atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#3492: A break in the heat

It's 83 outside. It's probably not going to get much warmer than that today, and it looks as if it'll be cool enough tonight that I can ventilate the bunker a bit.

But not yet. Later.

* * *

Obamanomics FTW! Yeah, it's really wonderful that we're getting all these new regulations and taxes during the worst economy since the 1930s.

It's even more wonderful that this November we'll have a choice between Obama and Obama.

* * *

So the president of Chick-fil-A is a Christian and has definite beliefs about what "marriage" is. He says so in public and refuses to retract his statement.

Predictably, liberals lose their shit over it. JayG blockquotes the article:
The mayor of Boston is vowing to block Chick-fil-A from opening a restaurant in the city after the company's president spoke out publicly against gay marriage.

Mayor Thomas Menino told the Boston Herald on Thursday that he doesn't want a business in the city "that discriminates against a population."
So the mayor of Boston is going to use the power of government to keep a business out of the city which is run by someone who says things he doesn't like?

Of course, one of the founding principles of political correctness is that a display of "intolerance" is not included in the First Amendment...and of course the PC crowd gets to define what "intolerance" is. Saying you're against gay marriage? Intolerant! You have no civil rights! Off with your head!

Saying you wish George W. Bush would be shot dead? Why, that's just "dissent" and there's nothing wrong with it.

What it is, though, is liberals ignoring basic freedoms in favor of their personal preferences.

However, I suspect the populace will fall more on Chick-fil-A's side than that of Boston's idiot mayor. Not sure how much is the fault of JC Penney's new "gay-friendly" advertising scheme and how much is simple mismanagement by a stupid liberal: "First-year CEO Ron Johnson's decisions have led to disastrous results for the company."

Regardless, anyone who puts progressive politics ahead of facts and figures is an idiot, because progressivism always fails.

* * *

I'm reserving comment on the shootings in Aurora, Colorado, until there's information on the actual real shooter, his motivation, and such. But the knee-jerk reaction of the left requires no wait time for additional information, because they always go off half-cocked. (Pun intended.)

First up, the press! ABC News links the shooter to the Tea Party without bothering to find out if the first hit they saw on Google had anything to do with the shooter. Yeah, someone put "James Holmes" into Googe and this guy popped up. It fit the media's preconceived notion that the Tea Party is brimming with hatred and violence, so they ran with it.

Problem: not the guy. It's a guy with the same first and last name, and--yeah--he lives in Colorado, but he's not the guy who police have in custody for shooting all those people.

ABC, however, didn't care about little details like that, because everyone knows those Tea Party guys are all massacres waiting to happen. This guy's membership in the Tea Party alone was all the proof they needed!

Besides, it was vital to get the meme out there--even if wrong--that the Tea Party had spawned yet another act of senseless violence.

I can't remember--aren't journalists supposed to verify things before reporting them? I suppose that course must have been dropped from the curricula of journalism schools, because it gets in the way of all the leftist propaganda. Besides, these days the press believes that even if a particular statement isn't true, if the lie serves a larger "truth" it's okay. (See also: global warming.)

Second? Why, the gun-control crowd, of course. They can never resist dancing in the blood of the victims of gun violence!

Karl Denninger tears NYC idiot mayor Bloomberg a new cornhole. I'm even gonna replicate all of Denninger's emphasis for once:
Mayor Bloomberg can pontificate on whether Constitutional Carry should be prohibited and the Second Amendment amended, which is the only lawful means to alter it, if and when, and only if and when, he dismisses all of his own armed security and turns over his own firearms -- all of them.

Until then, Mayor, you're a jackbooted asshole politician trying to exploit the death of people at the hand of an obviously-deranged individual and need to shut the fuck up.

Simple fact: these incidents occur in places where guns are not allowed. The theater in question has a posted policy about not allowing firearms inside, so the gunman was pretty certain he wouldn't be facing much, if any, return fire. Much like Virginia Tech, the theater was a "gun-free zone" people who weren't there to murder anyone. To the guy who went there specifically to shoot as many people as he could, though, the signs and the policies and the laws against murder didn't seem to do very much.

But sure, making guns more illegal will fix everything. Right?

* * *

Karl Denninger hasn't moderated his stance one whit on the impending economic doomsday.

Can't say I blame him. Nothing has been fixed since 2008; it's a matter of "when", not "if".

* * *

Thomas Sowell has a good piece up called "Trashing Achievements". It is a response to Obama's "you didn't build that" horseshit, and a good one.

* * *

The scientists who figured out why Pioneer 10 is slowing down didn't figure it out, either. It was all government! Oh, wait--

Turns out that the anomalous acceleration Pioneer 10 is experiencing isn't anomalous after all. You just have to take into consideration the infrared photons the thing is emitting, and they account rather nicely for the miniscule extra acceleration the spacecraft is experiencing.

87 nanometers per second per second--it's not a lot of thrust but then it's not a lot of IR photons being emitted, either. And it is a rather nice practical demonstration of the viability of using a laser for propulsion, too. (Though, I'll tell you what, that'd be a damn powerful laser if it provided more than a whisper of acceleration. Cooling that bitch would be a nightmare all in itself.)

* * *

Incidentally? If they can put a man on the Moon, why can't they put a man on the Moon?

That's so f-ing sad. *sigh*

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment