Bob Zimmerman says it wasn’t “rising.”
[Update at noon on Christmas day]
Half a century after shooting the picture, reflections from Bill Anders (who heartily endorsed my book at a NASA meeting a couple years ago).
[Bumped]
Category Archives: Media Criticism
Mike Griffin
For Secretary of Defense?
I agree that we need someone who understands the technology threat at the helm of the Pentagon. But I wonder how familiar Goldman is with Griffin’s actual record when I read “praise” like this:
The overriding strategic risk to the United States is the loss of our technological edge, and the Defense Department needs a leader with the vision and expertise to restore it. Michael Griffin would be an excellent choice. A first-rate physicist, Dr. Griffin headed NASA under the Bush 41 administration.
First, Mike knows physics, but I wouldn’t call him a “physicist.” He’s first and foremost an aerospace engineer (not that there’s anything wrong with that). The problem is that, during his tenure at NASA, he devastated the space R&D budgets and promoted Constellation, an attempt not to develop needed new technology, but to repeat Apollo (except this time “on steroids”) with decades-old technology based on Saturn and the Space Shuttle.
At the time he left the agency (unwillingly) in 2009, all that was being developed to get back to the moon was a rocket designed to carry a capsule into low earth orbit, with no serious plans for things like a lunar lander, and those items were far over budget, and slipping more than a year per year (one of the reasons that, almost a decade later, we remain dependent on the Russians for access to our own space station). Even if they’d succeeded, the planned flight rate would be very low, at ridiculously high cost.
Now, in theory, he could argue that he is now older and wiser, and learned his lesson from that, but that’s negated by the fact that he continues to support their successors, the SLS and Orion. So, if we need someone to restore our technological edge, it’s hard to make the case that he’s the right guy for the job.
[Update a while later]
OK, if Mike Griffin were SecDef, just what would he do, going on past performance? Would he propose a giant expendable combat aircraft, based on parts from F-15s and F-16s, that would fly once a year, and each service could take a turn?
Trump, Conservatives, And “Neocons”
Some intellectual history from Jonah Goldberg, on the demise of The Weekly Standard.
Republican “Control” Of The Senate
I do not understand why Republicans don’t push back on this media/Democrat (but I repeat myself) talking point:
BLITZER: We’re apparently in the same position we were a week ago. The president had, as you know, two years of Republican-controlled House and Republican-controlled Senate to get this done. To build that border wall. Why did he fail?
MILLER: Well, the House is voting as we speak o border security. The fight is only beginning. As you know, first of all, we’re talking about successful (ph) boarder security, this president has made unprecedented achievements in that area. But right now as we speak, we are rallying Republican lawmakers to try to get a bill out of the House. And the fundamental issue here is whether or not democrat will supply votes to pass border security or whether they’re going to push for open borders which…
The proper response to this nonsense should always be something like, “Wolf, Republicans did not control the Senate for the past two years. A party does not control the Senate for legislative purposes unless it has sixty votes. No party has controlled the Senate in the past decade except the Democrats, from 2009 through 2011, when they crammed the ObamaCare crap sandwich down the nation’s throat.”
Gaslighting
Some thoughts on the sad state of contemporary political discourse and freedom of expression.
My Lawsuit
I didn’t mention this at the time, but Mark Steyn has the latest absurdity. Yes, almost two years after our request for an en banc rehearing of the panel’s decision, we have to refile because they decided to amend the ruling with two footnotes.
The Paleo Diet
Forget it; go neolithic.
I’ve never been orthodox paleo. Basically, I’ve just cut way back on processed foods. I’m back to my college weight, my cholesterol is a little high, but the ratio is good, and my triglycerides are almost unmeasurable. I’m supposed to worry because both my parents died fairly young (father at 55, mother at 68) from coronaries, but they both were overweight, had terrible diets, and were inveterate smokers. Every time I check my arteries, no issues are found.
The Boring Company
I didn’t work up the gumption to go look at Elon’s tunnel last night, but Megan Geuss did. Most seem to have been less than whelmed.
[Update a few minutes later]
Elizabeth Lopatto took a ride, too.
[Afternoon update]
Gizmodo has a round up of pans:
Hopefully Musk and his engineers will be able to make the ride feel less like a dirt road sometime in the future, especially if they want to build this concept in Chicago, as they promised in a high-profile press conference with the mayor back in June.
But even if they make the ride more pleasant, where does that leave this transportation concept more broadly? There are plenty of underground highways in America. But they haven’t offered a very futuristic alternative. They’ve only delivered more single-family cars—which appears to be exactly what Elon Musk is putting in the pipeline.
Elon Musk has done some very impressive things with SpaceX and Tesla. But his futuristic Loop transportation system leaves a lot to be desired. Namely, the futuristic part.
Seems like the roll out was premature.
[Thursday-morning update]
Over at Popular Mechanics, a less critical review.
[Bumped]
The Stupidity Of Gun Buy-Back Programs
Kathleen Cairns, a WBFF Baltimore journalist, tweeted a picture of a woman who was surrendering a 9mm. She hoped to use the money from the program to buy an even bigger gun.
Good for her.
Carter Page
Ten pieces of evidence he’s the most diabolical Russian spy evar:
As of now, Carter Page hasn’t been charged with so much as lying to the FBI or filing a faulty tax return, let alone Russian spying. He endured the most intrusive, intimidating methods the government has at its disposal. He was the subject of media leaks. His reputation was destroyed. If he’s never charged with being a Russian spy, he’s either that slippery … or it would suggest that the top intelligence officials who targeted him were either incompetent or corrupt. It would seem to border on criminal.
I don’t think it “borders” on criminal.
[Update a few minutes later]
The results of the second interview of the corrupt James Comey. I’ve never seen such a disgusting display of arrogant sanctimony. And no, “Republicans” did not pay for the dossier. They initially hired Fusion GPS, but it was the Clinton campaign who paid for the dossier itself. I wonder if Comey really doesn’t know that?
[Noon update]
More thoughts from Neo-Neocon:
Here Comey is repeating MSM and Democratic talking points about Fusion which have been shown to be untrue. Republicans had zero to do with the funding of the dossier, as Comey either knows or should know if he’s at all competent. What he probably does know, however, is that Republican involvement is the fiction the MSM was pushing and that many many Americans probably believe that to be the case, so Comey’s answer will appear to make some sense to those people even though it is based on a falsity.
Comey’s lack of specific interest in who funded the dossier (if he really didn’t know and didn’t ask, which may or may not be the case) would have come from his need to get that investigation going and to use the dossier to jumpstart it no matter what. Why question its provenance if you’re already dedicated to using it despite the fact that Trump’s enemies paid for it, which should have made it highly suspect as a source?
Of course, it turns out that Trump’s oppponent’s campaign funded it, which if anything would make it even more suspect than if other Trump enemies had funded it. But to Comey, all of that was irrelevant (or at least he’d like us to think it was irrelevant). In his previous career, had he really lacked curiosity to that degree? I doubt it very much. But he’s a clever enough lawyer to use it as an excuse now. He’d prefer that we think him a fool rather than a knave, if he has the choice of shaping our opinion.
I say “knave.” The man is no fool, not by a longshot.
Knave indeed.