So says Ron Bailey. He’s right.

So says Ron Bailey. He’s right.

So says Ron Bailey. He’s right.

Over at the Speculist.

I know I’ve been dissing barsoomheads lately, but go read Phil’s interview with Bob Zubrin, to celebrate the opposition of the Red Planet.

Over at the Speculist.

I know I’ve been dissing barsoomheads lately, but go read Phil’s interview with Bob Zubrin, to celebrate the opposition of the Red Planet.

Over at the Speculist.

I know I’ve been dissing barsoomheads lately, but go read Phil’s interview with Bob Zubrin, to celebrate the opposition of the Red Planet.

I’ve heard three references today (from NPR this morning, from Greta on Fox, and from Cici Connally on Brit Hume’s show) that today is a “milestone,” because the number of US military casualties since President Bush declared major hostilities over is now equal to casualties in Iraq during the war itself.

Can someone explain to me why this is a significant number?

Two points.

First, to make such an equation is to engage in an exercise of irrational numerology. I can’t imagine why the number, or the ratio of the two numbers, is of any significance.

Second, it seems to me that, like Warren Buffet’s comparison of California with Nebraska property taxes, this makes exactly the opposite point from that intended. To wit, rather than implying that California’s taxes are too low, it really implies that Nebraska’s are too high. Similarly, for those who complain about the “high” number of deaths since the end of major combat ops (less than the murder rate of any major city in the US), it simply points out how low our casualties in the war itself were.

But leave it to the liberal…errrmm…excuse me, “progressive” media to attempt to make good news seem like bad…

That’s what the Space Frontier Foundation says (via NASA Watch/Spaceref, and Keith has a lot of good links on the subject, but unfortunately, he hasn’t upgraded his software yet to support permalinks…)