Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Stark naked
JimK has his latest Starkcast up and ready. Go and listen.
How likely is an earthquake?
Well, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) has put together a nifty little page showing the likelihood of an earthquake here in California as a color graph, updated daily.
Interesting items on the other side….
The Professor has noted some interesting things about our old friend, Andrew Sullivan. Here is an interesting quote:
“But while I think that what happened at Abu Ghraib was bad, and that it should be punished, and that Koran-flushing (if it had happened) would have been bad, though not torturous, I don’t think it’s terribly important compared to the war as a whole, and I think that it takes a peculiar perspective to make it emblematic of the war, and of the American military, which seems to be where Andrew is going these days, at least to judge—as he invites us to—by the volume of posts.”
Mr. Reynolds, let me explain.
I posted a large amount of entries about Mr. Sullivan since Istarted posting here at this blog. As a matter of fact, I have posted 31 entries having to do with Mr. Sullivan, including a couple fiskings and, what I believe to be a damning portrait of a man who says he is one way, but is actually another. Sully tries hard to come across as a libertarian/conservative, but is actually as much a big-government sociologist as any liberal or Religious Republican. He just wants the government to stay away from curtailing HIS rights, and to hell with the rights of others to do or say what they want to.
Actually, let me be more clear: He believes that the Bush government is morally wrong for not declaring gay marriage legal and ethical. Because of that, everything negative that has happened since that time is the fault of Bush and the Religious Right.
Andrew has no problem with the government imposing higher taxes, just as long as they don’t affect him (he does not drive, yet he supports a $.50 a gallon tax on gasoline), he supports court overthrowing of decisions voted on by the people (see every same-sex issue passed by the states in the last 2 elections).....he wants the government to legally sanction gay marriage so that HIS life is made whole, at least in his eyes, and to HELL with the rest of people.
Professor Reynolds says the following: “What people blog about is none of my business. Andrew seems to feel differently, and beyond that seems to have endorsed the “fake but accurate” defense of Newsweek’s reporting.” I would like to remind the Blogfather of something else Andrew the Bush-Hater posted....
“But the personal tone of Clarke’s attacks, the exaggeration, the political anti-war agenda of a man who lost his job under this president, cannot but undermine the man’s basic credibility. If he had written with less fire, if he had testified in a less partisan manner, if he had not embellished, he’d be a far more important witness. But he has done nothing that fatal to this administration, except give important credibility to the argument (an argument I find callow and too limited) that the war against Saddam and the war against terror were unrelated.....The president could have gone on television to take some responsibility for such a tragedy occurring on his watch; he could subsequently have looked the American people in the eye and explained his error on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and why he still believes he was right to make the decision he did. He could even now concede some errors in this war. Errors are inevitable. The mark of character is not refusing to recognize them, but acknowledging them and taking responsibility. But this administration has done precious little of it: on the deficit, on WMDs, on its continually flawed predictions of job growth. If the Bushies spent more time doing that, taking some responsibility for their sometimes forgivable failures rather than launching attacks on people like Dick Clarke and Paul O’Neill, they might be doing a little better than they are right now in the polls. People with something to hide lash out. And the more the Bushies lash out, the less people trust them.”
That was from late March of 2004. Translation: “Even though what Clarke is saying must be viewed as suspect, because he has a massive anti-Bush bias, we should believe what he is saying, because Bush is wrong.”
Sound Familiar? It should....it’s what AS is saying about the Newsweek story.
Wasn’t Sullivan supposed to be on some sort of excursion, with all the money he collected from his blegging?
Just happened to peek
I took a gander at my SiteMeter readout (at the bottom of the left column), and was mildly startled to realize how close the site is to 100,000 visitors. At the rate things are going (assuming you all don’t decide to find something else to do over the next two weeks), we should reach that milestone by late next week. Probably Thursday or Friday, I’m guessing.
Now I’m not doing anything goofy like asking you to speed that event by telling all your friends about it, I just thought it was interesting. (I’m weird about numbers like dat...)
It’s just a number, but I’m impressed. And it’s all due to you folks. Thanks. 