Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Is this Clear Enough?

What do the terrorists want?

Update: Ok, to lazy to read the article, here's the short version...

to cite the Daily Telegraph, their "real project is the extension of the Islamic territory across the globe, and the establishment of a worldwide ‘caliphate' founded on Shari'a law."

Friday, July 22, 2005

Nuthin ta do with worms, eh...

This is a great thread from a must read blog which lead to this well written post.

I always enjoy an intelligent debate with plenty of interesting facts.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Why stop at Taiwan?

"Some of China's military planners are surveying the strategic landscape beyond Taiwan" - no kidding?

It's hard to know, but I'm hoping we are spending enough on spies to keep close tabs on China. America's people would like nothing better than to just get on with our own lives. We have no dreams of conquest. We have no desire for any involvement other than commercial trade. Live and let live is our motto. If the terrorists had been less successful, as they had been for at least a decade before 9/11/2001, we would have pretty much ignored them... even though regime change in Afghanastan and Iraq were moral imperatives.

China is the greatest threat we face. When it finally comes to a head, it will make everything that came before seem unreal. Russian support is likely. France would like to sell them the latest weapons.

I hope I'm not in the neighborhood when the nukes start landing.

Friday, July 15, 2005

China, anyone? Bueler... Bueler...

I'm of the opinion that this is more important that what Karl Rove might have said (or rather what Novak said to him.)

Friday, July 08, 2005

Three, One or None?

So now what are the chances that Bush and/or conservatives will get someone in the mold of Scalia or Thomas on the bench?

Thugs never change.

It's thugs that use bombs, this time in London. It reminds me of another time. I was in high school at the time and had a strange thought... "is this the death of journalism?" I later learned he had a brother.

I don't know why this event always stuck with me? But I compare it to today's car bombings in Iraq. I see Saddam as a type of Mafia thug. I think of Bin Laden as a type of twisted thug (who thinks he's Harry Seldon) and imagines he can predict the future in his twisted wishful fantasy (Al Queda apparently means Foundation.)

Journalist today don't do journalism. Journalism is not about asking people how they feel because of some tragedy. It's about digging and exposing facts... It's certainly not some form of entertainment and media ratings are not the point.

It's one of the reason web logs give me hope. The people that write blogs all have their own personal reasons. Within some bloggers beat the heart of people that want to expose the truth and now they can. I'll be reading.

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Iraq Arms Sales... A Complete Picture?

Sometimes a picture does tell the story. Feel free to use liberally when rebutting airheads or asshats.

Scathing Opinion on the Opinions

I could feel the heat coming from my monitor as I read Ann's latest. Wow! Her denunciation of Sandra O'Conner actually surprised me. I don't expect the courts to honor the constitution (which is a deed rather than a word) but I never really paid much attention to examining the opinions beyond a cursory glance. I might note which Judge voted the way I might, and was really disappointed with their latest decision regarding theft of real property to give to others for which I gave O'Conner points for a dissent...

The thing is, the Supreme Court is suppose to be the final say on matters. Which suggest it requires of pretty high standard for those writing an opinion. When you or I talk about opinions, we are reminded of the comparison between a certain anatomical orifice which everybody has... but the written opinion's of the Supreme Court are supposed to be of a different nature. Those opinions are supposed to be based on written law, the words of which are suppose to contain meaning. They just can't disregard the law to give what a lay person would define as an opinion.

Well, when you filter out the harsh venom (ya gotta love her!) that's basically what Ann is claiming - in 25 years, O'Conner has not contributed to legally clarifying the law with regard to contentious issues... the Supreme Court is not suppose to make law (that's what those other bums are suppose to do) they are suppose to support and defend the Constitution from attack, foreign and DOMESTIC.

She covers a lot of ground, but just one example makes her point. Ann says... she preferred her own words, "entanglement" and "endorsement," to the Constitution's word "establishment."

This really is the heart of the matter. A clarification of what establishment means constitutionally is what we expect once the matter reaches the Supreme Court. To muddy the waters by introducing issues that don't exist is the law, taking the matter away from the point, is horrendous.

Even Judge Judy gets it. She's says, when you come into her court the issue is money. If you want psychiatric help, call Dr. Phil!

Each to it's own venue.

It's not really funny.

Ann makes one point that she doesn't directly substantiate... "It's often said that O'Connor's problem is that she is not a judge, but a legislator." Although she gives a number of examples where the judge is acting as a legislator, she doesn't indicate where it's often said. I expect somebody else will point this out to her in order to attack her opinion. To which I expect Ann will provide the references. Sometimes I wish Ann weren't quite so over the top, but it is fun to watch even when the most serious of issues is the topic.

Flame on!

Update: Someone agrees with her.

Sunday, July 03, 2005

Space... finally a frontier.

I'm pretty sure the politicking behind the scenes has been tremendous considering the money, jobs and votes involved but it seems the direction of NASA is coming into focus. Rand had a link before hand to some of the big players propaganda here with some good comments from readers.

I have some strong feelings about space. I was ten when Neil and Buzz made history (and Mike too... can you imagine his mixed feelings? I'm sure he felt that some time in the future he would also walk on the moon. Men had vision back then..."Saturn by 75!" I even remember a math book in grade school had a photo of the Nerva engine in it.) I've also been a fan of hard sf forever. I believe in frontiers and personal liberty. Most of the last 30 years have been a disappointment for a kid that used to read about torch ships and such.

I think all the arguing about going about it misses the point, but then I've got my own ideas too.

I want to see private companies doing things in orbit and beyond. I think it's unstoppable. I also know that government will continue to spend my money in ways I don't always agree with... so I don't have much simpathy for those that think I'm a stinker because I'd like to advocate those ways when they don't agree. That's life.

It confuses me a bit that people don't see that being able to put 100 tons into orbit is a useful capability. I think people that would rather put little pieces into space and hope to build something useful in a reasonable time frame are unrealistic... even lacking in vision (which of course, they would accuse of me.)

Too many people are looking at things as either/or... I don't believe it's going to fall that way. Here's what I see...

Real spaceships don't land on planets. They are a means of enduring long duration flights to places. 100 tons is the mini-cooper of spaceships. It's how we are going to spend six to 18 months in flight to some destinations. Later we will put together 100 ton modules for larger ships. Governments will build the first of these ships and later private corporations will want them for themselves because government is going to lose it's tight grip on space activities. Why? Simply because they will not be able to compete in cost to orbit. Astronauts will get to their spaceships by buying a ticket from private companies.

This seems good to me.

I think we will colonize Mars first, but any colony, any where, that is self sustaining, will be the beginning of an economy that will keep us in space. Not only keep us in space for good, but give us a new expansive perspective on life, liberty and all that intangible stuff, ya know, like happiness. Life, liberty and happiness... sounds like something only guys with their heads in the clouds would write about, eh?

I've got a copy of Harry Stines book, "Halfway to Anywhere." Signed by the author who is an Arizona native. This is what may be that taxi to space.

Update: Leave it to Zubrin to design a torch ship!

Saturday, July 02, 2005

An American Housewife

I'm of the opinion that average America can be pretty insightful, here's a housewife that supports this proposition.

It may take a moment to get to the right link once you reach the site... be patient.