Huh. Really. That should be interesting. And evolution is also "unscientific," you say? Really.
Well, at least it's nice when people tell you up front that they're retarded. I just hope whomever they are debating against is up to the challenge.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Bill Maher with one of the fired attornies
Bill Maher interviews Iglesias, the fired attorney from New Mexico. (Quick aside: I don't actually like Bill Maher all that much, but being on HBO, he has more freedom to interview whom he chooses and say what he wants, which is why I think you end up seeing him here more than he otherwise would be)
There isn't really any new information there, but it is an excuse to rant on the attorney firings. I think the issue is actually more subtle than it's made out to be. The original action, the firing of the attorneys, was indeed _not_ illegal. Technically, those are political appointees, and they can be dismissed (to use that cringe-worthy phrase) at the pleasure of the President. So what's the issue?
Well, at this point, there are two. The first is that top Justice Department officials lied...most recently under oath...when asked about the dismissals. That, and not the original firings, is potentially actionable. Gonzales lied to Congress. Period. He should be dismissed solely on that basis.
But, there's a deeper point. Even though firing the attorneys for political reasons is not illegal, it's part of a larger effort by the Bush administration to politicize every aspect of government, which is tantamount to destroying it. Yes, we have an adversarial two-party system, but at some level, certain jobs have to be independent and non-partisan in order for government to function at all. The GAO (Government Accountability Office) is a good example of this: we have to have some entity within government that can give impartial accounting information about government finances. It's fundamental to transparency. You can't have those guys living under the threat of being tossed on their asses because they bring up something the White House doesn't like. And, even though no one has been paying attention to them, the GAO has fairly consistently been presenting accurate reports that say Bush is bankrupting government. That information is important.
Similarly, federal prosecutors have to be free to execute the law without fear of retribution when those prosecutions potentially damage one party or the other. It's a fundamental piece of the rule of law. If you don't have that, then you have given the White House the ability to define the law by itself since an unenforced law is no better than no law at all, and you had better believe they are more interested in having their adversaries prosecuted than their own people. Is there any more fundamental way to un-blind justice?
The point is that the system breaks down if you don't have at least some pieces of the system operating in a non-partisan manner. We have checks and balances, but they have their limits. At some point, a sufficiently collusive group of people (e.g., a political party) can quite easily undermine them. Those checks and balances are merely speed bumps and obstacles in the way of government corruption; they are not walls, and they never will be. At some level, you cannot create a system composed of the same people that system tries to protect against that is infinitely resilient. In other words, Americans created a system of checks and balances to protect Americans. They created rules for themselves. And just as they created those rules, they can, with sufficient effort and organization, circumvent, ignore, or otherwise obviate those rules. They are bound by them only insofar as they are willing to be bound by them. The Bush administration has been the most frighteningly vivid example of that this country has, I think, yet seen, and that's a large part of why he is the worst and most dangerous President we've ever had. That he's an arrogant idiot only makes matters worse.
So, can the prosecutors be legally dismissed for political reasons? Can those positions be legally politicized? Sure. But it's crossing a very, very dangerous line to do so, and it's good that someone is screaming about it.
There isn't really any new information there, but it is an excuse to rant on the attorney firings. I think the issue is actually more subtle than it's made out to be. The original action, the firing of the attorneys, was indeed _not_ illegal. Technically, those are political appointees, and they can be dismissed (to use that cringe-worthy phrase) at the pleasure of the President. So what's the issue?
Well, at this point, there are two. The first is that top Justice Department officials lied...most recently under oath...when asked about the dismissals. That, and not the original firings, is potentially actionable. Gonzales lied to Congress. Period. He should be dismissed solely on that basis.
But, there's a deeper point. Even though firing the attorneys for political reasons is not illegal, it's part of a larger effort by the Bush administration to politicize every aspect of government, which is tantamount to destroying it. Yes, we have an adversarial two-party system, but at some level, certain jobs have to be independent and non-partisan in order for government to function at all. The GAO (Government Accountability Office) is a good example of this: we have to have some entity within government that can give impartial accounting information about government finances. It's fundamental to transparency. You can't have those guys living under the threat of being tossed on their asses because they bring up something the White House doesn't like. And, even though no one has been paying attention to them, the GAO has fairly consistently been presenting accurate reports that say Bush is bankrupting government. That information is important.
Similarly, federal prosecutors have to be free to execute the law without fear of retribution when those prosecutions potentially damage one party or the other. It's a fundamental piece of the rule of law. If you don't have that, then you have given the White House the ability to define the law by itself since an unenforced law is no better than no law at all, and you had better believe they are more interested in having their adversaries prosecuted than their own people. Is there any more fundamental way to un-blind justice?
The point is that the system breaks down if you don't have at least some pieces of the system operating in a non-partisan manner. We have checks and balances, but they have their limits. At some point, a sufficiently collusive group of people (e.g., a political party) can quite easily undermine them. Those checks and balances are merely speed bumps and obstacles in the way of government corruption; they are not walls, and they never will be. At some level, you cannot create a system composed of the same people that system tries to protect against that is infinitely resilient. In other words, Americans created a system of checks and balances to protect Americans. They created rules for themselves. And just as they created those rules, they can, with sufficient effort and organization, circumvent, ignore, or otherwise obviate those rules. They are bound by them only insofar as they are willing to be bound by them. The Bush administration has been the most frighteningly vivid example of that this country has, I think, yet seen, and that's a large part of why he is the worst and most dangerous President we've ever had. That he's an arrogant idiot only makes matters worse.
So, can the prosecutors be legally dismissed for political reasons? Can those positions be legally politicized? Sure. But it's crossing a very, very dangerous line to do so, and it's good that someone is screaming about it.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
FHM's 100 hottest women
My usual complaint: many are too thin to be really sexy. It's a bad sign when your first instinct is less to want to sleep with them than it is to want to give them some soup.
I don't know about the women themselves, but I like the pictures of 2 and 3 better than 1.
I don't know about the women themselves, but I like the pictures of 2 and 3 better than 1.
...and the irony train keeps on chugging
Kids, stop freaking out about college. You don't have to go to the best college. You just have to say you went to the best college.
Girl porn stars-I-mean-gamers
The poses are priceless.
Topless on a couch reading an instruction manual? On the floor in a g-string sucking on a ring-pop? What? Not everyday occurrences?
Topless on a couch reading an instruction manual? On the floor in a g-string sucking on a ring-pop? What? Not everyday occurrences?
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
52 most influential video games
I would quibble with some of the ordering, but I think they have their bases covered. Why not the original Mortal Kombat, though?
Random thoughts at 3 am
- Pursuit of Happyness is a fucking ridiculous conservative wet dream. It's got everything: the rags-to-riches story, the ball-and-chain wife who won't support the breadwinner's dreams and aspirations, and, in a moment of utterly orgasmic conservatism, the IRS coming and whisking away Will Smith's last bit of savings just as he's about to get on his feet. All it's missing is the voice-over that says, "...and so, if poor people would just get off their asses and work really hard, they could end up millionaries like Chris Gardner if they really wanted to."
- I just went back through about 3/4 of my linear algebra text book, reminded myself what the fuck eigenvectors are, tried to wade my way through the professor's notes on dynamic chemical networks, and finally had to look up what the fuck a Jacobian was on wikipedia. My brain hurts. Math is hard!
- Side note 1: Math and science articles on wikipedia have the most remarkable (and infuriating) ability to be totally opaque to people not already familiar with the subject matter.
- Side note 2: I loved Harvard, but its math courses were fucking terrible for those of us who are not math majors. Which is to say: math courses were taught by math majors at Harvard who, being math majors at Harvard, were completely unable to think like, relate to, and finally teach us normal mortals. Going back through my textbook, I am realizing how little of linear algebra I actually understood.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Corruption in the Bush administration?! No!
Huh. The last president that could put up this kind of list of corrupt public officials was Ronald Reagan.
Your daily douchebag (4/23/07)
Just when I thought Newt Gingrich had escaped Daily Douchebag-ery, he comes up with this gem. Turns out liberals are responsible for the Virginia Tech shootings (just like Columbine). And that woman who drowned her two children. If only you'd voted Republican, they'd all still be alive!!!
(Dick.)
(Dick.)
Thursday, April 19, 2007
My brain hurts
So...no, ok, wait. Let me get this straight.
You want to deal with rampant crime...
...rampant _gun_ crime...
...with...with...a fucking zeppelin? A goddamn blimp?
Really?
A big, slow-moving target that is kept aloft solely by a thin fabric containing...air?
Air that would rush out really quickly if even a small piece of the fabric is punctured?
Really?
You want to deal with rampant crime...
...rampant _gun_ crime...
...with...with...a fucking zeppelin? A goddamn blimp?
Really?
A big, slow-moving target that is kept aloft solely by a thin fabric containing...air?
Air that would rush out really quickly if even a small piece of the fabric is punctured?
Really?
Procrastinatory comment on the Virginia Tech video
There's been a lot of hoopla (perhaps, even, a kerfuffle) regarding NBC's decision to air parts of the Shoot-y McNutball's ranting video that he sent before finishing off his little rampage. Some of the parents of the victims cancelled their interviews on Today in protest at its airing. NBC insists it "didn't make the decision (to air the video) lightly," and that it is in the public interest to understand the mind of a killer.
Which is horse-shit, frankly. From a moral standpoint, there is no fucking reason to air the video, and lots of reasons not to. The video, and the shootings, were one big attention-getting ploy, just like the Columbine shootings, and "completing the circle," as I believe Brian Williams admitted NBC was doing, just encourages other nutballs. At the same time, there's nothing in the video we really need to know. I'm not saying don't report that the video exists. All you need to say about it, though, is that "the shooter sent a rambling, incoherent video to NBC." That's it. He was clearly batshit insane. No one is under any delusion that he wasn't. So, we don't need the evidence that he is. A verbal description suffices. I don't see NBC airing the videos suicide bombers leave before blowing up markets in Baghdad, do you? Then why the fuck is it necessary to view this video?
All that said, I find it very unlikely that someone wouldn't ultimately have gotten their hands on it and at least leaked it to the Internet if not some other sleazeball network like Fox, so it's not like the video would have been quelled. I understand that. So, in that sense, NBC's gesture would have been ultimately futile, so they might as well show it. I'm just saying that it is basically immoral for anyone to show the video even though pragmatically somebody will. I mostly wish NBC would just come clean and say, "Yeah, we probably shouldn't air it, but you'll see it anyway, so here it is." None of this horse shit about public interest.
In other news, man is Alberto Gonzales a douchebag. I hope to god he gets what's coming to him, namely, a boot on his ass. What a stubborn prick to not resign when everyone has made it perfectly clear they don't want him around. No wonder Bush likes him.
With that and the calls for Wolfowitz to resign from the World Bank, the Bush administration really has become a farce at this point.
Which is horse-shit, frankly. From a moral standpoint, there is no fucking reason to air the video, and lots of reasons not to. The video, and the shootings, were one big attention-getting ploy, just like the Columbine shootings, and "completing the circle," as I believe Brian Williams admitted NBC was doing, just encourages other nutballs. At the same time, there's nothing in the video we really need to know. I'm not saying don't report that the video exists. All you need to say about it, though, is that "the shooter sent a rambling, incoherent video to NBC." That's it. He was clearly batshit insane. No one is under any delusion that he wasn't. So, we don't need the evidence that he is. A verbal description suffices. I don't see NBC airing the videos suicide bombers leave before blowing up markets in Baghdad, do you? Then why the fuck is it necessary to view this video?
All that said, I find it very unlikely that someone wouldn't ultimately have gotten their hands on it and at least leaked it to the Internet if not some other sleazeball network like Fox, so it's not like the video would have been quelled. I understand that. So, in that sense, NBC's gesture would have been ultimately futile, so they might as well show it. I'm just saying that it is basically immoral for anyone to show the video even though pragmatically somebody will. I mostly wish NBC would just come clean and say, "Yeah, we probably shouldn't air it, but you'll see it anyway, so here it is." None of this horse shit about public interest.
In other news, man is Alberto Gonzales a douchebag. I hope to god he gets what's coming to him, namely, a boot on his ass. What a stubborn prick to not resign when everyone has made it perfectly clear they don't want him around. No wonder Bush likes him.
With that and the calls for Wolfowitz to resign from the World Bank, the Bush administration really has become a farce at this point.
Your daily douchebag (4/19/07)
You know, I have to resist the urge to continuously give Daily Douchebags to Jack Thompson, but I think he merits it in this case. Just watch the video.
God, he really is such a douchebag. And he has no idea what he's talking about. And the media keep giving him air time.
God, he really is such a douchebag. And he has no idea what he's talking about. And the media keep giving him air time.
Fucking cyclists
Living in Seattle, I am developing a serious loathing for cyclists, particularly the fuckers who drive at 10 mph in the middle of the road as if they're cars.
You blew yourself up...growing weed?
How much of a fuck-up do you have to be to blow yourself up growing marijuana?? It's a goddamn _plant_, for fuck's sake. When's the last time you lit a match around a tulip and had it fucking _explode_? I don't think I could blow myself up growing weed if I _tried_.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
The dance of DNA!
Oh, you gotta love the 60s. Only that decade could think that an interpretive dance representing DNA biochemistry would be a good idea.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
TV shows that need to go
I actually agree with this list of 5 tv shows that need to go. 24 is hopelessly stale. Lost, well, lost its mystique a long time ago and has just become annoyingly vague. ER and Simpsons are far past their prime. And did we even need to say anything about the plethora of CSIs?
Monday, April 16, 2007
How to win at rock, paper, scissors
Wow...so much for Nash equilibrium.
Actually a fascinating study in psychology as much as anything...
Actually a fascinating study in psychology as much as anything...
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Maher on the attorney firing scandal
Oh, this video clip does my heart good. Not as good as actually having competent people in government, but good...
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Friday, April 13, 2007
Google buys DoubleClick
At least this acquisition makes fucking sense! My only question is why it didn't happen earlier...I bet the price tag would have been cheaper.
Your daily douchebag (4/13/07)
Apparently your Daily Douchebags are coming rapid fire...
Today's Daily Douchebag is giving a short (but temporary, I assure you) break to the far right and tipping its ignominious hat to none other than the Democratic National Committee. In their infinite wisdom (after such genius moves as putting two of the least electable men in successive elections against W), they have seen fit to appoint Ms. Jenni Engebretsen as Deputy CEO for Public Affairs for their upcoming convention in Denver.
Now, you don't know ol' Jenni, but as soon as I tell you that she is the Director of Communications for the RIAA, it should become clear whence this here Daily Douchebag comes. As the article points out, the RIAA handily beat out such powerhouses as Walmart and Halliburton for the title of "Worst Company." So it seems...I dunno...odd...that the DNC would hire someone so clearly proficient at alienating as many people as humanly possible as one of their chief PR people.
What's next? David Duke as liason to the Congressional Black Caucus?
Today's Daily Douchebag is giving a short (but temporary, I assure you) break to the far right and tipping its ignominious hat to none other than the Democratic National Committee. In their infinite wisdom (after such genius moves as putting two of the least electable men in successive elections against W), they have seen fit to appoint Ms. Jenni Engebretsen as Deputy CEO for Public Affairs for their upcoming convention in Denver.
Now, you don't know ol' Jenni, but as soon as I tell you that she is the Director of Communications for the RIAA, it should become clear whence this here Daily Douchebag comes. As the article points out, the RIAA handily beat out such powerhouses as Walmart and Halliburton for the title of "Worst Company." So it seems...I dunno...odd...that the DNC would hire someone so clearly proficient at alienating as many people as humanly possible as one of their chief PR people.
What's next? David Duke as liason to the Congressional Black Caucus?
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Your daily douchebag (4/11/07)
Today's Daily Douchebag is not so much an individual as an organization: the Florida legislature. Why? Upset that the University of Florida had the audacity not to give Jeb Bush an honorary degree, they've forced the university to rename its education school the "Jeb Bush School of Education."
Well done. You know you can be proud of your state when the legislature spends time and taxpayer dollars on a bill that serves no other purpose than to be petty and vindictive. While we're at it can we go ahead and rename the New York Stock Exchange the Ralph Nader Hall of Commerce? Would that be cool?
(God, I hate Florida. That fucking state can't sink into the Atlantic fast enough, as far as I'm concerned. It would do my soul good to see a sea of walkers and mouse ears slowly bubble and submerge into the shadowy depths...)
Well done. You know you can be proud of your state when the legislature spends time and taxpayer dollars on a bill that serves no other purpose than to be petty and vindictive. While we're at it can we go ahead and rename the New York Stock Exchange the Ralph Nader Hall of Commerce? Would that be cool?
(God, I hate Florida. That fucking state can't sink into the Atlantic fast enough, as far as I'm concerned. It would do my soul good to see a sea of walkers and mouse ears slowly bubble and submerge into the shadowy depths...)
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Monday, April 09, 2007
The little known Alameda-Weehawken Burrito Tunnel
"...The success of the burrito tunnel has encouraged no end of imitators - whether the Reagan-era attempt to construct an intracoastal barbeque pipeline, the perennial political deadlock over allowing tomatoes in the Northeastern Chowder Viaduct, or the recent fiasco of high-speed BagelRail."
Oh...oh...my side hurts. That so makes my day!
Oh...oh...my side hurts. That so makes my day!
OS X keyboard shortcuts
This blog entry is more for me than anything else. Y'all can go fuck yourselves.
http://creativebits.org/keyboard_shortcuts_in_os_x
http://creativebits.org/keyboard_shortcuts_in_os_x
Weirdest music videos
There are some doosies. I added Kenna's "Hell Bent" because, well, it's weird. And depressing.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
"Oh shit!" moments
15 great "Oh shit!" moments in movie history.
Not for the faint hearted.
Also, raise your hand if you're procrastinating wildly on all your work. Anybody else? Anybody?
Not for the faint hearted.
Also, raise your hand if you're procrastinating wildly on all your work. Anybody else? Anybody?
What happens when a world-class violinist plays in the DC subway?
Very little, apparently.
You know, I find the tone of the piece infuriating. It is the worst kind of elitist horse shit. The article spends its time being shocked...shocked!...that people in the subway wouldn't take note of the great violin master playing before them. Dizzied by this revelation, they seek solace in the high-minded explanations of Hume and Kant.
What snobs! Why is it so surprising that context is so important? Is it really so shocking that there isn't an inherent worth in the artist's performance independent of venue? Can you not wrap your elitist little heads around the fact that when you pay $100 per seat at the music hall, you're paying just as much for the experience of paying $100 to listen to a musician respected by people you want to be respected by as you are paying to listen to the musician him/herself? Do you really not understand that it's a social exercise and a ritual of your class more than it's the "pinnacle" of music in some supernaturally objective way?
I've never seen any difference between people going to a classical music concert and people going to a Dave Matthews Band or even a Korn concert. Beauty really is in the ear of the beholder. Art is equivalent to entertainment, and the enjoyment of the audience is the _only_ thing that matters. To believe the things you enjoy are fundamentally better in some arbitrarily defined way is arrogance of the highest order. Most of the time what you mean is the _kind of people_ who enjoy a particular kind of art are somehow inferior rather than the art itself is inferior, and it should be obvious that that is just another means for one group of people to differentiate and judge another group.
So you know what? The next time you accost someone for not "appreciating" classical, or jazz, or opera, remember that you're no different from that red state neanderthal railing against "east-coast" liberals. You're both just judging people you don't know because they're not like you.
You know, I find the tone of the piece infuriating. It is the worst kind of elitist horse shit. The article spends its time being shocked...shocked!...that people in the subway wouldn't take note of the great violin master playing before them. Dizzied by this revelation, they seek solace in the high-minded explanations of Hume and Kant.
What snobs! Why is it so surprising that context is so important? Is it really so shocking that there isn't an inherent worth in the artist's performance independent of venue? Can you not wrap your elitist little heads around the fact that when you pay $100 per seat at the music hall, you're paying just as much for the experience of paying $100 to listen to a musician respected by people you want to be respected by as you are paying to listen to the musician him/herself? Do you really not understand that it's a social exercise and a ritual of your class more than it's the "pinnacle" of music in some supernaturally objective way?
I've never seen any difference between people going to a classical music concert and people going to a Dave Matthews Band or even a Korn concert. Beauty really is in the ear of the beholder. Art is equivalent to entertainment, and the enjoyment of the audience is the _only_ thing that matters. To believe the things you enjoy are fundamentally better in some arbitrarily defined way is arrogance of the highest order. Most of the time what you mean is the _kind of people_ who enjoy a particular kind of art are somehow inferior rather than the art itself is inferior, and it should be obvious that that is just another means for one group of people to differentiate and judge another group.
So you know what? The next time you accost someone for not "appreciating" classical, or jazz, or opera, remember that you're no different from that red state neanderthal railing against "east-coast" liberals. You're both just judging people you don't know because they're not like you.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
God is a prick
Don't believe the hype. God fucked up way more people than Satan ever did.
Personally, I think God just has a better PR crew.
Personally, I think God just has a better PR crew.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
You did what with dad's ashes?
Wow. I...really got nuthin' on this one. I keep trying to think of a clever quip, and all I'm left with is the original headline.
How to end your career in a blaze of glory
I'm pretty sure this would be roughly day 2 of Nick's career as an elementary school principal.
Meat Cake
You thought George Carlin was kidding when he talked about meat cake. No, dear friends...she is real!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)