To the tune of Gordon Lightfoot’s “The Edmund Fitzgerald,” by the Capitol Steps.

I like it better than the original.

To the tune of Gordon Lightfoot’s “The Edmund Fitzgerald,” by the Capitol Steps.

I like it better than the original.

Tom Daschle says that he’s been getting threats, and it’s Rush Limbaugh’s fault.

Looks like, out of desperation, they dug out the playbook from 1995, after Oklahoma City and their recent loss of the Congress. They figure demonizing “right-wing talk radio,” and “angry white men” worked then, maybe it’ll work now.

Unfortunately for their strategy, it looks to me like the “angry white men” have a (D) after their names. Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore, Phil Donahue, Garrison Keillor…

“What happens when (radio talk show host) Rush Limbaugh attacks those of us in public life is that people aren’t satisfied just to listen,” the South Dakota Democrat explained. “They want to act because they get emotionally invested. And so, you know, the threats to those of us in public life go up dramatically, on our families and on us, in a way that’s very disconcerting.”

Simply amazing.

What does he call an “attack”?

Criticism? Pointing out actions that he’d prefer weren’t publicized? Describing his actual behavior?

First he wanted “campaign finance reform” so that no one other than media could criticize him before an election. Now he doesn’t want the media to be allowed to criticize him, or any other incumbent (at least not Democratic incumbents), either.

Ever.

Apparently he hates the First Amendment as much as he does the Second.

This sense of self importance would be laughable if it weren’t so frightening and pathetic. Just how stupid does he think we are?

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s a story that expands on it, and has a lot more quotes. Apparently he compared talk-radio listeners to “fundamentalists in other countries” (read Taliban/Al Qaeda).

There are some quoted comments from Rush as well, which parallel mine.

[Update on Thursday morning]

Bryan Preston expands on the theme.

Tom Daschle says that he’s been getting threats, and it’s Rush Limbaugh’s fault.

Looks like, out of desperation, they dug out the playbook from 1995, after Oklahoma City and their recent loss of the Congress. They figure demonizing “right-wing talk radio,” and “angry white men” worked then, maybe it’ll work now.

Unfortunately for their strategy, it looks to me like the “angry white men” have a (D) after their names. Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore, Phil Donahue, Garrison Keillor…

“What happens when (radio talk show host) Rush Limbaugh attacks those of us in public life is that people aren’t satisfied just to listen,” the South Dakota Democrat explained. “They want to act because they get emotionally invested. And so, you know, the threats to those of us in public life go up dramatically, on our families and on us, in a way that’s very disconcerting.”

Simply amazing.

What does he call an “attack”?

Criticism? Pointing out actions that he’d prefer weren’t publicized? Describing his actual behavior?

First he wanted “campaign finance reform” so that no one other than media could criticize him before an election. Now he doesn’t want the media to be allowed to criticize him, or any other incumbent (at least not Democratic incumbents), either.

Ever.

Apparently he hates the First Amendment as much as he does the Second.

This sense of self importance would be laughable if it weren’t so frightening and pathetic. Just how stupid does he think we are?

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s a story that expands on it, and has a lot more quotes. Apparently he compared talk-radio listeners to “fundamentalists in other countries” (read Taliban/Al Qaeda).

There are some quoted comments from Rush as well, which parallel mine.

[Update on Thursday morning]

Bryan Preston expands on the theme.

Tom Daschle says that he’s been getting threats, and it’s Rush Limbaugh’s fault.

Looks like, out of desperation, they dug out the playbook from 1995, after Oklahoma City and their recent loss of the Congress. They figure demonizing “right-wing talk radio,” and “angry white men” worked then, maybe it’ll work now.

Unfortunately for their strategy, it looks to me like the “angry white men” have a (D) after their names. Terry McAuliffe, Michael Moore, Phil Donahue, Garrison Keillor…

“What happens when (radio talk show host) Rush Limbaugh attacks those of us in public life is that people aren’t satisfied just to listen,” the South Dakota Democrat explained. “They want to act because they get emotionally invested. And so, you know, the threats to those of us in public life go up dramatically, on our families and on us, in a way that’s very disconcerting.”

Simply amazing.

What does he call an “attack”?

Criticism? Pointing out actions that he’d prefer weren’t publicized? Describing his actual behavior?

First he wanted “campaign finance reform” so that no one other than media could criticize him before an election. Now he doesn’t want the media to be allowed to criticize him, or any other incumbent (at least not Democratic incumbents), either.

Ever.

Apparently he hates the First Amendment as much as he does the Second.

This sense of self importance would be laughable if it weren’t so frightening and pathetic. Just how stupid does he think we are?

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s a story that expands on it, and has a lot more quotes. Apparently he compared talk-radio listeners to “fundamentalists in other countries” (read Taliban/Al Qaeda).

There are some quoted comments from Rush as well, which parallel mine.

[Update on Thursday morning]

Bryan Preston expands on the theme.

Jim Jeffords wants to be a Republican again.

Only if he gets to keep his chairmanship, though. What a two-timing weasel.

Why am I not surprised?

Jim Jeffords wants to be a Republican again.

Only if he gets to keep his chairmanship, though. What a two-timing weasel.

Why am I not surprised?

Jim Jeffords wants to be a Republican again.

Only if he gets to keep his chairmanship, though. What a two-timing weasel.

Why am I not surprised?

Americans, particularly young Americans, are appallingly ignorant of geography.

Ask young people to pick out Iraq on a map of the Middle East, and only 13 percent can locate it ? despite a barrage of headlines and broadcast reports about a possible war against President Saddam Hussein.

Oh, well. Perhaps in a year or so no one will be able to pick out Iraq on a map. At least an up-to-date one…

They’re finally realizing that nuking errant asteroids aren’t the best way to deal with them.

Improvements in detecting and understanding asteroids, in fact, are what is prompting the change of thinking toward a slow approach, which was exemplified by presentations at a NASA-sponsored workshop on asteroid hazards in September near Washington that “pretty much sent the nuclear weapon idea home packing,” said Dr. Erik Asphaug, a professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz and one of the workshop’s organizers.

I’ve only been saying this for over a decade…

I find the new notion of moving it by changing its albedo impractical as well, though. It’s not very predictable. I’d rather develop techniqes that actually allow us to manage and herd the things, so we can more easily avail ourselves of their resources.

I think the problems of “anchoring” a propulsion system to one are overstated. Worst case is you use a net, and pull, rather than push it. The exhaust can be angled off so it doesn’t hit the asteroid. There would be some cosine losses, but you’d use the asteroid itself for propellant, so engine efficiency wouldn’t be that critical anyway.