April 26, 2006
— Ace "I saaaaaaiiiid, we got motherf--king chimps on this motherfu--king taxi cab!"
ARMED Sierra Leonean police are hunting up to 20 chimpanzees which killed a local taxi driver and injured three American visitors after they broke out of a wildlife sanctuary.
The Tacugama Chimpanzee Sanctuary in forested hills outside the Sierra Leonean capital Freetown, where the incident happened, has been closed since Sunday's attack by the screaming and excited apes, which mobbed and mauled the four men.
Liberals immediately reacted with horror to this clear-cut case of species profiling. A spokesman for the Southern Poverty Law Center stated that we need to examine the "root causes" of killer chimp behavior, such as poverty, a lack of education and job opportunities, and US support for Israel.
Thanks to yls.
— Ace The "outing" campaign turns nasty:
I'm sorry to have to send another e-mail about the men's bathroom, but Jenny was on the receiving end of an unfortunate tirade from the building engineer (wait: assistant building engineer) a few minutes ago about a clogged toilet from this morning. I know that none of you would intentionally "stuff" a toilet, but he seems to think that someone from this office is doing just that.
Who could it be from Media Matters that is dropping anchor to such an extent actually caused a catastrophic failure in the building's plumbing?
It's a stone-cold mystery. I can't think of any possible suspects.
Thanks to Alarming News.
— Ace ...then performed a lewd act on himself. I'm not sure what the lewd act was; I imagine he put a hand under an armpit and started cranking out fart noises, which is a felony in Scotland.
Kevin Costner has been revealed as the celebrity accused of performing a sex act while having a massage at a prestigious hotel in Scotland, after a tribunal ruled there was not a strong enough reason to keep his name suppressed.
The Hollywood star was accused of taking off his towel during the massage at The Old Course Hotel in St Andrews, Fife, in October 2004, exposing himself and then performing a sex act.
An earlier legal ruling had prevented his identity being revealed, but the tribunal chairman Nicol Hosie ruled that following widespread newspaper and magazine reports outside Britain, as well as internet blogs, which alleged that Costner was the culprit, his name had already fully entered the public domain.
Here's the kicker:
The 51-year-old actor had been on honeymoon with his new wife in St Andrews when he went for the massage.
Wow. I'm not sure what to call that. Sheenesque, I guess.
April 25, 2006
— Ace "I saaaaaid, we got bears on this m---erf---ing sub!"
Thanks to the Skinnersphere.
— Ace On O'Reilly, Snow was supposed to appear to debate NPR commentator/low-functioning retard Juan Williams, but cancelled.
Snow? Cancelling Fox?
"We hear he's in as the new press secretary," O'Reilly said, and seemed to be serious about that rumor, not just joking about it.
— Ace It's a bit murky. She and her lawyer say she didn't; sources say she didn't... kind of.
She discussed "classified information," though, with the author of the piece about prisons, Dana Priest.
It could be that she's guilty of the "confirmation only" thing that Deep Throat did in All the President's Men. Perhaps she didn't volunteer information (which came from another source), but she did either confirm or deny that information to Priest-- which is still a firable, and prosecutable, offense.
Saying "Yes, that's true" regarding an inquiry about classified information is still a disclosure of the truth of the matter being asked about.
As Tom Maguire noted (cited in Allah's bit), if Priest wanted to clear McCarthy, she could do so. Sure, Priest isn't supposed to reveal sources, but obviously she can reveal non-sources, correct?
— Tanker Frog Foreign Minister hails Hamas for its condemnation of suicide attacks. Of course, they were condemning the suicide attacks in Egypt against Arab Muslims.
I don't know which is worse. Froggy thinking that this is a major accomplishment, or Froggy thinking that anyone cares what they say.
In other news, ChIraq has announced support for a web site to challenge Google. He did so because he wants to:
show the world that France is more than a "museum country"
Hey Jacques, maybe you should Google 'Dien Bien Phu' before picking a fight you can't win!
— Ace On an old episode of Dinah Shore.
As they say, sometimes the difference between "embarrassingly awful" and "sublimely brilliant" is just twenty or thirty years' perspective.
Thanks to yls.
— Ace As Allah notes, this is one of those stories that, if you missed the first 48 hours after it broke (over the weekend), you may be so behind on it you're not willing to try to play catch-up.
But it's very important, so, if I may be so bold, I suggest you do try to catch up.
That catching-up is relatively painless, though, as Allah has blogged over at the new Hot Air site a quick and dirty primer to all things Molegate.
— Ace Ahem. No, not like that.
In their quest to create the super warrior of the future, some military researchers aren't focusing on organs like muscles or hearts. They're looking at tongues.
By routing signals from helmet-mounted cameras, sonar and other equipment through the tongue to the brain, they hope to give elite soldiers superhuman senses similar to owls, snakes and fish.
Researchers at the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition envision their work giving Army Rangers 360-degree unobstructed vision at night and allowing Navy SEALs to sense sonar in their heads while maintaining normal vision underwater turning sci-fi into reality.
The device, known as "Brain Port," was pioneered more than 30 years ago by Dr. Paul Bach-y-Rita, a University of Wisconsin neuroscientist. Bach-y-Rita began routing images from a camera through electrodes taped to people's backs and later discovered the tongue was a superior transmitter.
Thanks to Ogre Gunner.
— Ace Gonzo bluegrass style, this time from Hayseed Dixie.
Their website is here.
You know, personal bias aside, this is just a really good song that sounds cool no matter what genre it's in.
Thanks to Uncle Jefe.
— Ace ...while a majority of Americans still rate the economy as "poor."
Hmmm... most think that personally they're doing very well, and they have the best sort of first-hand economic evidence for that: their own finances.
And yet they have been somehow convinced that for everyone else the economy is terrible and we're actually still in a recession or "jobless recovery."
Gee, how do you think that people's views on the macro-economy diverge so greatly from their views of their own personal micro-economy? It's almost as if -- stay with me here -- there is some large, influential organization or collection of organizations constantly telling people that the broader economy is just plain at near-depression levels, despite what the testimony of their paychecks and bank accounts may tell them.
But that's a silly notion, because what sort of large, influential organization or collection thereof would have the sort of power and the political motivation to present the public with a false picture of the economy? I can't think of any.
It's truly a mystery, a bona-fide puzzler, one that we may never have a good answer for.
— Ace Who'd've guessed it?
I don't know; I'm unconvinced by this attempt at "debunking." Like, last year my astrological forecast said that I should expect a "bad news from a stranger," and then, within one week, a clerk at Subway told me my Frequent Buyer Card was expired and that I'd have to pay full freight for my Vegie-Haters Sandwich. (A full quarter pound of meat in a "meata pita" made of spicy balogna.)
Is that alone enough to refute scientists' extensive statistical analysis on the subject?
Well, yeah. I think it is.
Thanks to Allah.
— Ace Improved nutrition in China causing women's breasts to balloon up to D-cups.
Well, not all of them, of course. But a lot of them:
Bra producers have been forced to offer bigger cup-sizes in China because improved nutrition is busting all previous chest measurement records.
"It's so different from the past when most young women would wear A- or B-cup bras," Triumph brand saleswoman Zhang Jing told the Shanghai Daily from the Landmark Plaza of China's commercial hub.
"You...never expect those thin women to have such nice figures if they are not plastic."
The report, seen on the daily's Web site Tuesday, said that the Hong Kong-based lingerie firm Embry Group no longer produces A-cups for larger chest circumferences and has increased production of C-, D- and E-cup bras to meet pressing demand.
It's over. They truly have overtaken us as the world's greatest superpower.
Thanks to Joe, who writes, "I, for one, am haunted by the vision of a future where we will face the jiggling Chinese hordes!"
You and me both, Joe. You and me both.
Update: Japanese Girls Too! Hmmm... good at math, gots the mad kung fu skillz, gots the big racks. We truly live in an age of miracles and wonders.
According to this research, in 1980, 58.6 percent of bra they sold were A-cup ones, and they did not have to produce bra over E-cup. However, in 1992, the ratio of A-cup girls become 25.9 percent of all, and in 2004, it finally became around 10 percent of all girls. On the other hand, the demand for larger bra increased, and now 12.7 percent of girls are using bra over E-cup. Amazingly, In other words, 12.7 percent of Japanese girls are kyonyu (the owner of big boobs).
Western readers should bear in mind that Japanese cup sizes run differently; a Japanese E is roughly the same as an American D. But the trend is impressive nonetheless. So what's causing it? Santos26 offers a hypothesis: "Maybe it is thanks to junk foods which include a lot of fat."
You know, before this, I considered anti-globalization McDonalds' vandals to be a nuisance. Now I consider them the greatest threat to human progress the world has ever known.
Thanks to Charlie Fox for that.
— Ace We'll have Patterico of Patterico's Pontifications to discuss Hiltzikoshi's Sock Puppet Theater, and the LATimes' insufferably pompous liberal bias generally.
We'll have him on at the top of the show (it's his lunch break).
Then, in the last half or so of the show, we'll talk about... I don't know. There's not really a lot of news this week, is there?
April 24, 2006
— Ace Video Update: The yabbering yentas at The View yap about this.
Thank God. I was up half the night last night tossing and turning and wondering, "But what does funnywoman Joy Behar think about all this?" Now I know, and the answer is surprising. (She's for it! Wow! Forget everything I wrote about it!)
THE crown prince rejects a bevy of beautiful princesses, rebuffing each suitor until falling in love with a prince. The two marry, sealing the union with a kiss, and live happily ever after.
That fairy tale about gay marriage has sparked a civil rights debate in Massachusetts, the only US state where gays and lesbians can legally wed, after a teacher read the story to a classroom of seven year olds without warning parents first.
A parents' rights group said overnight it may sue the public school in the affluent suburb of Lexington, about 19 km west of Boston, where a teacher used the book King & King in a lesson about different types of weddings.
"It's just so heinous and objectionable that they would do this," said Brian Camenker, president of the Parents Rights Coalition, a conservative Massachusetts-based advocacy group.
Mr Camenker said he believes the school, Joseph Estabrook Elementary, broke a 1996 Massachusetts law requiring schools to notify parents of sex-education lessons. "There is no question in my mind that the law is being abused here," he said.
"I wouldn't be surprised if in the next couple of weeks there was some kind of (legal) action taken," he said.
Lexington Superintendent of Schools Paul Ash said the school was under no legal obligation to inform parents the book would be read to the classroom of about 20 children.
"This district is committed to teaching children about the world they live in. Seven-year-olds see gay people. They see them in the schools. They see them with their kids," he said.
"I see this as a civil rights issue. People who are gay have a right to be treated equally," he said.
"If it were North Carolina, this would be a whole different story. But the law in Massachusetts is that gay marriage is legal. We have lots of gay families in Lexington."
Note that pro-gay-marriage advocates like Andrew Sullivan sorta forgot to mention this "side benefit" of gay marriage-- that the acceptance of gay marriage would be the pretext for drafting children into the next battlefront in the gay culture wars.
I "get" that gays have an interest in living their lives as free from hatred as possible. But I am tired of the left's insistence that every other value is subordinate to this one, including allowing children some precious few years of sexual innocence and allowing parents to decide upon his child's sexual education.
The insistence on bringing children into this is just plain creepy. Not just the gay left, but the broader heterosexual sexual/cultural left. They have an idea of what they think human sexuality ought to be and, if it's too late to change the minds of teenagers and young adults, well then, they'll just have to get to them earlier, won't they?
And it's colossally selfish. Your right to extend your fist ends at the tip of my nose, the saying goes. Surely your right to indoctrinate society per your sexual preferences ends at the tip of other people's children's noses, for Christ's sake.
But for the gay/sexual-cultural left, even children's innocence must now be sacrificed at the altar of gay marriage.
— LauraW. In addition to being a dynamite lady (and gracious host to many trolls) she is now the conservative blogger at the Houston Chronicle's online paper.
Check out the information at the link, please visit her at the HC site and say hello.
— Harry Callahan
Sometimes, a picture really needs neither caption nor interpretation.
— Ace It's a "blended wing" -- not quite a full-on flying wing, but close to it. A conventional airplane has an obviously separate body and wingspan; a flying wing features nothing but wing, with the body of the plane inside the win. Or, putting it the other way, the plane's body is shaped like a wing, so the body provides lift too rather than just being lofted up by the wing.
The 797 is about halfway to a full flying wing.
There are several big advantages to the blended wing design, the most important being the lift to drag ratio which is expected to increase by an amazing 50%, with overall weight reduced by 25%, making it an estimated 33% more efficient than the A380, and making Airbuss $13 billion dollar investment look pretty shaky. High body rigidity is another key factor in blended wing aircraft, it reduces turbulence and creates less stress on the air frame which adds to efficiency, giving the 797 a tremendous 8800 nautical mile range with its 1000 passengers flying comfortably at mach .88 or 654 mph cruising speed (another advantage over the Airbus tube-and-wing designed A380s 570 mph).
Cool. God, I hate the Europeans.
Meanwhile, in further news to appeal to the enormous Dr. Reo Symes demographic, here's some cool video of a bridge getting the living eff blown out of it.
Thanks for the latter to Jack Straw.
The Most Famous Blended Wing... wasn't real.
Spielberg wanted a flying wing to represent the Nazis' advanced aeropsace programs, but in fact the plane shown is a more menacing variation of an Amerian Northrop design.
More Airplane Stuff: Video of shitty-ass punks spraypainting Air Force One with anti-Bush jibe "Stay Free" was in fact a hoax.
How'd they do it?
[Hoaxster Mark] Ecko acknowledged Friday that his company had rented a 747 cargo jet at San Bernardino's airport and covertly painted one side to look like Air Force One. Employees signed secrecy agreements and worked inside a giant hangar until the night the video was made. Ecko declined to say how much the stunt cost.
"It's not cheap," he said. "You have to be rich."
I guess so.
Thanks to msl.
— LauraW. A little deeper into this 'Tough, Strong' nonsense we've been hearing from the Democrats.
'Framing' is a concept that Democrats are hoping will help them develop an unambiguous message that they can easily get across to the People. A progressive message, gift-wrapped in a way that will actually appeal to real citizens and cause them to vote for Democrats.
When you hear a word, its frame (or collection of frames) is activated in your brain. Established frames create clarity and promote a vision.
In other words, "Words mean things."
Let me know if this is going too fast for you. This guy is a friggin' genius.
Quick, name 5 things that progressives stand for.
Uhhhhh...equality, freedom...liberty, justice....and...opportunity?
Okay, now the conservatives, what do you stand for?
1) Smaller Government
2) Lower Taxes
3) Family Values
4) Strong Defense
5) Free Markets
Very good. Now who do you suppose has an easier time getting their message across to the American people in a way that is effective, compelling, meaningful and memorable...i.e. in a way with which the average person can identify? Who do you suppose is more effective at instilling in the electorate, their set of ideological frames -- the bedrock foundation within which all new information will be processed, evaluated, and stored for future use.
When I read that, I thought, "A-ha! They're finally, kind-of, sorta getting it! Maybe there's hope for this two-party system after all."
Coming out of Denial
I used to be fond of the belief that the 'facts are on our side' and therefore, we have the true advantage since the 'truth shall set us free'. As we progress, you will discover that the truth will only set those free who are willing to accept it. In short, objective truth often takes a distant back seat to a person's established frame.
In fact, Progressives have traditionally fought for the vote based on 4 primary (and mistaken) beliefs:
1) The truth will set you free: We believe that 'if only the people knew the truth' about Bush or about Republicans... or about the tax structure, etc., then they would change their minds and join us on our progressive quest.
2) People will vote in their self-interest: We believe that if someone lost their job as a result of Bush's policies, or lost benefits from a social program because it was cancelled due to Bush's tax cut to the top 1% of income earners, then they would join us.
3) Political campaigns are like marketing campaigns: We believe (at least our political representation in Washington does) that a campaign should be run like a product is sold. The candidate is the product and the candidate's platform is the product's attributes. Target the attributes to the needs of the 'client' (the electorate) and you will have a successful 'product'.
4) Media access is what we need to retake the nation: Although certainly part of that quest, it is neither its driver nor its primary focus. Indeed, if we promote a compelling message based on our values, then it will be easier to take back the media [emphasis mine].
All of these assumptions are wrong. We've been sprinting down this path -- the wrong path -- ignoring the fact that people vote for those with whom they identify often regardless of the 'objective truth', against their 'self interest', regardless of whether the product has the attributes they need, and without regard to the media access of the candidates or their message.
Frames rule over facts!
You said it, brother.
#3 is particularly amusing; no, political campaigns shouldn't be run like marketing campaigns. Apparently this guy thinks they should be run like management fads instead. He's trying to establish a new dynamic paradigm.
I could take excerpts from this thing all night. It has got to be one of the saddest essays I have ever read.
OK: just one more.
Once we recognize and define our values, we will be able to summarize them in a further list of objectives that encapsulates those values and presents a solid foundation with which to appeal to the progressive part of each person's psyche.
"What's my platform? Anybody have a fucking clue what I stand for? Oh shit. You got to be kidding me...(shuffling papers)..lessee...more centralized government, reproductive rights, higher taxes...I'M SURE WE CAN FIND A WAY TO REPHRASE THESE THINGS SO THAT PEOPLE WILL VOTE FOR IT."
Please do go on to skim part II, and giggle when he dismisses out of hand the very notion of moving the platform to the right.
I'm through with this bozo's paper. If any of you find more hilarity in the remaining pages- and you will- please be a sweetling and post them in the comments for us all to mock at leisure.
42 queries taking 3.8937 seconds, 279 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.