Dean Barnett is as unimpressed as I am with the election of Trent Lott as Minority Whip:
If there
Dean Barnett is as unimpressed as I am with the election of Trent Lott as Minority Whip:
If there
John Wixted says that Europe is an economic and demographic failure–a cultural evolutionary dead end:
What’s wrong with Europe? The same thing that was wrong with states that chose communism as an economic model, though to a lesser degree. The Europeans are not communists, but their generous social welfare state has moved pretty far in that direction. It is not an inherently evil economic approach — it might even be morally superior in some ways. The problem is that it just doesn’t work.
It is important for people to come grips with this reality because Western Europe is the embodiment of the liberal ideal. Even if you think that liberal thinking is morally superior, the empirical evidence would appear to suggest that it is not practical.
…The Europeans are driving off a cliff, but they don’t see it coming because they spend so much of their time reveling in their own moral superiority. I believe that, in their own minds, they are on the cutting edge of societal evolution (to borrow a phrase from Rush Limbaugh), but the forces of natural selection would appear to be working against them.
For those of you with HDTV, the Discovery Channel will be doing a live broadcast from space in a few minutes, at 11:30 Eastern time. This will be the first time ever that there’s been such a broadcast in HD And if you miss it live, it will be repeated at 9 PM.
[Watching]
Some random thoughts. They spend a lot of time up front justifying and defending a space station. The problem is that this is a straw man. Many critics of the program agree that we should have a space station (I think that we should have multiple ones). The issue is not a space station, but this space station.
Also, there are no stars. They obviously filmed this in a movie studio, with hidden wires on the floating astronauts… (that’s a joke, for those unfamiliar with my posting style).
The beginning is just the astronaut floating and describing experiments. Not that interesting a use of the medium, I think. Now they’re showing views out the window, which is much more useful.
Now they’ve gone back to interior views, and are showing astrofood. I’m not fascinated by this, but I guess a lot of people are. Hope they won’t demonstrate use of the hygienic facilities…
[A few minutes later]
OK, broadcast over. They needed to do more views of the earth below, which is really the feature attraction. I think there’s a market for a camera that does nothing except orbit the earth at this resolution and show it in all its seasons, weather and diurnal cycles. It’s almost like a living kaleidoscope.
[Update about half an hour after broadcast end]
Glenn agrees. Great (or some kind of) minds think alike, I guess:
It was pretty good, but it was the images of Earth from space that were really captivating — they came across as IMAX-like — and they didn’t show enough of those. The stuff from the station interior was okay, be we’ve all seen people eat in zero gravity before and the demonstrations weren’t especially exciting just because they were HD. I would have rather had half an hour of pictures of Earth from low orbit, with only minimal talking-head involvement.
I wonder if you could make money with a cable channel that just showed pictures from a low-earth-orbit satellite in HD? It would certainly be cool — bringing the “Overview Effect” down to Earth — though I don’t think the technology’s really there for that yet.
[Update]
I’d like to see HD of the view of this from space:
KFC Corporation today became the world
Ralph Peters says we have to take off the kid gloves in Iraq, if we’re to have any hope of pacifying it:
Our “humanity” is cowardice masquerading as morality. We’re protecting self-appointed religious executioners with our emphasis on a “universal code of behavior” that only exists in our fantasies. By letting the thugs run the streets, we’ve abandoned the millions of Iraqis who really would prefer peaceful lives and a modicum of progress.
We’re blind to the fundamental moral travesty in Iraq (and elsewhere): Spare the killers in the name of human rights, and you deprive the overwhelming majority of the population of their human rights. Instead of being proud of ourselves for our “moral superiority,” we should be ashamed to the depths of our souls.
Jonah Goldberg writes about institutionalized racism in the academy.
John Fund has the lowdown (and it’s pretty low) on potential incoming Majority Leader John Murtha:
Mr. Murtha has said his only interest in the purported Saudi sheiks’ money was that he hoped it would be invested in businesses in his district. But the full tape makes clear that Mr. Murtha was primarily interested in talking about such investments as a possible cover should he later decide to have the money transferred.
“And what I’m sayin’ is, a few investments in my district, a few you know, is big to me, to this guy apparently is not too big, to a couple of banks which would get their attention. And investment in a business where you could legitimately say to me–when I say legitimately, I’m talking about so these bastards up here can’t say to me, well, why, in eight years from now, that’s possible, we’d never hear a thing for eight years, but all at once, ah, some dumb bastard would go start talking eight years from now, ah, about the whole thing and say, ‘[expletive], ah, this happened,’ then he, then he, in order to get immunity so he doesn’t go to jail, he starts talking and fingering people and then the [expletive] all falls apart.”
The undercover FBI agent in the meeting then spoke up and said “You give us the banks where you want the money deposited.”
“All right” Mr. Murtha responded. “How much money we talking about?”
“Well, you tell me” replied the FBI agent.
A few moments later in the tape, Mr. Murtha continues his discussion of how “a business commitment” in his district would be structured: “A business commitment that makes it imperative for me to help him. Just, let me tell you something. I’m sure if–and there’s a lot of things I’ve done up here, with environmental regulations, with all kinds of waivers of laws and regulations. If it weren’t for being in the district, people would say, ‘Well that [expletive], I’m gonna tell you something this guy is, uh, you know, on the take.’ Well once they say that, what happens? Then they start going around looking for the [expletive] money. So I want to avoid that by having some tie to the district. That’s all. That’s the secret to the whole thing.”
…Crile reported that prior to Mr. Wilson’s arrival on the Ethics Committee, it had largely given Mr. Prettyman, the special counsel, a free hand in his probe. That quickly changed: “Before Prettyman could fully deploy his investigators to move on the Murtha case, he was informed that the committee had concluded there was no justification for an investigation.” The Ethics Committee chairman, Rep. Louis Stokes of Ohio, suddenly declared “This matter is closed.”
Mr. Prettyman, who had already likened the Ethics Committee to “a misdemeanor court faced with a multiple murder,” was furious at the dramatic change of course. He abruptly resigned his post the same afternoon the committee voted to clear Mr. Murtha. While Mr. Prettyman continues to refuse to discuss the case, he told Roll Call newspaper in 1990 that it would be “a logical conclusion” that he resigned over the committee’s exoneration of Mr. Murtha. Crile’s book notes that “a teary Murtha had confided to a colleague that Wilson’s effort had saved his life.”
Does Nancy Pelosi really think that this is the route to long-term power?
Phil Bowermaster (who’s not the man he once was) has a some musings on virtual children. His co-blogger responds.
Gerry Williams has a report from a space awards ceremony in San Diego, featuring Peter Diamandis and Burt Rutan.
Pet peeve–I wish that people would learn the difference between “risk averse” (correct) and “risk adverse” (incorrect).
Glenn has a column today on how democracy is like sex:
My thought has been that elections play the same role for the body politic that sex plays for the body physical: Every so often, the voters throw the rascals out, and vote in a new set of rascals, meaning that the special interest groups, lobbying outfits, etc., that parasitize the body politic have to adapt to a shifting target. As scientist Thomas Ray has said, one rule of nature is that every successful system accumulates parasites. The American political system has been successful for a long time.
It’s not perfect, of course — neither is sex, since parasites remain a problem — but it does mix things up and help prevent special-interest relationships from becoming too fossilized. When the Democrats come in, Republican interest groups lose influence, and vice versa. The question is, does it mix things up enough?
He goes on to suggest additional anti-parasitical measures, such as term limits, but I still think that a sunset amendment to the Constitution could be very powerful in limiting government (since the growth of government power is the culture medium for parasitism). If we could keep the rascals busy renewing (and rejustifying) old laws, they’d have less time for creating new ones, and rent seeking. Unfortunately, it’s probably infeasible, politically.
Jon Goff has an interesting post on deciding when to quit, a critical ability for success.
Is it always right to keep going and see any difficult task through to completion, no matter the difficulty? Or is it best sometimes to reevaluate and change course when the going gets tough? How do you know which situation is which?
One of the things I got hammered into me growing up was the power of determination. If you set your mind to it, the saying goes, there is almost nothing you can’t accomplish. Unfortunately, I’ve ran into several situations in the past which have made me wonder when it really is best to keep slogging through a tough problem, and when it truly is wisest not to keep slogging away at it, but to completely change courses.
In a sense, this is a trap into which NASA has fallen many times (Shuttle and ISS both being excellent examples, and Ares may be as well), but they are often forced by politics to forge ahead with bad ideas. This is one of the many reasons that we will have to privatize space in order to make much progress.
There’s probably a lesson here for the administration vis a vis Iraq as well–clearly, we’ll have to do something different. The problem is that now the different thing that the people in charge want to do is give up and claim defeat, instead of coming up with a way to win.