It's still set on "KILL." (and so dies hope)
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
Similar incidents
The Political Animal is usually a good, solid read. Here he selects a random bit of bile coming from the right and dismantles it calmly, exposing the hypocrisy. Problem is, soon enough the rightards will produce another bit of trash. And another. And another. Truth doesn't matter to them. Only gaining advantage and trashing the opposition. How sad. How disgraceful. And it wouldn't be so bad if there were a regular counter to their bullshit, that got the same level of PR.
SIMILAR INCIDENTS, DIFFERENT RESPONSES.... To hear conservatives tell it, the White House's handling of the failed Christmas terrorist plot has been inadequate. President Obama, the Right has argued, waited too long to speak publicly about the incident, and hasn't taken the matter seriously enough.
Of course, the obvious response is probably the most effective one: Obama commented on the Abdulmutallab plot a lot faster than Bush responded to an identical attempted attack eight years ago.
But that doesn't fully capture the important and illustrative differences between the two responses.
The Abdulmutallab attempt was two weeks ago today. Over the course of these two weeks, President Obama has spoken publicly about the incident three times -- Dec. 29, Jan. 5, and Jan. 9. He also devoted his weekly address to the subject last weekend. Also, over the span of two weeks, the president's national security team prepared a relatively thorough security review of what transpired and a new directive on corrective actions.
Now let's compare the previous administration's response to a nearly identical terrorist plot -- Richard Reid's failed shoe-bomb attack (the same chemical, the same target, the same intended consequence, in same month of the year, with the same twisted ideology). Consider these two weeks, from eight years ago:
Dec. 22: Reid's attempt fails.
Dec. 28: Bush hosts a press conference from his Texas ranch. In his opening statement, the president makes no reference to the terrorist attempt. Reporters ask Bush 15 questions, zero about the Reid incident. The president references the failed attack anyway, saying a total of 89 words on the subject.
Dec. 29: The president reads his weekly radio address. He makes no reference to the attempted terrorism.
Dec. 31: Bush again chats with reporters at a media availability in Crawford. Reporters ask Bush 10 questions, zero about the Reid incident. Again, Bush referenced the matter briefly, saying 53 words on the subject.
Jan. 4: Karen Hughes hosts a briefing for reporters. There were no questions about the Reid incident, and the subject wasn't addressed.
Jan. 5: The president reads another weekly radio address, and makes no reference to the attempted terrorism. Later that day, Bush appears at two public events, one in California, the other in Oregon. The shoe-bombing incident doesn't come up at all at either event.
Do you notice a difference between the two weeks after the Abdulmutallab plot and the two weeks after the Reid plot? Tell me -- which of these two presidents seemed to respond to the attempted attacks more forcefully, more seriously, and with more depth? Which of the two seems more engaged when it comes to counter-terrorism?
Keep in mind, Bush faced literally no criticism for hardly responding at all to an attempt to blow up an airplane over the United States. There was no media pushback, no complaints from Congress, nothing. And this was just four months after 9/11, when presumably the terrorist threat was foremost on the nation's mind.
Rudy Giuliani said on CNN this week, "I think [Obama] has to make a major correction in the way he is dealing with terrorism because I think he has mishandled the situation. First of all, it was 10 days too late. This is something you react to immediately, not 10 days later after your vacation. The president of the United States, when there is a potential massive attack on this country, which is what this guy was going to do, should have been on top of this immediately, not 10 days later, 11 days later, 12 days later."
Bush pretty much ignored, at least publicly, the nearly identical "potential massive attack on this country," and no one seemed to care.
If I didn't know better, I might think there was a double-standard here, and a "controversy" has been manufactured by petty partisans hoping to undermine the Obama White House without cause.*
* edited
Loading Predators?
Can anyone tell me exactly WHY it was that Blackwater - oh, excuse me, Xe - was loading missiles onto Predator drones over in Pakistan?? Because of a contract? Loading missiles onto planes? Isn't that a job the military itself used to do? Why are we paying CONTRACTORS to do jobs that the MILITARY ought to be doing? At TWICE THE MILITARY'S PAY?! Or MORE!
Do we not have enough military?
Is it because we need some other off-the-record force to conduct those somewhat shady, off-the-books operations that we don't want our regular military to be involved with? We did sign the Geneva Conventions, didn't we?!
Is our military stretched a bit too far all around the globe? Do we have too many foreign military bases? (Over 700 and counting.) Do we have too many bases holding too many soldiers spread across the planet and we don't have enough leftover to perform the functions that the military usually performs? Like feeding itself? Or driving a truck?
What exactly is Blackwater doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Tell me what all of these para-military organizations are doing over there with taxpayer money? Why can't our own military provide protection for our diplomats? Our military has GUNS!! Why do we need special little private armies in addition to our regular military? Is this how wars have always been fought? A regular military and then a gang of thugs to do the real dirty work?
(I had a fevered dream the other day where Blackwater turned on our own military and started attacking them - us. Perhaps we need an epic battle between our "legitimate" military and these shadow forces.)
For that matter, why do we have a global "intelligence" agency fighting alongside our military in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? We have our military, the CIA (the Central Idiot Agency?) AND a veritable army of private contractors. NONE OF WHICH WE CAN EVEN AFFORD. It's all borrowed money. And, for some reason, people who work for Blackwater (Xe, whatever) make a whole lot more money than our regular military, FOR DOING THE SAME JOBS!
We don't have a big enough military, I guess. Shoot, I guess we have to feed the war machine even more. It's not growing FAST ENOUGH!! It must be FED!! I tellya, if we end up going into Yemen.....
Do we not have enough military?
Is it because we need some other off-the-record force to conduct those somewhat shady, off-the-books operations that we don't want our regular military to be involved with? We did sign the Geneva Conventions, didn't we?!
Is our military stretched a bit too far all around the globe? Do we have too many foreign military bases? (Over 700 and counting.) Do we have too many bases holding too many soldiers spread across the planet and we don't have enough leftover to perform the functions that the military usually performs? Like feeding itself? Or driving a truck?
What exactly is Blackwater doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Tell me what all of these para-military organizations are doing over there with taxpayer money? Why can't our own military provide protection for our diplomats? Our military has GUNS!! Why do we need special little private armies in addition to our regular military? Is this how wars have always been fought? A regular military and then a gang of thugs to do the real dirty work?
(I had a fevered dream the other day where Blackwater turned on our own military and started attacking them - us. Perhaps we need an epic battle between our "legitimate" military and these shadow forces.)
For that matter, why do we have a global "intelligence" agency fighting alongside our military in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? We have our military, the CIA (the Central Idiot Agency?) AND a veritable army of private contractors. NONE OF WHICH WE CAN EVEN AFFORD. It's all borrowed money. And, for some reason, people who work for Blackwater (Xe, whatever) make a whole lot more money than our regular military, FOR DOING THE SAME JOBS!
We don't have a big enough military, I guess. Shoot, I guess we have to feed the war machine even more. It's not growing FAST ENOUGH!! It must be FED!! I tellya, if we end up going into Yemen.....
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Myths about Electric Cars
Our next car just might be an electric car.
The information below comes from Plug In America. PIA is an advocacy group that seeks to inform the public and shape policy regarding all aspects of electric and plug in electric vehicles. They have a vehicle tracker on their website that shows everything that is known about electric vehicles from the companies that are/will be making them. Still, as with most things, this information should be taken with a grain of salt.
MYTH #1: EVs don’t have enough range. You’ll be stranded when you run out of electricity.
FACT: Americans drive an average of 40 miles per day, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Most new Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) have a range of at least double that and can be charged at any ordinary electrical outlet (120V) or publicly accessible station with a faster charger. The latter, already in use, will proliferate as the plug-in infrastructure is built out. At present, all it takes is planning for Electric Vehicle (EV) owners, who can travel up to 120 miles on a single charge, to use their cars on heavy travel days. Alternatively, a Plug-in Electric Hybrid Vehicle (PHEV) goes at least 300 miles on a combination of electricity and gasoline.
MYTH #2: EVs are good for short city trips only.
FACT: Consumers have owned and driven EVs for seven years or more and regularly use them for trips of up to 120 miles.
MYTH #3: EVs just replace the tailpipe with a smokestack.
FACT: Even today, with 52 percent of U.S. electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, plug-in cars reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and most other pollutants compared with conventional gas or hybrid vehicles. Plug-ins can run on renewable electricity from sources such as the sun or wind. PHEVs will reduce greenhouse gases and other emissions, even if the source of electricity is mostly coal, a 2007 study by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and NRDC showed. Read the summary of some 30 studies, analyses and presentations on this topic.
MYTH #4: The charging infrastructure must be built before people will adopt EVs.
FACT: Most charging will be done at home, so a public charging infrastructure isn’t a prerequisite. Still, a robust infrastructure will help, especially for apartment dwellers and those regularly driving long distances. But at least seven companies are competing to dominate the public-charging-station market and a trade group representing the nation’s electric utilities has pledged to “aggressively” create the infrastructure to support “full-scale commercialization and deployment” of plug-ins.
MYTH #5: The grid will crash if millions of plug-ins charge at once.
FACT: Off-peak electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel the daily commutes of 73 percent percent of all cars, light trucks, SUVs and vans on the road today if they were PHEVs, a 2007 study by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory found. Also, utilities are upgrading some local distribution systems to accommodate plug-ins, just as they do when residents add more air conditioners and TVs. Plug-ins, which can be seen as energy storage devices on wheels, can actually benefit the grid, making green energies like solar and wind power even more viable.
MYTH #6: Battery chemicals are bad for the environment and can’t be recycled.
FACT: Ninety-nine percent of batteries in conventional cars are recycled, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The metals in newer batteries are more valuable and recycling programs are already being developed for them. Utilities plan to use batteries for energy storage once they are no longer viable in a vehicle.
MYTH #7: EVs take too long to charge.
FACT: The most convenient place and time to charge is at home while you sleep. Even using the slowest 120-volt outlet, the car can be left to charge overnight, producing about 40 miles of range. Most new BEVs and PHEVs will charge from 240-volt outlets providing double or triple the charge in the same amount of time. Charging stations that reduce charging time even more are beginning to appear.
MYTH #8: Plug-ins are too expensive for market penetration.
FACT: New technologies are typically costly. Remember when cell phones and DVDs were introduced? Also, the government stimulus package includes a $2,500 to $7,500 tax credit for EVs and PHEVs. Some states are considering additional incentives ($5,000 in California and Texas). And, the purchase and lifetime operating cost of an EV is on par with or less than its gas-powered equivalent because EVs require almost no maintenance or repair: no oil or filter changes, no tune ups, no smog checks.
MYTH #9: Batteries will cost $15,000 to replace after only a few years.
FACT: The battery is the priciest part of a plug-in, but costs will drop as production increases and the auto industry is expected to be purchasing up to $25 billion in advanced batteries annually by 2015. Some car makers plan to lease their batteries, so replacement won’t be an issue. The Chevy Volt PHEV will have a 10-year battery warranty that would cover battery replacement.
MYTH #10: There isn’t enough lithium in the world to make all the new batteries.
FACT: Even in a worst-case scenario of zero battery recycling, aggressive EV sales, no new mining methods or sites, existing lithium stores will be sufficient for projected EV production for the next 75 years. See an analysis at PlugInAmerica.org. Also, lithium comes from many countries (24 percent is found in the United States), so we won’t be dependent on any one global region.
MYTH #11: Lithium batteries are dangerous and can explode.
FACT: Among the many kinds of lithium-ion batteries, lithium-cobalt batteries found in consumer electronics can pose a fire risk in certain circumstances. These risks can be mitigated by the use of advanced-battery management systems and careful design that prevents “thermal runaway.” Most plug-in vehicle makers are working with other battery types (such as lithium-iron-phosphate and lithium-manganese) which have inherent safety advantages and provide more years of service.
MYTH #12: Most of us will still be driving gas cars through 2050.
FACT: Several irrefutable factors are driving the shift from gasoline to plug-in vehicles: ever-toughening federal fuel economy standards and state caps on greenhouse gas emissions; projected price hikes for petroleum products as demand increases and supply flattens or drops; broad agreement over the need for America to reduce its reliance on petroleum for economic and national security reasons; and climate change, which is occurring faster than previously thought, according to the journal Science and others.
The information below comes from Plug In America. PIA is an advocacy group that seeks to inform the public and shape policy regarding all aspects of electric and plug in electric vehicles. They have a vehicle tracker on their website that shows everything that is known about electric vehicles from the companies that are/will be making them. Still, as with most things, this information should be taken with a grain of salt.
MYTH #1: EVs don’t have enough range. You’ll be stranded when you run out of electricity.
FACT: Americans drive an average of 40 miles per day, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Most new Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) have a range of at least double that and can be charged at any ordinary electrical outlet (120V) or publicly accessible station with a faster charger. The latter, already in use, will proliferate as the plug-in infrastructure is built out. At present, all it takes is planning for Electric Vehicle (EV) owners, who can travel up to 120 miles on a single charge, to use their cars on heavy travel days. Alternatively, a Plug-in Electric Hybrid Vehicle (PHEV) goes at least 300 miles on a combination of electricity and gasoline.
MYTH #2: EVs are good for short city trips only.
FACT: Consumers have owned and driven EVs for seven years or more and regularly use them for trips of up to 120 miles.
MYTH #3: EVs just replace the tailpipe with a smokestack.
FACT: Even today, with 52 percent of U.S. electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, plug-in cars reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and most other pollutants compared with conventional gas or hybrid vehicles. Plug-ins can run on renewable electricity from sources such as the sun or wind. PHEVs will reduce greenhouse gases and other emissions, even if the source of electricity is mostly coal, a 2007 study by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and NRDC showed. Read the summary of some 30 studies, analyses and presentations on this topic.
MYTH #4: The charging infrastructure must be built before people will adopt EVs.
FACT: Most charging will be done at home, so a public charging infrastructure isn’t a prerequisite. Still, a robust infrastructure will help, especially for apartment dwellers and those regularly driving long distances. But at least seven companies are competing to dominate the public-charging-station market and a trade group representing the nation’s electric utilities has pledged to “aggressively” create the infrastructure to support “full-scale commercialization and deployment” of plug-ins.
MYTH #5: The grid will crash if millions of plug-ins charge at once.
FACT: Off-peak electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel the daily commutes of 73 percent percent of all cars, light trucks, SUVs and vans on the road today if they were PHEVs, a 2007 study by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory found. Also, utilities are upgrading some local distribution systems to accommodate plug-ins, just as they do when residents add more air conditioners and TVs. Plug-ins, which can be seen as energy storage devices on wheels, can actually benefit the grid, making green energies like solar and wind power even more viable.
MYTH #6: Battery chemicals are bad for the environment and can’t be recycled.
FACT: Ninety-nine percent of batteries in conventional cars are recycled, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The metals in newer batteries are more valuable and recycling programs are already being developed for them. Utilities plan to use batteries for energy storage once they are no longer viable in a vehicle.
MYTH #7: EVs take too long to charge.
FACT: The most convenient place and time to charge is at home while you sleep. Even using the slowest 120-volt outlet, the car can be left to charge overnight, producing about 40 miles of range. Most new BEVs and PHEVs will charge from 240-volt outlets providing double or triple the charge in the same amount of time. Charging stations that reduce charging time even more are beginning to appear.
MYTH #8: Plug-ins are too expensive for market penetration.
FACT: New technologies are typically costly. Remember when cell phones and DVDs were introduced? Also, the government stimulus package includes a $2,500 to $7,500 tax credit for EVs and PHEVs. Some states are considering additional incentives ($5,000 in California and Texas). And, the purchase and lifetime operating cost of an EV is on par with or less than its gas-powered equivalent because EVs require almost no maintenance or repair: no oil or filter changes, no tune ups, no smog checks.
MYTH #9: Batteries will cost $15,000 to replace after only a few years.
FACT: The battery is the priciest part of a plug-in, but costs will drop as production increases and the auto industry is expected to be purchasing up to $25 billion in advanced batteries annually by 2015. Some car makers plan to lease their batteries, so replacement won’t be an issue. The Chevy Volt PHEV will have a 10-year battery warranty that would cover battery replacement.
MYTH #10: There isn’t enough lithium in the world to make all the new batteries.
FACT: Even in a worst-case scenario of zero battery recycling, aggressive EV sales, no new mining methods or sites, existing lithium stores will be sufficient for projected EV production for the next 75 years. See an analysis at PlugInAmerica.org. Also, lithium comes from many countries (24 percent is found in the United States), so we won’t be dependent on any one global region.
MYTH #11: Lithium batteries are dangerous and can explode.
FACT: Among the many kinds of lithium-ion batteries, lithium-cobalt batteries found in consumer electronics can pose a fire risk in certain circumstances. These risks can be mitigated by the use of advanced-battery management systems and careful design that prevents “thermal runaway.” Most plug-in vehicle makers are working with other battery types (such as lithium-iron-phosphate and lithium-manganese) which have inherent safety advantages and provide more years of service.
MYTH #12: Most of us will still be driving gas cars through 2050.
FACT: Several irrefutable factors are driving the shift from gasoline to plug-in vehicles: ever-toughening federal fuel economy standards and state caps on greenhouse gas emissions; projected price hikes for petroleum products as demand increases and supply flattens or drops; broad agreement over the need for America to reduce its reliance on petroleum for economic and national security reasons; and climate change, which is occurring faster than previously thought, according to the journal Science and others.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Best of Best of
2009 in Review: Best of the 'Best of' Lists
About.com Political Humor Lists
40 Funniest Protest Signs of 2009
20 Funniest Political Moments of 2009
50 Funniest Pictures of 2009
25 Dumbest Political Quotes of 2009
20 Funniest Political Videos of 2009
10 Funniest Obama Moments of 2009
More Year in Review Lists
The 20 Biggest Douchebags of 2009 (Kind of a Lark)
Top 10 Late-Night Jokes (Time)
Top Ten Comedic News Stories of 2009 (Will Durst)
Top 10 Weirdest Moments of 2009 (Politico)
Top 10 Editorial Cartoons of 2009 (Time)
Top 10 Political Gaffes of 2009 (Time)
The 12 Weirdest Right-Wing Conspiracies (Huffington Post)
The Top 'Nontroversies' Of 2009 (NPR)
Top 10 Media Blunders of 2009 (Politico)
The Best and Worst Apologies (Huffington Post)
10 Things That Totally Sucked About The Media (Huffington Post)
Top 10 Political Stories That Were Neither Political Nor Stories
More Year-End Humor
Dave Barry's Year in Review (Miami Herald)
2009: The Quiz (Paul Slanksy, The New Yorker)
Never a Year Like '09 (JibJab)
2009 Whack Job Jamboree (Keith Olbermann)
2009 Headline of the Year Contest (Fark)
2009: The Year of WTF (Huffington Post)
2009 Year in Review Cartoons (Daryl Cagle) (Apoliticus)
Do you wanna see the ads? Click here.
40 Funniest Protest Signs of 2009
20 Funniest Political Moments of 2009
50 Funniest Pictures of 2009
25 Dumbest Political Quotes of 2009
20 Funniest Political Videos of 2009
10 Funniest Obama Moments of 2009
More Year in Review Lists
The 20 Biggest Douchebags of 2009 (Kind of a Lark)
Top 10 Late-Night Jokes (Time)
Top Ten Comedic News Stories of 2009 (Will Durst)
Top 10 Weirdest Moments of 2009 (Politico)
Top 10 Editorial Cartoons of 2009 (Time)
Top 10 Political Gaffes of 2009 (Time)
The 12 Weirdest Right-Wing Conspiracies (Huffington Post)
The Top 'Nontroversies' Of 2009 (NPR)
Top 10 Media Blunders of 2009 (Politico)
The Best and Worst Apologies (Huffington Post)
10 Things That Totally Sucked About The Media (Huffington Post)
Top 10 Political Stories That Were Neither Political Nor Stories
More Year-End Humor
Dave Barry's Year in Review (Miami Herald)
2009: The Quiz (Paul Slanksy, The New Yorker)
Never a Year Like '09 (JibJab)
2009 Whack Job Jamboree (Keith Olbermann)
2009 Headline of the Year Contest (Fark)
2009: The Year of WTF (Huffington Post)
2009 Year in Review Cartoons (Daryl Cagle) (Apoliticus)
Do you wanna see the ads? Click here.
Stargazing January 2010
The long, cold nights of winter serve up a treat this year: Mars. We will pass by the Red Planet late in the month, so it shines brightest for the year. It is an orange beacon, shining steadily in the constellation Cancer, the crab. It will glow almost twice as bright at the end of the month as at the beginning. As Mars climbs to prominence, Jupiter drops lower in the west every evening. It's still the second-brightest object in the night sky this month, after the Moon. More stargazing information: http://stardate.org/nightsky/weekly.php
Hear StarDate every day on more than 360 radio stations nationwide. Or subscribe to our podcast and RSS feed. 
January 11-17: A cold telescope. A giant telescope is taking shape under the ice at the South Pole -- thousands of light detectors that are looking for some of the most elusive particles in the universe. Join us for details on IceCube, plus much more.
January 18-24: Chemistry sets. The hearts of stars are like nature's chemistry sets -- they brew up most of the elements in the universe. We'll have a few examples of the elements and the stars where they're being made. Join us for this and more.
January 25-31: The Red Planet. Mars puts on quite a show this week, shining like a bright orange beacon through most of the night. And the Moon joins it to put on an even better show. Join us for tales of the Red Planet all week long.
January Program Schedule: http://stardate.org/radio/calendars
Find an Affiliate: http://stardate.org/radio/affiliates.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
remember
deja vu
indeed
Delete Fox "News"
Probably
