lambert Simnel.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
Stormblogging
Frances has finally showed up, or at least her far outskirts. The eye's still over Tampa and we're feeling strong winds and rain here in Tallahassee, so I guess for once the weather Cassandras were right. It IS a large storm. But I'm in my snug little trailer here, not worrying about anything. It would just be inconvenient if the lights went out just as I was bloggin
Ha.. Just my little joke. I've got plenty of time to evacuate if it should become necessary. Haven't I? Looking on the bright side, if this rain and wind keeps up maybe I'll get a day off work on Tuesday.
OK, back to reading about Buckingham's rebellion against Richard III. That's what I like about the Wars of the Roses. One surprise after the other.
Frances has finally showed up, or at least her far outskirts. The eye's still over Tampa and we're feeling strong winds and rain here in Tallahassee, so I guess for once the weather Cassandras were right. It IS a large storm. But I'm in my snug little trailer here, not worrying about anything. It would just be inconvenient if the lights went out just as I was bloggin
Ha.. Just my little joke. I've got plenty of time to evacuate if it should become necessary. Haven't I? Looking on the bright side, if this rain and wind keeps up maybe I'll get a day off work on Tuesday.
OK, back to reading about Buckingham's rebellion against Richard III. That's what I like about the Wars of the Roses. One surprise after the other.
Saturday, September 04, 2004
The Wounds of Time
All I'm going to say about this is what a good thing it is that no one really has to worry about what happens to Bill Clinton any more. It doesn't matter, as it did in the days when he had his wandering finger on the nuclear button and his backup was Al-Gor. I certainly won't mention the rumors that his weak heart may be a result of cocaine ingestion, not Big Macs, or wonder why he didn't release his medical records while he was president (no capitalization deserved in his case).
All I'm going to say about this is what a good thing it is that no one really has to worry about what happens to Bill Clinton any more. It doesn't matter, as it did in the days when he had his wandering finger on the nuclear button and his backup was Al-Gor. I certainly won't mention the rumors that his weak heart may be a result of cocaine ingestion, not Big Macs, or wonder why he didn't release his medical records while he was president (no capitalization deserved in his case).
Thursday, August 26, 2004
Nuance
John Kerry says he can’t be blamed for voting to give authority to George Bush to wage war to liberate Iraq because how was he to know that Bush would take that authority and “use it in the wrong way”? He seems to think he can be absolved of the consequences of any action he takes if he didn’t predict those consequences in detail. In other words, he claims to have intended that Bush would not have used Congressional authority to go to war but would have, for example, NOT gone to war!
Isn’t Kerry responsible for the consequences of his votes in Congress? Isn’t he responsible for making the judgment that Bush would properly and responsibly (in Kerry's view) use authority granted him? How stupid does Kerry think people are? Or, perhaps more to the point, how stupid is Kerry?
Here at the end of August, the Kerry campaign doesn't seem to have any traction at all. I will be very surprised if he manages to gain any voters out of the Republican convention. If form holds, Bush will gain. He may gain big. And if by the middle of September Bush is ahead by five points or more in most polls, Kerry is an ex-politician. He has gone to join the choir invisible of politicians who never quite made it onto the big stage, like his former boss Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Dole and his special buddy, Captain Oldsmobile. ( I just saw somewhere that nickname for Teddy Kennedy, and I love it!)
--
John Kerry says he can’t be blamed for voting to give authority to George Bush to wage war to liberate Iraq because how was he to know that Bush would take that authority and “use it in the wrong way”? He seems to think he can be absolved of the consequences of any action he takes if he didn’t predict those consequences in detail. In other words, he claims to have intended that Bush would not have used Congressional authority to go to war but would have, for example, NOT gone to war!
Isn’t Kerry responsible for the consequences of his votes in Congress? Isn’t he responsible for making the judgment that Bush would properly and responsibly (in Kerry's view) use authority granted him? How stupid does Kerry think people are? Or, perhaps more to the point, how stupid is Kerry?
Here at the end of August, the Kerry campaign doesn't seem to have any traction at all. I will be very surprised if he manages to gain any voters out of the Republican convention. If form holds, Bush will gain. He may gain big. And if by the middle of September Bush is ahead by five points or more in most polls, Kerry is an ex-politician. He has gone to join the choir invisible of politicians who never quite made it onto the big stage, like his former boss Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Dole and his special buddy, Captain Oldsmobile. ( I just saw somewhere that nickname for Teddy Kennedy, and I love it!)
--
Tuesday, August 24, 2004
Gambella Massacre
It's amazing what you find just by ambling around the blogosphere. Actually, I found this site while I was looking at Africapundit. The Anuak blog tells a detailed story of the Ethiopian government's ethnic cleansing of an area of western Ethiopia called Gambella state. Here is a
map.
I have never heard about this. I followed the Ethiopia-Tigre-Eritrea story for years, mostly, I guess, because it corroborated my idea that collectivism always leads to violence. The stories on Anuak Genocide Watch are as bad as what came out of Rwanda, much worse than Bosnia and Kosovo. Because Gambella has no oil (that I know of) or uranium and doesn't fit any pet victim profile that would galvanize the UN into action (hah!), it has been totally ignored. It makes one wonder how many of these stories exist around the world, holocausts that fade unnoticed into history. Their motto is not "Never again". It's "That never happened". People care more about the elephant or the mountain gorilla than they do about Anuaks. The tragedy can be best appreciated by seeing where the survivors headed for refuge: Sudan!
Update: there is, apparently, an oil angle, though this article is irrationally biased against oil extraction. I understand the mistrust of government, but there's no reason why oil can't be produced to the profit of the Anuak. It will only be the fault of the left-leaning government if it isn't. To call the use of valuable resources "socially and environmentally destructive" tells you everything you need to know about the real agenda of "Genocide Watch" and their "Cultural Survival" project to keep people as pets, protected from the nasty twenty-first century so they can stay poor on their farms and never get it together to defend themselves from the Ethiopian government. I'm only linking to these collectivist fools because there's some interesting history in their article.
It's amazing what you find just by ambling around the blogosphere. Actually, I found this site while I was looking at Africapundit. The Anuak blog tells a detailed story of the Ethiopian government's ethnic cleansing of an area of western Ethiopia called Gambella state. Here is a
map.
I have never heard about this. I followed the Ethiopia-Tigre-Eritrea story for years, mostly, I guess, because it corroborated my idea that collectivism always leads to violence. The stories on Anuak Genocide Watch are as bad as what came out of Rwanda, much worse than Bosnia and Kosovo. Because Gambella has no oil (that I know of) or uranium and doesn't fit any pet victim profile that would galvanize the UN into action (hah!), it has been totally ignored. It makes one wonder how many of these stories exist around the world, holocausts that fade unnoticed into history. Their motto is not "Never again". It's "That never happened". People care more about the elephant or the mountain gorilla than they do about Anuaks. The tragedy can be best appreciated by seeing where the survivors headed for refuge: Sudan!
Update: there is, apparently, an oil angle, though this article is irrationally biased against oil extraction. I understand the mistrust of government, but there's no reason why oil can't be produced to the profit of the Anuak. It will only be the fault of the left-leaning government if it isn't. To call the use of valuable resources "socially and environmentally destructive" tells you everything you need to know about the real agenda of "Genocide Watch" and their "Cultural Survival" project to keep people as pets, protected from the nasty twenty-first century so they can stay poor on their farms and never get it together to defend themselves from the Ethiopian government. I'm only linking to these collectivist fools because there's some interesting history in their article.
Monday, August 16, 2004
Oh, those fascinating Olympic sports! I tuned in to the coverage this morning and saw two teams of women playing something that looked like a cross between field hockey and water polo on land. I remembered before too long that there was something called "team handball" and this must be it. I'd never seen it before. It was the Hungarians, who all seemed to have their hair frosted in unison, and the Chinese, who seem to be able to come up with skilled athletes in any sport in a month or two after the sport is adopted in the Olympics. The US is definitely at a disadvantage in women's team handball, since hardly any Americans are even aware such a sport exists. All our athletes are out playing "beach" volleyball, which is now an Olympic sport distinct from regular volleyball. Maybe this is a trend. Why not have "beach" soccer or "beach" tennis or "beach" cycling, where athletes try to ride a bike through deep sand? No doubt they'd develop new bikes with big tires. Didn't the Romans set their gladiatorial combats on sand? I think "arena" comes from a word for sand. So once again the Romans were there first. But there's little blood in women's beach team handball, just a lot of screeching and hair pulling.
As for men's basketball, starring two NBA stars against the rest of the world, the US lost to Puerto Rico yesterday. Which is very odd, considering that PR is PART of the US! Does no one else find this disturbing? Why not the US vs. Florida in football? Florida would win. I've been puzzling over the autonomy of PR in basketball since I've been watching Olympic sports. I suppose it's an outgrowth of the move for independence, which has been soundly rejected by the Puerto Riqueno populace every time it's been voted on. And for good reason, considering that half or more of the PR populace receives US government Food Stamps funded by the taxpayers of the rest of the US. But still. In the Soviet era, Belarus and the Ukraine were not allowed to have separate Olympic teams. All their athletes had to play for the Soviet team, even when in the United Nations they had separate votes as part of the Soviet bloc. And you know who's responsible for all this nonsense? Yep. You guessed it. SHEMP!!
As for men's basketball, starring two NBA stars against the rest of the world, the US lost to Puerto Rico yesterday. Which is very odd, considering that PR is PART of the US! Does no one else find this disturbing? Why not the US vs. Florida in football? Florida would win. I've been puzzling over the autonomy of PR in basketball since I've been watching Olympic sports. I suppose it's an outgrowth of the move for independence, which has been soundly rejected by the Puerto Riqueno populace every time it's been voted on. And for good reason, considering that half or more of the PR populace receives US government Food Stamps funded by the taxpayers of the rest of the US. But still. In the Soviet era, Belarus and the Ukraine were not allowed to have separate Olympic teams. All their athletes had to play for the Soviet team, even when in the United Nations they had separate votes as part of the Soviet bloc. And you know who's responsible for all this nonsense? Yep. You guessed it. SHEMP!!
Monday, July 26, 2004
On the Lighter Side
Measurement. It's such an annoyance. The Metric Maniacs insist that a system invented during the French Revolution is clearly superior to the English system, based, as far as I can determine, on the size of various parts of the human body. Let's see, which is more universal, easier to understand? One ten millionth of the distance between the North Pole and the Equator along the Greenwich meridian or the size of my thumb?
I was watching this documentary about the feasibility (see http://denbeste.nu/) of a manned Mars mission, when I started thinking, OK, so this is it. We're going to the stars. For thirty years it's been really hard to actually believe it was going to happen.
But when we're out on Aldebaran a thousand years from now why should we be using a system of measurement based on a more or less random distance on a third-rate planet in a mediocre solar system in an average galaxy? OK, I've been reading Stephen Hawking, too. So English would be better. If we still have thumbs and feet. But maybe we won't.
So why not adopt a measurement system based on something that won't vary no matter where in the universe we go? I'm talking about light. The speed of light, that is. The light year is used extensively right now. It's neither metric nor English. Its only not universal because of that "year" thing. Why the time it takes for a somewhat average planet - etc. - to go around a mediocre star is relevant will not be apparent to our descendants on Aldebaran. A light year is of course a bit lengthy to be useful for cutting cloth or constructing football fields. But that's where exponents can come in handy. We can use an appropriate fraction of a light year to represent a convenient unit of length. Cloth, lumber or licorice can be measured as a fraction that is universal, at least for observers in a similar frame of reference.
Measurement. It's such an annoyance. The Metric Maniacs insist that a system invented during the French Revolution is clearly superior to the English system, based, as far as I can determine, on the size of various parts of the human body. Let's see, which is more universal, easier to understand? One ten millionth of the distance between the North Pole and the Equator along the Greenwich meridian or the size of my thumb?
I was watching this documentary about the feasibility (see http://denbeste.nu/) of a manned Mars mission, when I started thinking, OK, so this is it. We're going to the stars. For thirty years it's been really hard to actually believe it was going to happen.
But when we're out on Aldebaran a thousand years from now why should we be using a system of measurement based on a more or less random distance on a third-rate planet in a mediocre solar system in an average galaxy? OK, I've been reading Stephen Hawking, too. So English would be better. If we still have thumbs and feet. But maybe we won't.
So why not adopt a measurement system based on something that won't vary no matter where in the universe we go? I'm talking about light. The speed of light, that is. The light year is used extensively right now. It's neither metric nor English. Its only not universal because of that "year" thing. Why the time it takes for a somewhat average planet - etc. - to go around a mediocre star is relevant will not be apparent to our descendants on Aldebaran. A light year is of course a bit lengthy to be useful for cutting cloth or constructing football fields. But that's where exponents can come in handy. We can use an appropriate fraction of a light year to represent a convenient unit of length. Cloth, lumber or licorice can be measured as a fraction that is universal, at least for observers in a similar frame of reference.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Mountain of lies
I'm awed by the mountain of lies the political campaign has thrown up, almost all on the Democratic side, although if the Republicans started talking about the War on Some Drugs, they would add to the heap. But no one talks about the WOSD these days. Does that mean the war's lost or everyone's given up or the war's won and no one cares?
Michael Moore and Leni Riefenstahl. Both won awards from the French:
see Triumph des Willens
Moore lies intentionally and continuously, by implication and outright. Riefenstahl was just going along with the Nazis because she wanted to make films.
The lies will form an avalanche and bury their sponsors eventually. But will it collapse before the election or after? I've come to the conclusion that a Kerry presidency would be a great opportunity for the Republicans to consolidate their control of the Congress and would be a disaster for Hillary Clinton's hopes for 2008. So not so bad. But Bush's speech yesterday makes me think he's going to turn up the heat. Also, Theresa appears to be cratering. So maybe now it gets to be fun.
Got a truck. Got a W04 sticker for the back window of the truck. Funny not having a back seat. At least I have a cool silver tool box and a plastic bedliner.
I'm awed by the mountain of lies the political campaign has thrown up, almost all on the Democratic side, although if the Republicans started talking about the War on Some Drugs, they would add to the heap. But no one talks about the WOSD these days. Does that mean the war's lost or everyone's given up or the war's won and no one cares?
Michael Moore and Leni Riefenstahl. Both won awards from the French:
see Triumph des Willens
Moore lies intentionally and continuously, by implication and outright. Riefenstahl was just going along with the Nazis because she wanted to make films.
The lies will form an avalanche and bury their sponsors eventually. But will it collapse before the election or after? I've come to the conclusion that a Kerry presidency would be a great opportunity for the Republicans to consolidate their control of the Congress and would be a disaster for Hillary Clinton's hopes for 2008. So not so bad. But Bush's speech yesterday makes me think he's going to turn up the heat. Also, Theresa appears to be cratering. So maybe now it gets to be fun.
Got a truck. Got a W04 sticker for the back window of the truck. Funny not having a back seat. At least I have a cool silver tool box and a plastic bedliner.
Monday, June 07, 2004
Reagan and stupidity
I never liked Reagan. Mostly because he just had to be a stupid actor but he turned out to be right about most everything. That's really annoying. Lileks has a good summary of the situation in today's Bleat. I voted for Carter in 1976. In 1980, because Carter never came through on his promise of zero-based budgeting, I didn't vote. That was the beginning of my Harry Browne-inspired "there's no point in voting" period. As Lileks remembers:
Then when the wall fell in 1989 and it obviously had something to do with the stances Reagan took, I was so ashamed of myself. I mean, the Berlin Wall. I remember when it went up in 1961, I was twelve. The wall became a permanent part of the world. It was the concretization (!) of the Iron Curtain. Which would never go away. And then all of a sudden there it was, gone. Something was going on which I couldn't understand. What blows my mind today is that anyone could live through all that and not realize that they didn't understand anything. And reexamine their political assumptions. Then the Gulf War and twelve years of ineffective Cartering around. Then 9-11. Then Bush actually does something about it. How can anyone not love it? Or at least give it a chance? The point is that freedom is something tangible, as real as a good meal. Something everyone can learn how to enjoy.
I never liked Reagan. Mostly because he just had to be a stupid actor but he turned out to be right about most everything. That's really annoying. Lileks has a good summary of the situation in today's Bleat. I voted for Carter in 1976. In 1980, because Carter never came through on his promise of zero-based budgeting, I didn't vote. That was the beginning of my Harry Browne-inspired "there's no point in voting" period. As Lileks remembers:
We didn’t hate Reagan; we viewed him with indulgent contempt, since he was so obviously out of his depth. I mean, please: an actor? As president?
Then when the wall fell in 1989 and it obviously had something to do with the stances Reagan took, I was so ashamed of myself. I mean, the Berlin Wall. I remember when it went up in 1961, I was twelve. The wall became a permanent part of the world. It was the concretization (!) of the Iron Curtain. Which would never go away. And then all of a sudden there it was, gone. Something was going on which I couldn't understand. What blows my mind today is that anyone could live through all that and not realize that they didn't understand anything. And reexamine their political assumptions. Then the Gulf War and twelve years of ineffective Cartering around. Then 9-11. Then Bush actually does something about it. How can anyone not love it? Or at least give it a chance? The point is that freedom is something tangible, as real as a good meal. Something everyone can learn how to enjoy.
Wednesday, June 02, 2004
Sounds familiar
A news story about Jose Padilla, a traitor who worked on bombing US apartment buildings, reminded me of stories during the Russians' little problems with Chechnya. Weren't something like 500 or more Russians killed by Chechnyan (Muslim) terrorists blowing up buildings around Russia? And didn't these terrorists use exactly the same technique Padilla is accused of contemplating? That is, renting an apartment and filling the apartment with gas by opening the pipes and then lighting the whole building off with a timed bomb.
And if my memory serves, wasn't it mostly because of this horrific bombing campaign that the Russian military went into Chechnya, killing thousands and losing hundreds in Grozny alone? Why haven't I seen any reference to this similarity?
A news story about Jose Padilla, a traitor who worked on bombing US apartment buildings, reminded me of stories during the Russians' little problems with Chechnya. Weren't something like 500 or more Russians killed by Chechnyan (Muslim) terrorists blowing up buildings around Russia? And didn't these terrorists use exactly the same technique Padilla is accused of contemplating? That is, renting an apartment and filling the apartment with gas by opening the pipes and then lighting the whole building off with a timed bomb.
And if my memory serves, wasn't it mostly because of this horrific bombing campaign that the Russian military went into Chechnya, killing thousands and losing hundreds in Grozny alone? Why haven't I seen any reference to this similarity?
Thursday, May 27, 2004
It's obvious
The suicide rate in New Jersey is twice the homicide rate, according to a new study. This isn't surprising, since anyone who has seen any part of the rest of the world and finds himself trapped in New Jersey has no other realistic option than to commit suicide. The small number of murders is no doubt accounted for by the few native New Jerseyites who realize the nature of the hellhole they inhabit. The few who do will do anything, even murder, to get out.
The suicide rate in New Jersey is twice the homicide rate, according to a new study. This isn't surprising, since anyone who has seen any part of the rest of the world and finds himself trapped in New Jersey has no other realistic option than to commit suicide. The small number of murders is no doubt accounted for by the few native New Jerseyites who realize the nature of the hellhole they inhabit. The few who do will do anything, even murder, to get out.
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
The only boooks in the world
Thought I'd come up with a list of the only real books out there. It's odd to go into a bookstore and not see any great number of books, just a few here and there, separated by meaningless jumbles of typography on wasted paper. So I'll just give you authors' names. Not all the authors listed actually wrote a book every time they put words on paper but most of their production is real:
I'll add more as I think of them and perhaps someday figure out how to move the list into a permanent section of the site. Odd how few wrote after 1900, eh?
Thought I'd come up with a list of the only real books out there. It's odd to go into a bookstore and not see any great number of books, just a few here and there, separated by meaningless jumbles of typography on wasted paper. So I'll just give you authors' names. Not all the authors listed actually wrote a book every time they put words on paper but most of their production is real:
Rand
Hugo
Balzac
Adam Smith
Orwell
Carlyle
Stendhal
Asimov
Gogol
Dostoevsky
Voltaire
Simenon
Bernard Lewis
Raffaello Pumpelly
Benvenuto Cellini
Hayek
Vernon Howard
Bunyan
Lysander Spooner
Thomas Paine
I'll add more as I think of them and perhaps someday figure out how to move the list into a permanent section of the site. Odd how few wrote after 1900, eh?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)