The most important part of it is that the payloads got to where they were supposed to go. The whole point of the exercise is to put things in orbit; what happens to the boosters afterwards is less important than that--so when they fail to recover a booster it's disappointing but it's not the end of the world. As long as the payloads get delivered.
People love to focus on the bad: "Ah you lost the booster!" but no one can reasonably expect them to recover boosters 100% of the time. And there are some flights for which the booster simply won't be recoverable, because it's too high and too fast to make it back to Earth safely. Yesterday's launch was on the margin of that envelope.
I mean, look at this:
Though it had carried out a handful of successful launches, SpaceX's legacy of launch-day malfunctions is well recognized by now, and will likely create problems for CEO Elon Musk as he pushes to launch the company's first manned space flight by the end of the year.This story isn't even accurate in its details. "Main rocket"? There were two strap on boosters which were both recovered successfully. And it's not until the last paragraph that the article acknowledges that the payloads were successfully launched.
But in the latest setback, the company failed in what RT described as an "audacious" mission to retrieve rockets after launch. After the main rocket successfully landed on a sea-based launch pad, the center core booster that had helped power the rocket missed the pad, instead crashing into the sea in a fiery explosion.
The brilliance of the SpaceX strategy is that it accounts for losing boosters once in a while--plans on it--and accepts that as a cost of doing business as long as the payloads are delivered.
* * *
A million links already and there's a new Woodpile Report so I guess this one's gonna take a while....
737 MAX 8 parking only? Looks like a storage lot for used Volkswagen diesels. Only bigger and a lot more expensive.
* * *
Here is that old canard again. "Well, that's not real socialism!"
Trust me, what happened to Venezuela was MOST ASSUREDLY socialism. Nationalizing industry, government running everything, the whole nine yards.
The article I linked has, as its last paragraph, a succinct summation of why socialism always fails.
* * *
Little Hitler has delusions of grandeur. That annoying cretin (and his communist salute) has faded from public view, so now he's trying to make himself relevant by claiming that there have been seven attempts on his life.
Wow, seven? Amazing! I thought a third-tier commie creep wouldn't rate more than one or two. I wonder how many assassination attempts there have been on more prominent gun-control leftists? And why aren't they talking about them? I'd think that if assassination attempts were that common--well.
Oh, wait a moment. I get it. I understand what he means:
"I specifically ordered a soy latte milko macho. This is a dairy latte macho milko! I'm lactose intolerant! Are you trying to kill me?" Assassination attempt one....and so on.
"What do you mean the pasta isn't gluten-free?" Attempt two.
"You bastard, you took my parking spot! Do you know who I am?" "No, and shut up, pussy." Attempt three.
* * *
Yeah, they're not listening.
If you believe that so much that you are willing to tell the US Holocaust Museum that they are a bunch of Nazi bootlickers, the conversation is over.The nice thing is, it's going to make for some really good campaign commercials in 2020.
There is nothing left to say. All the rational arguments in the world fall of these willingly deaf ears.
* * *
I think this could be an apt characterization. Iran's downing of the drone was meant to be a provocation, to get Trump to hit back--and Trump didn't.
The thing I find interesting about this is the Democrats' reaction. They were all set to demonize him for attacking Iran; when he decided not to, they were gobsmacked by it--and immediately started harping on the fact that he didn't order the attack. "Confusion", they're saying. "Well, he almost got us into a war!"
Democrats wanted there to be an attack so they could deplore it and denounce Trump for something he'd actually done. Iran wanted there to be an attack so they could escalate things and make trouble and solidify their citizens behind the mullahs.
Trump flipped the script and did away with the Carter Doctrine which is a major league plus in my book.
* * *
Nice, if it works. Transparency from health care providers about prices is a long time overdue, that's for sure.
* * *
The FEC should consider this a campaign contribution to the Democrat party. "Should" doesn't mean "will" but it certainly is something to consider; if a large media company like Googe is purposely trying to skew an election, that should mean something to the people who regulate such companies.
Incidentally: when YouTube (owned by Googe) "demonetizes" an ad, they don't stop running ads. What they do is to stop paying the content creator any of the ad revenue. They still serve the ads; Googe keeps all the money. Given that the content they demonetize is usually right-wing? The hypocrisy is manifest, but since hypocrisy is an essential component of leftism that's not terribly surprising.
* * *
Yes, all cultures are equally valid, all right, and a culture which kills bald men because legend has it there is gold in their heads is just as valid as one that invents antibiotics and space travel.
* * *
This one will be a non-starter, all right. They say the Democrat party ought to be the ones who pay reparations to blacks. Heh!
IF there should be reparations paid in this day for the institution of chattel slavery, for the malignant practices of the Jim Crow laws, and local law-enforced racial segregation, and the depredations of the KKK, which cruelly impacted Black Americans, such reparations ought to and should be paid by the Democrat Party.Makes sense to me!
Democrat party stalwarts embraced slavery, to the point of rebellion and formal withdrawal from the United States. The KKK brutally oppressed freed slaves after the war in the 19th and early 20th century, as well as persecuting white activists who bravely chose to support civil rights. Indeed, a long-time Democrat stalwart, Senator Robert Byrd, functioned as a local-level officer in the KKK early in his political career and the Birmingham, Alabama director of Public Safety, one Eugene "Bull" Connor – quaintly described in Wikipedia as "international symbol of institutional racism" – was also a long-time Democrat Party politician on the local level. In contrast, the Republican party was founded to specifically oppose slavery as it was practiced and continued supporting civil rights for all citizens throughout the turmoil of the 1960s. No – there was no grand switcheroo after that period, wherein all the racists and anti-racists in the respective parties obligingly bed-hopped to the other; that is a transparent attempt by the current Democrat Party to escape institutional responsibility for the crimes against Black Americans committed in the 19th and 20th century.
* * *
I am so very shocked to learn that the "woman" who accuses Trump of raping her appears to be a complete lunatic.
...[W]hen she was asked last week if she would press assault charges against Trump, she told MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell that doing so would be "disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock down there without any protection."Translation: I have no evidence, and if my accusation were to be subjected to the standards of evidence required of criminal cases, I'd be laughed out of court. And LOOK! HALLEY'S COMET!
"The women have very little protection there," she added. "It would just be disrespectful." And then she rambled on about all the rapes all around the world and how her bringing charges against Trump "just doesn’t make sense to me."
Well, that's not an answer. It is, though, the most awkward pivot to a left-wing political talking point in the history of cable news.
ADDENDUM: SHE LIFTED HER STORY FROM AN EPISODE OF LAW AND ORDER: SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT. END ADDENDUM
* * *
"American War of Southern Independence" has a nice factual ring to it; I think I'll start using that myself.
* * *
"Study finds that most straight people aren't gay." That's the first sentence of the post and it's the TL;DR for the whole thing.
I can't believe that we are even having this conversation. These people are trying to convince us that there is no difference between a biological woman and a man who has been surgically altered to resembles one, that the only difference is due to prejudice and bigotry, and that we are wrong to insist on believing our own lying eyes.
By the way: Does the Brave New World of government-mandated orgy-porgy sex and soma require that sex be purely a hedonistic activity, and that normal men and women may have no interest whatsoever in childbirth?The short answer is no, you are not allowed to consider the person's ability to take part in breeding when you select a mate. You must accept transsexuals as mates and may not consider the fact that the process of making someone transsexual renders them sterile even if your aim is to get hitched and raise a passel of brats.
Just adopt, or something.
The entire argument is fundamentally weak, of course, because these people telling heterosexuals that they have no choice about this are the same ones who tell us that homosexuals must be allowed to be who they are, that it's unreasonable to expect them to change who they want to be with, that it's impossible to do so.
But, you know: left, hypocrisy, blah blah blah etcetera.
* * *
UAW doesn't care about automakers, of course. Unions are parasites. They exist to siphon needed resources from their hosts; sometimes the host dies. (Like Hostess *rimshot* going bankrupt because of unions.)
Of course it's the corporation's fault when a union drives them out of business.
Let's face it: cars cost too much. Since when does building a pickup truck cost so much that adding a modest profit to it results in a price tag of $60,000? In 2000 Ford was making $15,000 profit on every Excursion they sold--that was at dealer cost, by the way, what they charged the dealer for the things. That was when the sticker price was $40,000, and that was for a fully-loaded four-wheel-drive SUV-style truck with leather seats etc. These days you're lucky to get a pickup truck for under $35,000, and if you want a V8 engine?
The fuel economy standards set by the Obama administration are ludicrous anyway. CAFE of 50 MPG by 2026? Who thought that was actually possible? The asshats at the EPA don't give a rat's ass if it can be done; let a car cost $150,000 and require eight hours of charging every day.
* * *
Making them in the US simply costs too much. Down in the comments:
Harley is on the wrong end of a demographic shift. The kids look at the heavy metal with scorn and contempt - they are going all in on the scramblers and crotch rockets. The romance of the Harley mystique is lost on them.No, that's not the problem. The problem is that H-D motorcycles are freaking expensive for what you get.
You can go to an H-D dealership and spend $15,000 easy on a bike and not even get any frigging accessories for it. They have "entry level" models but those are priced in the "midrange" area of other manufacturers. And they all look the same, but for minor variations.
By the way, they are "heavy metal"--which is why they need those huge thumping tractor motors--but they don't handle as well as Japanese bikes do. They're cruisers, they're essentially easy chairs on two wheels, and they're meant to be very comfortable riding; they do that well, but what if you want "nimble"? There isn't an H-D motorcycle which can maneuver as well as an entry-level sport bike does. Because "heavy metal": weight has mass, and mass has inertia, and the more inertia you have the less nimble you are.
Lest you think I'm exaggerating: entry level engine on a Japanese road bike is about 250cc. On an H-D it's a full liter.
* * *
Some of these are just sad. Like the one about the pot, #20 I think it is. And the one after it, about taking birth control.
* * *
So: today it is actually hot in here. The warm weather we've been waiting all year for arrived; and what's the first thing I hear from my wife?
"Could you turn the AC on?"
It's going to be 65° tonight.
* * *
Latest to-do about the "concentration camps" is that "ONOES THE KIDS HAVE NO SOAP OR TOOTHPASTE". I'm betting that the reason they don't have soap or toothpaste is A) because they took what they were given and MADE AN UNHOLY MESS WITH IT, which is why the people running the facilities stopped providing it.
That, or B) there are so many of them that it's no longer possible to provide them with soap and toothpaste because there's no money left in the budget. When I was in the psych ward there were times when the showers had no soap in them. That's how it is in an institutional setting: supplies run out and they don't always get refilled right away.
Or C) soap and toothpaste are only provided when they actually need it. "Hold out your brush." *poot* "There you go!"
In any case, these are people who were dragged there by their parents, or at least by people who claim to be their parents. They, like their parents, are here illegally. They broke the law by coming here. We are not obligated to put them up at the frigging Ritz-Carlton.
* * *
Now it's 7:30 and I've got three hours of work left. Woohoo! ...or something.