 |
Sunday, February 22, 2004 |
--------------------
Run Ralph, Run!
Okay, the more I think about Nader getting in the race, the more sense it actually makes to me. Yes, you read that right. The first thing to understand is that Nader deciding to be in the race today is... [The Truth Laid Bear]
I must have read a dozen different theories today on why Ralphy's running. Of course I think it must be the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy running the show. I like the thought that we members of the VRWC have the power to do anything we want! That's what they say about us so it must be true....right?
I heard in a discussion today that he is such an honest man and that's why he could never be in politics. Has anyone thought to ask him why he's running? If he's so damn honest then we would have to believe his answer....right? Give me a freaking break people! CP
8:58:52 PM 
|
|
--------------------
AND PEOPLE WONDER WHY THE NEW YORK TIMES HAS CREDIBILITY ISSUES?
This looks suspiciously like the same quote, recycled and relabeled. But thanks to the Internet, we can fact-check your ass. (Originally spotted here, with what I think is an appropriate comment: "Shame on the NYTimes....but then, it says alot that they have to keep interviewing the same guy over and over for different stories, to gather the right soundbite.") Or, more likely, recycling the original quote in a different story.
And as for relabeling the source guy from "independent" to "Republican" to fit the slant of the story, well, that's pretty lame -- especially as the stories are by the same reporter. [instaPundit]
It's not just the NYTimes. The LATimes could give them a real run for the money on lack of credibility. CP
11:46:55 AM
|
|
--------------------
The Whining has begun!
I thought he said "Bring it on". Then he complains? Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry accused President Bush on Saturday of using surrogates to attack his military service in Vietnam and his subsequent activism against that war. Guess what Boy Kerry, you'll have to explain a whole... [Left Coast Conservative]
11:40:51 AM
|
|
---------------------
Aldous Huxley "An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex." [Quotes of the Day]
That's the first time I've been called an intellectual! CP
11:30:43 AM
|
|
--------------------
Linux servers hacked more often, ITFacts.biz says.
The feed from AlwaysOn tells me that Linux servers are hacked more frequently than Windows servers are. [The Scobleizer]
No way! I'm shocked I tell you, shocked! How many years have I been saying this now? The weenies who wrote the code for the Linux servers made sure to keep a pocket full of keys for themselves. Anytime they want to walk in and rummage around they just insert key and turn. Never any sign of forced entry. These guys have been reading your email forever. Wake up people! CP
3:28:14 AM
|
|
--------------------
Interesting SUV safety article
Over at Jim Moore's feed I found this excellent article by Gladwell about the safety (or lack thereof) of SUVs and why Americans keep buying them.
I've given up in trying to correct the stupidity of my friends (stupidity in this context is the lack of ability to apply any risk analysis to their lives). I have never met one of my brother-in-laws, for instance. Why? He lives in London, England. He won't fly. He's afraid of flying. But he drives. Let's see, you're 1000 times more likely to die in a car than in a plane accident. If he's afraid of flying he should absolutely be freaked out about driving. But he drives a bus.
Another friend recently told me his family had given up beef. Why? Because of the mad cow disease. Let's see. How many people have died? Zero. How many people have gotten sick. Zero. But he does things every day that put his family at risk of death and destruction.
Our buying behavior is really weird. What's really bad, though, is our tax policy. That's really what got this SUV craze going. Over in Europe they tax gas. Any wonder why they are driving more fuel efficient cars there? [The Scobleizer -- Celebrating the Geek lifestyle]
3:18:08 AM
|
|
--------------------
For too many blacks (African American is just too unwieldy), ‘Afrocentrism’ means “I thumb my nose at Western culture.” It’s a rejection of white people, not an embrace of something else that lives and breathes. It’s a way to punish America for mistreating us by pretending to opt out while availing themselves of every morsel of their American, Western rights and benefits.
3:12:33 AM
|
|
--------------------
He collected three Purple Hearts but has no limp. All his injuries were so minor that he lost no time from duty. Amazing luck. Or he was putting himself in for medals every time he bumped his head on the wheel house hatch? Combat on, the boats were almost always at close range. You didn't have minor wounds, at least not often. Not three times in a row. Then he used the three Purple Hearts to request a trip home eight months before the end of his tour. Fishy.
2:59:51 AM
|
|
--------------------
2/22/2004. Day By Day by Chris Muir
2:09:52 AM
|
|
--------------------
Kerry Runs From Vietnam Record
John Kerry's obsession with Vietnam long ago became a national joke, but let's take it seriously for a moment. Why does Kerry seem to think his service in Vietnam in the late '60s is the most important question facing the country in the mid-'00s?
The Democratic line is that Kerry's distinguished service in the Navy proves his character, and also insulates him from what Dems imagine to be Republicans' propensity to "question the patriotism" of Democrats. But another reason Kerry talks about Vietnam so much may be that he's on the defensive over his own Vietnam record. After all, Kerry isn't just a veteran; he was a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, an outfit that, for better or worse, was instrumental in undermining the American war effort.
These days Kerry talks a lot more about his "band of brothers" than about his antiwar activities, but yesterday CNN's Judy Woodruff asked him about the latter:
Woodruff: it's been reported that, well you're aware of this, Vietnam veterans [are] upset with the fact that when you came back from the war, you went to Capitol Hill, and you testified in so many words against the kinds of things that U.S. soldiers were doing over there--
Kerry: Yes, I did.
Woodruff: To the Vietnamese.
Kerry: Yes, I did.
Woodruff: They are saying, in effect, you were accusing American troops of war crimes.
Kerry: No, I was accusing American leaders of abandoning the troops. And if you read what I said, it is very clearly an indictment of leadership. I said to the Senate, where is the leadership of our country? And it's the leaders who are responsible, not the soldiers. I never said that. I've always fought for the soldiers.
Here's what Kerry said in his April 22, 1971, testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (link in PDF format; the excerpt begins on page 180, the second page of the file):
Several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. . . . They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.
They told the stories [that] at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned on the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.
It's true that elsewhere in his testimony Kerry accuses America's political leadership of giving short shrift to veterans. But this passage indisputably accuses soldiers of war crimes, and far from being an "indictment of leadership" for "abandoning the troops," it is an attack on the military leadership "at all levels of command" for complicity in the purported war crimes. [WSJ]
1:56:17 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2004 Lopsided Poopdeck.
|
|
|
Astronomy Picture of the Day 
