More candidates like this, please

Allen West is running for Florida's 22nd Congressional District seat in 2010...we need more men and women like this.

Obama breaks silence on Tiger Woods story

After two weeks, President Barack Obama has offered his views on the story everyone's talking about; the Tiger Woods sex scandal. Following is a transcript:

Well, now, uh, I don't have all the facts, but clearly Elin acted stupidly. She let that young billionaire just run around all over the place. I mean...what the heck was she thinking?

Asked if he would intervene personally to resolve the situation, the president said:

Uh, sure, why not? Maybe a round of golf at Andrews AFB between the three of us...sort of a golf summit. Or, hey, Elin's Swedish, right? Maybe a lutefisk summit in the Rose Garden?

Stupid crap that bugs me

Just caught a teaser for the upcoming local news show in which the anchor said "Pakistan" with the Obama-approved pronunciation "PAH-kee-stahn", and it made my eyelid twitch. I know it's a running gag on the right, but it bugs me beyond all reason.

Presumably they pronounce it that way because that's how a Pakistani would pronounce it, yet you never hear Obama or any of the other assclowns pronounce Afghanistan the way someone from that region pronounces it. For that matter, you never hear one of them pronounce "Germany" as "DOYTCH-lahnd".

Fucking poseurs.

Local music break

I haven't had time for blogging due to travel the last two weeks, so I'm going to ease back into it with something requiring less effort than the usual fare.

One of my favorite local bands is Honor By August, and this might be my personal favorite of their many great songs. "Johnny (Pass Me Another One)" is a poignant, heart-felt song and never fails to please when they play it at their shows.

The video up top is more or less the "official" video for the song. Below is another take on the song recorded when Honor By August played last month at the Colonial Tavern here in Fredericksburg. First, a little about this video.

A friend of ours, Young Devereaux, sits in on sax with the band just about every time they play here, and he joined them for "Johnny" that evening, and I'd recorded the whole show on a digital audio recorder I have which is great for capturing live performances. About a week later, Young mentioned to me that someone had evidently videotaped the show and put the "Johnny" track up on YouTube, but that the audio quality was pretty bad. More as an academic exercise than anything else, I downloaded a copy of the YouTube clip using savevid.com to see if I could marry up my audio track with the video. The clip below is the result.

Senate Tora Bora report: A politically-timed hit piece

The Democrat-controlled Senate Foreign Relations Committee is set to release a report [PDF format] tomorrow on the failure to capture Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora in December 2001. The report aims to place blame for the failure directly on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and theater commander at the time, Gen. Tommy Franks. Indirectly, the clear intent is to implicate former President George Bush in the failure.

The report details events and command decisions made during the December 2001 battle at Tora Bora during which "...it was clear that Osama bin Laden was within our grasp" and criticizes the decision not to insert a massive force in the area to capture or kill bin Laden. I agree, to a large extent, with those criticisms, more for the psychological message killing or capturing Bin Laden would have sent than for the long-term strategic importance of doing so. I disagree completely with the reports conclusions of the consequences of that failure.

The final section of the report beginning on page 19, titled The Price of Failure claims that failing to close the book on bin Laden is the reason we're still in Afghanistan today.

Osama bin Laden’s demise would not have erased the worldwide threat from extremists. But the failure to kill or capture him has allowed bin Laden to exert a malign influence over events in the region and nearly 60 countries where his followers have established extremist groups. History shows that terrorist groups are invariably much stronger with their charismatic leaders than without them, and the ability of bin Laden and his terrorist organization to recover from the loss of their Afghan sanctuary reinforces the lesson.

Eight years after its expulsion from Afghanistan, Al Qaeda has reconstituted itself and bin Laden has survived to inspire a new generation of extremists who have adopted and adapted the Al Qaeda doctrine and are now capable of attacking from any number of places. The impact of this threat is greatest in Pakistan, where Al Qaeda’s continued presence and resources have emboldened domestic extremists waging an increasingly bloody insurrection that threatens the stability of the government and the region. Its training camps also have spawned new attacks outside the region—militants trained in Pakistan were tied to the July 2005 transit system bombings in London and several aborted plots elsewhere in Europe.

This is complete and utter hogwash. Islamist extremists of the Al Qaeda ilk don't need bin Laden to be alive in order to propagate their violent ideology within and outside their region. In fact, as much as I'd have liked to see bin Laden's head on a pike (and still would), I'll go so far as to say that bin Laden's current disposition is preferable to having him dead or in US custody.

There's no shortage of charismatic ideologues in the ranks of the Islamist jihad movement. A dead or captured bin Laden would clear the way for one of them to replace bin Laden, which hasn't happened yet. In death, bin Laden would be a martyr revered above his own idol, Sayyed Qutb, whose writings to this day inspires Islamist extremists all over the world long after his death in 1966.

This report, timed to coincide with President Obama's unveiling of his long-delayed Afghanistan strategy, is nothing more than a politically-timed hit piece on the previous administration designed to give Obama cover with the political left, which opposes continued involvement in Afghanistan. Look for Obama to cite this report extensively when he gives his inevitable speech on his Afghanistan strategy.

Yes, Climategate DOES discredit climate research

The files and e-mail exchanges from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at University of East Anglia are damning in several respects. What's readily apparent to anyone reading objectively is that CRU systematically engaged in a practice to stifle peer review of their work. This is a fact and not subject to dispute, and by itself ought to be sufficient to summarily dismiss any reports or recommendations coming from CRU.

Also readily apparent is advocacy for a specific outcome of their work. Take it away, AoSHQ:

> >From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx]
> >Sent: 05 January 2009 16:18
> >To: Johns, Tim; Folland, Chris
> >Cc: Smith, Doug; Johns, Tim
> >Subject: Re: FW: Temperatures in 2009
> >
> >
> > Tim, Chris,
> > I hope you're not right about the lack of warming lasting
> > till about 2020. I'd rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office
> > press release with Doug's paper that said something like -
> > half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on
> > record, 1998!
> > Still a way to go before 2014.
> >
> > I seem to be getting an email a week from skeptics saying
> > where's the warming gone. I know the warming is on the decadal
> > scale, but it would be nice to wear their smug grins away.

Dammit...curse this global cooling! I want to wipe some "smug grins" off people's faces! Oh, and never mind the fact that 1998 was NOT the hottest year on record. That was 1934, but that hardly fits the anthropogenic global warming narrative. This reveals an emotional investment in a desired conclusion which is incompatible with objective, honest scientific inquiry.

As for CRU researchers deliberately manipulating data to fit their needs, it certainly appears that happened, but the evidence is - for now - less than conclusive. But what may be even worse than fudging the data is that...CRU evidently has no idea what their datasets represent.

First, a few things about that Fortran source code you've probably heard about. For the uninitiated, "source code" is the program code that a programmer actually types into a computer. It might look funny to someone who's not a programmer, but it's still readable by humans. The source code is then run through a compiler which converts the source code to machine-readable form for execution.

Fortran is a programming language whose name comes from "FORmula TRANslator". It's been around for a long time (I did a little bit of Fortran work in the mid-1980s back in my programming days when I had to do some complex life insurance rate calculations), and it's still commonly used by scientists in number-crunching applications. Unlike other programming languages, Fortran source code can be pretty cryptic, even to an experienced programmer. For this reason, it's common practice to extensively comment the source code (comments are ignored by the compiler) so that someone coming along later to make changes to the code can understand what the hell's going on. This is why the Fortran source code from CRU has those long-running comments sections. Like this one:

7. Removed 4-line header from a couple of .glo files and loaded them into Matlab. Reshaped to 360r x 720c and plotted; looks OK for global temp (anomalies) data. Deduce that .glo files, after the header, contain data taken row-by-row starting with the Northernmost, and presented as '8E12.4'. The grid is from -180 to +180 rather than 0 to 360. This should allow us to deduce the meaning of the co-ordinate pairs used to
describe each cell in a .grim file (we know the first number is the lon or column, the second the lat or row - but which way up are the latitudes? And where do the longitudes break? There is another problem: the values are anomalies, wheras the 'public' .grim files are actual values. So Tim's explanations (in _READ_ME.txt) are incorrect..

8. Had a hunt and found an identically-named temperature database file which did include normals lines at the start of every station. How handy - naming two different files with exactly the same name and relying on their location to differentiate! Aaarrgghh!! Re-ran anomdtb:

It doesn't take a programmer to read this and realize that the guy writing the code was faced with a bunch of climate data files, the structure of which was unknown. Picture opening up an Excel spreadsheet with column after column of numbers, and no column headers telling you what each column contains.

Think about all this as President Obama jets off to Copenhagen to discuss a global climate change treaty with other world leaders, and think about what Obama's climate czar, Carol Browner, had to say about the appalling evidence coming out of CRU:

Ms. Browner initially shrugged when asked about the e-mails, saying she didn't have a reaction. But when a reporter followed up, she said she will stick with the consensus of the 2,500 climate scientists on the International Panel on Climate Change who concluded global warming is happening and is most likely being pushed by human actions.

Wow. I'm sure glad that science is being returned to its rightful place in this administration.

Update: I can't believe I forgot to mention the conspiracy to circumvent FOIA requests.

Hot Air links. Thanks!

Retailers: "Won't you please help?"

Just an observation on this Black Friday in the midst of the depression recession recovery.

It hasn't always been the case that the news media obsessively covered the Christmas shopping season. I'm thinking maybe for the past 15-20 years or so. But in all that time, I don't think I ever heard someone say "Wow! We're selling crap like there's no tomorrow and we expect a record year!". Not once. Instead, every report is all doom and gloom with retailers seeing anything from "disappointing results" to "the worst Christmas retail season ever".

Now why do you think that might be?

Social climbers

If you've seen the story about White House party-crashers Tareq and Michaele Salahi, you've probably already seen this picture of the couple with VP Joe Biden. It's usually the one that accompanies the story. But the overreaching Washington socialites have a joint Facebook page (how weird is that?) with many more pictures from their illicit night at the White House.


Not satisfied to be seen schmoozing with the veep, they skipped right over his boss and went straight to the top for this picture with Rahm Emanuel, the real top dog in the White House.


Oh, wait...did I say Rahm Emanuel? Sorry. It was apparently some look-alike named Ron Emanuel. My bad.


Michaele's such an important figure, a few good men took time out from their duties to personally welcome her. Or so her Facebook page would have you believe.


Women of real substance and import have to stick together, you know. And a trend emerges...what does the right side of Michaele's face look like?

Later in the evening, Michaele and Joe got cozy.

The story was at first interesting only from a security perspective - how did two uninvited guests manage to crash a state dinner at the White House? - and I'm sure that between this episode and Biden's recent motorcade demolition derby, some folks over at the Secret Service are sweating bullets. But it keeps getting weirder.

Today's reports are that Michaele was being considered for an upcoming reality TV show "Housewives of Washington" on the Bravo channel and was followed around by a film crew all day while preparing for her big night out. I don't know about you, but whenever I hear about someone trying to get on a reality show, my immediate thought is "publicity whore".

As for their motivation for crashing this particular event, there's a clue on their Facebook page:

The America's Polo Cup & the United States Polo Team is looking forward to welcoming India in 2010 in the world championship polo matches on the DC National Mall

The Salahis are active in polo events and their Facebook page lists the Americas Polo Club as one of their employers. Wouldn't hurt to schmooze with some official representatives of India in advance of this event.

And what is wrong with Michaele's right side?

Update: I was looking for an article that gave the ages of these two, because one I saw yesterday (and can't find now) said that Tareq's age is variously given as 39 or 41. Sorry, folks, but I'm turning 50 next month, and there's no way I'm 8 or 10 years older than this guy. But CNN has this piece detailing some of their legal woes.

Too Jive CRU

jive –noun
1. swing music or early jazz.
2. the jargon associated with swing music and early jazz.
3. Slang. deceptive, exaggerated, or meaningless talk: Don't give me any of that jive!

Too Jive CRU...2 Live Crew...see what I did there? Yeah, I know...lame. I doubt anyone even remembers today what 2 Live Crew was. Anyhoo...

When I first heard that someone had hacked into the University of East Anglia (UK) Climate Research Unit (CRU) and posted something north of 60MB worth of files and e-mails, I thought it was no big deal...there'd probably be a bunch of indecipherable climate data files and incomprehensible e-mails talking about the indecipherable climate data. But the e-mails between Phil Jones discussing "tricks" for cooking the books and - worse - conspiring to conceal their methods and data from prying eyes and FOI requests were in plain enough English.

Ace has a great post up today summarizing the chronology to date, but his addendum at the end about climate models, to me, is one of the most damning things I've seen yet on the charlatanism that is climate research. It seems that the models used to predict future climate trends - yes, those models which politicians world wide are citing to tax the living shit out of everyone and reduce us to a hunter-gatherer society - can't even properly predict the past, which, as Ace quips:

...is unfortunately quite knowable, and so we can check their "predictions" against actual records.

They all fail. They all fail.

I'll just quote from the link the same part Ace quoted, because I'm lazy like that:

None of the multiple computer simulations used by a UN climate-change agency for assessments of global warming appears good enough to predict how India’s monsoon will behave, two Indian scientists have said.

The researchers examined 10 simulations of future climate scenarios used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and found none could reproduce correctly the behaviour of even 20th-century rainfall.

Not a single model could simulate realistically key features of the Indian monsoon...

In attempts to assess impacts of global warming, the IPCC considered 17 models of how climate would evolve as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rose. Some models predict more rainfall over India, but with great uncertainty.

“The models have very serious problems in simulating even 20th century monsoon patterns,” said Madhavan Rajeevan, a senior scientist at the National Atmospheric Research Laboratory, Tirupati, and a co-author of the paper.

“When a model (computer simulation) cannot even show with reasonable accuracy monsoon behaviour in the past, there’s a big question mark over its ability to predict future patterns,” Rajeevan told The Telegraph.

CRU is just too jive to be believed, too jive to get further grant money, too jive to continue operating.

Update: My reply to Charles in the comments about the programmer's remarks in the source code, because I think it's an important point:

Here's the scandal:
The guys writing the software to produce the climate prediction models don't know the structure of the data sets they're dealing with.

When taxes become punitive

This is sort of a repost of something I posted last year a few weeks before Barack Obama got elected. I usually don't repost old material, but I thought it timely given the Democrats' plans to levy punitive taxes on the wealthy to help fund ObamaCare. Here's the original:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers", he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?"
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

Of course, the idea that Obama the bartender would lower the cost of our beer is laughable, but the point about the "tenth man" remains. And as I've previously pointed out, when the tenth man gets sick of getting his ass kicked and quits the game, or there aren't enough tenth men to go around, the tax bill will start trickling down.

Hokey-pokey

Clay Jones, the editorial cartoonist at our local paper The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, runs a weekly caption contest in which he supplies a cartoon with an empty word balloon and readers submit caption suggestions. Readers vote on the top four or five entries, and the winner receives the completed original. This was my third winning entry this year.

Incidentally, Clay is also lead guitarist and front man for the local rock/punk/post-grunge/garage band Corporate T-shirt. Their debut album No Thanks To Hancock is available for purchase at the link. It rocks righteously and if you don't get it, you're a Commie. It's rumored that chicks swoon over him, but I've yet to see it for myself.

Sex toys of the deep

Deep-sea researchers claim to have discovered a treasure trove of sex toys, perhaps left behind by citizens of the lost city of Atlantis. Or maybe they just fell overboard from a Kennedy family yacht. We attempt to identify and catalog them here.

The Spade

"The Spade" is believed to have been intended for the beginner in sexual self-gratification. This device is "reversible" in that either end could be employed, depending on the experience level of the user, or the amount of stimulation desired.

The Day Tripper

"The Day Tripper" is thought to be a "fire and forget" type of self-gratification device. We believe the wing-like protuberances hold the device in place and the motion of the wearer throughout the day takes care of the rest.

His And Hers

"The His And Hers" is clearly intended for both men and women to enjoy (but probably not at the same time, unfortunately).

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

"Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" is apparently meant for only the most experienced user. Another reversible device, the user can choose which end to employ depending on the level of pleasure - or pain - desired. It can also be enjoyed (or endured, depending on the rock/paper/scissors outcome) by two at the same time.

OK, maybe I just made all that stuff up.

Ideological purity? No thanks. But...

Allahpundit at Hot Air reports on a recent poll which shows that 51% of Republicans would rather lose elections than win with party members who are less than ideological purists. Allah makes the fair point that this thinking could lead to long-term Democratic control of the executive and legislative branches:

The only way the right wins a majority is if the left screws things up so egregiously that even staunch conservatives are apt to beat centrist Democrats head to head. It’s a passive strategy, but it’s a strategy, I guess.

Like I said, it's a fair point. But what good is a Congress ruled by a Republican majority if that Congress is still passing craptastic legislation? Who cares if Republicans have an overwhelming majority if Congress is still pursuing cap & trade, government-run health care and excessive spending?

If one truly believes that conservative/libertarian policies are better for the country, then damn it, support candidates who advance those policies. This was the thrust of a brief exchange last night on Twitter between Allahpundit and Caleb Howe, who kicked it off with this Tweet linking to Allah's post:

Believing in things is stupid and you should stop it right away: http://bit.ly/G3tJz @allahpundit

To which Allah responded via re-tweet:

Lose with honor, conservatives RT @CalebHowe: Believing in things is stupid and you should stop it right away: http://bit.ly/G3tJz

That set Caleb off on this mini rant:

Principles. Petty pride. What's the difference. As long as there are more people with an R than a D, who cares how they vote? @allahpundit

The most important part of a ruling majority is the little letter in parentheses. Consensus on issues is a passé concern. Right, Dede?

Honestly, why do parties go to all this trouble of "planks" and "issues"? It's silly. Obviously the little parenthetical ID is what matters.

Cap and trade? Sure! Obamacare? Fine! Caucus with Dems? No problemo. Could you just use this little R logo? Sweet. We're solid. @allahpundit

My own ideology is closer to Allahpundit's (I think), but I have to agree with Howe on this. It does the "conservatarian" cause - and the country - no good if Republicans hold a majority but push legislation only a Democrat could love.

If we're right, and the Democrats' policies are in fact as bad as we say they are, Democrats will eventually succumb to a sort of political Darwinian process of natural deselection. The big question is what the extent of damage will be in the meantime.