March 31, 2017

Overnight Open Thread (03-31-2017)
— Open Blogger

GK Chesterton.jpg

Art, like morality, consists of drawing the line somewhere.
-- G.K. Chesterton

Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance.
-- G.K. Chesterton

Idolatry is committed, not merely by setting up false gods, but also by setting up false devils; by making men afraid of war or alcohol, or economic law, when they should be afraid of spiritual corruption and cowardice.
-- G.K. Chesterton

The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people.
-- G.K. Chesterton

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:00 PM | Comments (886)
Post contains 635 words, total size 5 kb.

Open Thread
— Ace

Claire McCaskill: I'm filibustering Gorsuch over his "stunning lack of humanity."

Maybe they will filibuster. If so, good. Gorsuch is the best possible candidate (for us) in the case of a filibuster. We would suffer the least fall-out from Going Nuclear over it, and our RINOs would have little excuse to indulge their RINO instincts.

Progressives, who are crazy as you probably know, are demanding total Resistance to Trump, and are demanding this very stupid thing be done.

We know that leftist politics are the religion of the godless, but sometimes they make that too obvious.

Amazingly, a college holds a forum on Fake News, and is lectured to by an expert in Fake News: A Buzzfeed editor.

Why are you laughing?

PeTA hasn't been getting enough attention lately and they mean to change that:

This CNN co-anchor of something or other thought this joke was good enough to brag about:

I guess he really wants to get on Stephen Colbert.

If they're not going to bother pretending any more, why should we?

Night! And happy Friday!

Posted by: Ace at 03:20 PM | Comments (328)
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.

— Ace

I had to take some time off from working out because I'd overdone it. Because I wasn't working out, I wasn't drinking my potions. Creatine, citrulline, glutamine, BCAAs. Problem with that: That was pretty much the way I was drinking most of the (inadequate) water I was getting. So now having gone off the powders, I'd gone off water too.

So I wound up badly dehydrated. This is why I've been in-and-out this week. I got really badly dehydrated. And when you get dehydrated, you feel lethargic, which prompts you to drink caffeine, which acts as a diuretic and flushes more water out, which makes you more lethargic, etc.

Anyway, I gotta think I'll finally start drinking water regularly now that I wound up having to go to a doctor with semi-scary symptoms only to hear him say, for the tenth time: "You have to drink more water, asshole.'

Well, hopefully it's just a matter of drinking water. We'll see by Monday.

As I have no GAINZZZ (unless you consider dropping your blood pressure to dangerous levels a "gain"), I thought I'd mention the BRAINZZZ GAINZZZ side of things.

Below, two videos by that guy whose videos I always link now. The first is how the Internet is deliberately designed to increase the human brain's appetite for quick and easy distraction, and then, having stoked that appetite, to then offer a fix for the craving for distraction it's created -- the next Wikipedia link, the next video, the next Tweet.

It's an elaboration of that article that got a lot of attention nine years ago, "Is Google Making Us Stupid?," which asked if the internet was reprogramming our brains away from thinking in focused ways towards thinking (or not thinking) in a manner that might be diagnosed as Attention Deficit Disorder in a kid, always looking for that next shiny link to click instead of finishing the article, or even the sentence, one is reading right now.

"Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?" So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial brain. “Dave, my mind is going,” HAL says, forlornly. "I can feel it. I can feel it."

I can feel it, too. Over the past few years I've had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn't going--so far as I can tell--but it's changing. I'm not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when Im reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I'd spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. That's rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.

I think I know what’s going on. For more than a decade now, I’ve been spending a lot of time online, searching and surfing and sometimes adding to the great databases of the Internet... Even when I’m not working, I'm as likely as not to be foraging in the Web’s info-thickets’reading and writing e-mails, scanning headlines and blog posts, watching videos and listening to podcasts, or just tripping from link to link to link. (Unlike footnotes, to which they’re sometimes likened, hyperlinks don’t merely point to related works; they propel you toward them.)


But that boon comes at a price. As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation. My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.

I've mentioned this before, but I'm pretty much certain that this is true. I was never a great reader, and always prone to distraction, but a few years ago I noticed that I had become unbearably unfocused, no longer able to even read a book.

I've tried a few things to improve that. The things that seem to be effective are:

1. Actually trying to read a book. This is actually tough, because if you have Internet Onset ADD, you will find your mind continually drifting off from the thing you're reading, becoming impatient that there is not a hyperlink in the book you can click to, or a sidebar featuring Beach Bodies and Baby Bumps (as the Daily Mail specializes in).

This will result in you being bored, because you're not actually following the flow of the book in the way that it would actually stimulate your brain. And this will frustrate you, and make you feel dumb, and you will therefore not want to continue, because people don't like doing things that frustrate them and make them feel dumb.

People don't like to start exercising again after a long period off because they don't like that feeling I used to be a lot better at this.

So all of that will happen, but still, if you suspect your focus and attention span have been compromised by Internet Onset ADD, you just have to tell yourself It's normal that this is going to be frustrating at first and do it anyway.

2. The other thing, of course, is that you have to remove all distraction from the room when you're trying to read. If you're reading skills have suffered due to fragmented attention syndrome, as mine had, you certainly should not add to that problem by having the TV or radio on. And if you're reading on a device that offers internet access, like a tablet, then you have to download a program which will block you from accessing the internet when you're trying to read, or write, or get other actual work done.

Some of those have an emergency "Let me go on the internet for five minutes" button, so you can get out of it, if you want.

But if you're already suffering from fragmented attention syndrome, you can't have the Shiny Distractions tempting you to click away from the thing you're trying to get your mind to focus on. That turns something which is already hard (getting your focus back) into something impossible.

The second video below talks about the problem of fragmented focus, and sounds a lot like the Cal Newport book Deep Work: Rules for Success in a Distracted World, which I read and reviewed here. (Don't comment on old posts!)

Newport makes the point that if you stop for one minute to read and respond to an email in the middle of more cognitively-demanding work, you're not just taking one minute off. Because, he argues persuasively, it will take you several minutes of bearing down to get back into the focused mode you were in before stopping to read an email and dash off a quick response. Every time you fragment your attention like that, he says, you're not just losing thirty seconds or a minute or two minutes; you must, when returning to work, reconstruct your entire chain of thought and get into focused mode again.

His point is that interrupting work ten times for distracting, minor tasks winds up fragmenting your focus so badly that you might as well not even bother trying to do work at all.

Multitasking is a lie, is is his big point.

The second video below makes that point with reading. He notes that when you get bored of reading and go check your iPhone for Reddit or Twitter or whatever, and then return to reading, you actually have to go back and read the last couple of a paragraphs again, because otherwise the paragraph you abandoned won't make sense. You won't even know what's going on; you have to refresh your memory by re-reading that which you've already read.

And obviously the more times you do this, the slower you'll read, and the less you'll actually comprehend the book (and probably, the less you'll enjoy it).

He analogizes it to clearing the brain's cache of short-term memory every time you switch from one task to another. As long as you're keeping on one task, your cache of short-term memory can keep up with the new information you're adding, and make sense of it, and put it together into a coherent whole.

But every time you use that limited cache to do something else, you lose the work you've already done, and you have to re-fill that cache by doing the work a second (or third time).

I saw this video last night and immediately recognized that that is true, at least for me: I can't tell you how many times I've had to go back and re-read a relatively simple sentence or paragraph simply because I got distracted by something else (including my own daydreams). Then at some point I realize that while my eyes are "reading" -- moving from word to word on a page -- my conscious brain is actually completely disengaged from that physical process and is ignoring the input from my eye-reading to think about something else.

My brain has, literally, lost the plot at that point.

To me, this seems incontrovertibly true. I guess it's obvious, but sometimes obvious things aren't as obvious as they ought to be. Without distraction, I can read a book in two or three nights; if I let myself be distracted, with the TV of some crap show I only barely care about in background, or with the computer open and beckoning me "Come check this entry on Wikipedia," I can't finish the book at all. I'll put it down after four chapters.

Another thing on the "To Do" list which never actually gets done.

Just because I felt I had to look something up or otherwise distract my brain from more focus-intensive tasks.

These ideas apply to anything -- including just doing your job. But if you've been having trouble reading lately, you might start trying to regain that skill, which is kind of a foundational ability for all other kinds of focused brainwork.

So: Do you have any GAINZZZ brahs? And do you intend any GAINZZZ of your BRAINZZZ -- new (or newly re-discovered) hobbies, interests, skills, etc.?

And do any of you have this same feeling of having gotten dumber as you got older? This can't just be me and two other assholes on the internet. Please tell me this isn't just me and two other assholes on the internet.

BTW: I've tried playing various audio tracks branded as "sounds for focus and study and relaxation" or whatnot. They don't work for me; my mind is a junkie always on the hunt for its next fix of distraction, and does get distracted by those too. But they might work for you, especially if they help drown out other more distracting noises, like YOUR ASSHOLE BOSS with his stupid whining that he's not paying you to read Hardy Boys on the job.

Maybe white noise or pink noise would work.

Also BTW: People used to ask why I bothered trying to learn French late in life (29 is sort of late). It was because of this feeling I had that my brain just wasn't capable of learning any more. I wanted to try to learn something just to prove that I could, and to retain (or rekindle) my ability to do so. I became worried that my brain had lost its neuroplasticity, its ability to make new neurons and new connections between neurons, and I wanted to try something that would kick-start it back to doing so.


Posted by: Ace at 01:57 PM | Comments (384)
Post contains 2080 words, total size 13 kb.

Adam Housley: Person Responsible for Unmasking Trump Team Members is "Very Well Known, Very High Up, Very Senior In the Intelligence World; Is Not in the FBI
— Ace

This prompted Sean Davis to write:

Roses are red
Penguins are dapper
I wonder if the guy behind this is named....

I wonder what name he's hinting at now. A round of applause to anyone who guesses it.

Housley's sources say the unmasking had noting to do with Russia, but were done for purely political purposes, to criticize a presidency that someone "very high up" in Obama's intel service opposed.

Story here.

A video clip plays with that report, too, if you prefer it that way.

By the way, Housley's sources say the big NYT claim that they had identified the two "sources" for Devin Nunes' information are not in fact his sources -- they were just two people that helped him "navigate" the information he'd been told by his sources to check out, or something like that.

At Hot Air, John Sexton also writes on these game-changer revelations, and has a clip of even Joe Scarborough coming around to the point of view that the Obama Administration's spying is a big deal.

Posted by: Ace at 12:46 PM | Comments (415)
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

Did This Clinton Campaign Worker Admit A Role in Pushing the Russia Story to Congress and the Media?
— Ace

Elizabeth Farkas is doing a lot of walking back of her March 2 comments (which were only recently given the attention they deserve), but her new explanations -- "I was just talking about process n' stuff," or whatever -- seem to be out-of-sync with her previous statements about having more definite knowledge of the intelligence about Trump's aides.

Posted by: Ace at 12:08 PM | Comments (192)
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Claims that Russia Was "Defnintely" Behind Election Hacking Relies Almost Entirely on Report Commissioned by Democrats From Private (and Partisan) Firm; That Firm Seems to Be Walking Back Its Claims
— Ace

From Hot Air, Jeff Dunetz reports that the security firm "Crowdstrike" is withdrawing the report that the FBI relied so much upon.

Quoting VOA:

U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year’s American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented data published by an influential British think tank.

Tucker Carlson had on a professor who's an expert on Russia last night to debunk the claim that it has been "proven" Russia meddled in our election. I didn't catch his name on the show; I just prayed "Don't be Stephen Cohen, Don't be Stephen Cohen," because he's a rather notorious Russian apologist who thinks Russia is pretty much innocent of everything.

Well, alas, it turns out the professor Carlson was interviewing was in fact Stephen Cohen.

Nonetheless, Cohen's claims here are factual in nature, not so much argumentative, and it seems to me that factual claims must be met with factual rebuttals, not questions about the biases of the person offering those claims.

And I'm not aware of anyone even contesting his factual claims.

Why was a private firm permitted to conduct the analysis which the US government then adopted as its own, exactly?

Would that have something to do with the fact that the DNC wouldn't permit the FBI to conduct its own forensic examination?

Posted by: Ace at 11:00 AM | Comments (344)
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.

Gizmodo Thinks It's Found James Comey's Secret Twitter Account, and Surprise, That Account Follows David Ignatius, the Reporter Who Kicked Off the Russia Investigation Leaks
— Ace

Seems pretty likely this is Comey's account.

Sure would like a subpoena for this account's DMs with David Ignatius.

Posted by: Ace at 09:40 AM | Comments (395)
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

Dave Chapelle Tells "Problematic" Jokes About Gays and Trannies and So It's a Big Thing
— Ace

So problematic I just can't even.

This pyrsyn, by the way, lists hyr accomplishments in hyxr twitter bio, starting first with "creator of the #OscarsSoWhite" hashtag outrage.

That's huge.

Buzzfeed, of course, is outraged.

Bonus points for this writer deploying the new-ish Offended Snowflake tactic of claiming that people who don't buy into their bullshit are themselves snowflakes who are easily offended. Watch how quickly Chappelle -- not the guy whining about Chappelle -- is branded as easily "offended."

Chappelle tells a story about being at a party where a trans girl gets high or drunk and proceeds to get sick and pass out. For Chappelle, "Whatever it was, it was definitely a man in a dress." He moseys over and unassumingly asks, "Is he okay?" He's admonished for using the wrong pronoun and now is immediately offended. "I support anyone's right to be who they are inside, but to what degree do I have to participate in your self-image? Why do I have to switch up my pronoun game for this motherfucker?"

And this is the crux of the cisgender problem -- cis people’s tendency to center themselves in the transgender experience. These aren't your pronouns. They belong to the person you're addressing. Using the correct pronouns isn't meant to validate someone's whimsical sense of self; it’s a basic courtesy and shows respect for who someone is. If Chappelle is clutch-my-pearls offended by incidents like this, it’s not because of our demand to be respected, but because of what that demand says about his own fragile gender identity.

By the way, "Cis people" have a "tendency to center themselves in the transgender experience" only to the extent you will not leave us the fuck alone in making demands that we pretend you're your new whimsically-chosen sex.

Stop "centering" us in your hot sexual confusion mess and Shanghaing us into your game of make-pretend and then we'll stop "centering" ourselves in it too.

Posted by: Ace at 08:06 AM | Comments (555)
Post contains 381 words, total size 3 kb.

Women's Health Care Is Abortion Is Women's Health Care, And That's Just Creepy
— Open Blogger

dkos stupid.jpg

Yeah, it's a screen-grab, because Twitter doesn't deserve the traffic, and certainly The Daily Kos doesn't either.

You have to give them credit though, the Left is fanatical when it comes to staying on message.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 07:07 AM | Comments (250)
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Mid-Morning Open Thread
— Open Blogger


Niagara Falls
Louisa Davis Minot

Minot was considered an artist of the Hudson River School, and now you know as much about her as I do.

Only recently has Louisa David Minot been identified as the artist of this painting of Niagara Falls, signed only Minot, making her one of the United States’ more prominent early female artists. The daughter of the solicitor-general of Massachusetts, Minot lived in Boston with her husband and five children. Although there is no known documentation of her artistic training, Minot wrote an essay called “Sketches of Scenery on the Niagara River” for the North American Review in July 1815, which captures her reaction as a tourist to the area. The terrible beauty of the waterfall comes across in her writing just as effectively as in her painting. She wrote: “The earth trembled as the torrent of the falls poured from a great height. The air filled with a mighty tumult of foam and wind. It was some time before I could command my pencil.”

Find a few more Hudson River School bios here.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 04:30 AM | Comments (551)
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

The Morning Report 3/31/17
— Open Blogger


Good morning, kids. Weekend's here. In the lead this morning is Mike Flynn offering to testify before Congress about the Russky/NSA/FBI wiretapping non-scandal scandal in exchange for immunity. As he himself had said last year, you don't ask for immunity unless you think you're guilty of something. Meanwhile, former assistant FBI Director Farkas saying her extended, detailed and unequivocal on-air admission that the Obama FBI did indeed wiretap PDT was "misinterpreted." We're also gearing up for the Neil Gorsuch confirmation hearings and despite breaking in the ranks from Manchin and Heitkamp, the Dems will indeed filibuster and McYertle will be forced to go nuclear. All this might serve to bite Chuck Schemer in the ass, since PDT will take this as a personal attack. He'll respond by nominating Kennedy's or Baader-Meinhoff's replacement with someone as originalist or more than Gorsuch. In any case, as he pisses me and others off by attacking the conservatives, PDT is quietly set to appoint a significant number of lower court judges and perhaps restore sanity to the bench for at least a generation if not longer. Anyway, lots of links from around the world, across the nation and up your street. Have a better one and remain blessed.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 01:49 AM | Comments (350)
Post contains 374 words, total size 4 kb.

March 30, 2017

Thursday Night ONT - Wordplay Edition
— Open Blogger

So, welcome to the Thursday night ONT. Mis Hum was kind enough to swap days with me, so from now on you Thursday night Morons are going to be stuck with me. Wednesday nighters breathe a sigh of relief.


Indeed, grammar is quite important, as is capitalization. Proper capitalization is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse. Even the dreaded Oxford comma has its place. more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 05:00 PM | Comments (852)
Post contains 923 words, total size 8 kb.

Open Thread
— Ace

Mike Flynn says he's willing to testify before Congress if he's given immunity for his testimony.

I don't know if that's just being cautious or it's something we should worry about. Andy McCarthy thinks it's just standard cautiousness by someone who is probably the target of the FBI.

SpaceX has successfully launched the world's first re-used (and re-usable) rocket.

More here.

Um, the space shuttle used re-usable rockets but I guess they were considered just "boosters" instead of the main rockets and engines for launch? I dunno whatever, it worked.

Mollie Hemingway has more on liberals' simultaneously hedonistic and ultra-prudish beliefs about male-female relations.

Did this Obama official admit the Obama Administration deliberately spread the fruits of their surveillance of Trump to partisans who would leak it?


Posted by: Ace at 03:42 PM | Comments (306)
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.

Manchin, Heitkamp Announce They'll Vote In Favor of Gorsuch
— Ace

And Pat Leahy has indicated he's not inclined to filibuster Gorsuch.

That's not enough defectors to imperil a Democrat filibuster -- but one wonders how seriously they'll pursue one when they can't even say the whole party is in favor of it.

Is it really worth it for them to get the nuclear option deployed under these conditions, when the candidate is well-liked by the public and the Republicans will pay no price at all for nuking them till they glow?

Their only hope is to deploy the filibuster in the next nomination, which really will change the direction of the court (probably), and just hope that Trump hasn't nominated someone with Gorsuch's level of public acceptability.

Plus, their hypocrisy is just embarrassing: more...

Posted by: Ace at 02:34 PM | Comments (220)
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.

Hillary's Insipid "H With an Arrow" Logo Took Three People Two Month's Work
— Ace

As Z said in Men in Black: "You're everything we've come to expect from government employees."

Though they weren't employees; they were volunteers. Employees would have taken another six months plus an addition $10 million to cover cost overruns.

This reads like a spoof, but the Free Beacon claims this is genuine.

"I put together a three-person team: me, designer Jesse Reed, and project manager Julia Lemle," Bierut wrote. "We would work in secret for the next two months."

Bierut says the goal of the two-month secret project was "to create something new and different."

And boy, did you exceed expectations.

This looks like a sign in a former Soviet Republic
telling you where to drop off your dying relatives for euthanasia

The team settled on "a perfectly square H," which seemed simple but really was anything but."

I did a ten second google search for "square H." I thought it would be very simple, but it was something else entirely -- it was very, very simple.

A theoretical perfectly square H (artist's conception)

I mean, obviously, a perfectly square H is a hard thing to pull off. You'd need like a T-square or shit.

"Although we explored dozens of symbols, the one everyone gravitated to was the simplest of all: a perfectly square H," Bierut explained.

Wait, I thought it turned out to be "anything but" simple, but now it's the "simplest."

"But its simplicity was deceptive."

No, it's not deceptive. Block letters are kind of the opposite of deceptive.

But anyway, here's the deceptive part, per this design expert:

"What looked like an H was really a window, capable of endless transformations."

A perfectly square H which is really a window,
capable of "endless transformations"

Incidentally, I've seen windows. I've used windows. I have sometimes put lights around windows to make them festive.

I have never noticed they were capable of "endless transformations." Pretty much they alternate between the "Open" and "Closed" "transformation."

"Two" is not really one of your classic numbers associated with "endlessness," unless the two in question is in Teen Wolf 2.

Though, if you want to be a stickler, I suppose you can say that Zeno's Arrow can be endlessly transformed into Zeno's Arrow, and each infinitesmial iota of sliding between "open" and "shut" can count as a new "transformation," and therefore a window is in fact capable of "endless transformations."

I guess you can also break the window, and glass could shatter in a not-quite-infinite-but-near-enough number of ways. More "endless transformations."

But that would be hard to achieve. You'd need an endless supply of protean window panes and an endless supply of transformative rocks.

For purposes of comparison, here's a window which suggests it just might be capable of "endless transformations:"


Note two important things about this window:

1, it's visually interesting; and

2, it belongs to a Fuckin' Wizard who has actually read several books about how to achieve endless transformations with your Fuckin' Wizard Powerz.

But this simple yet "anything but" simple design wasn't quite perfect yet -- while it wasn't an H, really, but an endlessly transforming window opening upon superdimensional vistas and higher planes beyond mortal man's ken, it wasn't quite perfect enough yet.

It needed one additional transformation -- infinity wasn't enough. Hillary Clinton needed infinity plus one.

By adding in an arrow, the logo was complete.



Ever buy a window? From like Home Depot?

I bet the packaging outside the window actually has an arrow on it to tell you which way the window should be installed.

So I bet this isn't even a novel look for a window.

These design geniuses (Jerry Seinfeld just emailed to ask, "Who arrrre these Design Geniuses?") realized that the simple but "anything but" simple H, which was really an endlessly-transforming window, wasn't quite endlessly transforming enough, and in fact was a bit static, which is the exact opposite of "transforming," whether endlessly, periodically, or whatever, but we're now very deep in the bullshit so let's just roll with it.

"We worried that the H alone, even as an ever-changing frame, was too static."

Bro, do you even lift concepts and buzzwords you barely understand?

Get ready for a final avalanche of meaningless buzzwords.

"We finally found what we thought was the right finishing touch, the simplest thing in the world: an arrow, emerging naturally from the geometry of the letterform, pointing forward, toward the future."

It emerged so naturally from the letterform they had to crudely draw it on with red paint.

By the way, this endlessly transformative frame of a window with an arrow through it could also be visualized as a sad blue Democrat letterform which has been mortally wounded by an arrow red with heart's blood and Republican hatred which could be said to emerge naturally from the geometry of Hillary's scandals and complete lack of message or personality.

And the block nature of the letter could be read as a the plan of a cell block. That, too, emerges organically and yet complexly from the letterform and its numinous transformations of mind:space and discourses about power relationships between jailer and prisoner.

Anyway, so that's the story of how a logo which an 8 year old kid would have designed in his first draft became Hillary's much criticized amateurish symbol of failure and incompetency.

You gotta see this sketchbook of "new and different" conceptspaces for the letterform "H," some with arrows in them.

Posted by: Ace at 01:10 PM | Comments (455)
Post contains 933 words, total size 7 kb.

Scientists: The Tyranosaurus Rex Was a Caring Lover Who Offered A Lot of Foreplay In Order to Control Women's Bodies and Garner Masculine Achievements
— Ace

Just kidding on the back half, but the first half is what scientists are claiming.

They found an earlier cousin of the tyranosaurus, not a rex but a smaller one, and found they probably enjoyed Snout Sex.

Scientists now believe the dinosaur and other tyrannosaurs including T. rex wore a mask of large, flat scales, with regions of tough and protective amour-like skin around the snout and jaws.

They found the hard surface of the snout had many "foramina" - small nerve openings.

These turned the dinosaur's face into an incredibly sensitive "third hand".


Lead scientist Dr Thomas Carr, from Carthage College in Wisconsin, said: "Given that the foramina are identical in tyrannosaurs indicates that they had super-sensitive skin as well."


Co-author Prof Jayc Sedlmayr, from Louisiana State University, said: "Our finding of a complex sensory web is especially interesting because it is derived from the trigeminal nerve which has an extraordinary evolutionary history of developing into wildly different 'sixth senses' in different vertebrates."

A sixth sense or a sexth sense, IYKWIMAITYD.

Posted by: Ace at 12:19 PM | Comments (269)
Post contains 222 words, total size 2 kb.

Nunes: FBI Continues Stonewalling on Requests to Disclose Which Persons Were "Unmasked" In Reports They Circulated
— Ace

I wonder why.

Nunes said last Wednesday that the FBI had not said whether it would respond to the committee's March 15 letter. He told THE WEEKLY STANDARD on Tuesday that the agency was still not cooperating, and that he did not know why.

"We're still having an issue there," he said. "I'm trying to get to the bottom of that."


The committee letter specifically requested the names of any unmasked U.S. persons related to the Trump or Clinton campaigns whose identities were disseminated from June 2016 to January 2017. They also asked for the names of agencies or officials that requested or authorized the unmasking and dissemination of that information.

Posted by: Ace at 11:16 AM | Comments (282)
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

Media Snarking on Mike Pence's and Wife's Marital Rules
— Ace

The Vice President never dines alone with another woman, in order to avoid temptation or even the appearance of impropriety which could spark jealousy or mistrust in his wife. I assume his wife follows a similar rule.

This is a pretty strict rule, but a wise one; temptations will happen, jealousies will erupt, unless you're pretty careful about just never putting yourself in a situation that could cause such things.

Certainly there's nothing wrong with it -- and a lot that's right with it. The most effective way to avoid being burned by fire is to never play with fire.

But the media, which never found anything curious about the Obama's his-and-hers separate vacations, or the Clinton's his-and-hers separate sex lives, finds this all very strange, and has been snarking on it for 48 hours.

Posted by: Ace at 10:04 AM | Comments (419)
Post contains 153 words, total size 1 kb.

Trump: We Have to Defeat the Democrats in 2018, As Well as the Freedom Caucus
— Ace

Hoo boy.

Posted by: Ace at 09:02 AM | Comments (479)
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

Conflict of Interest? What's That?
— Open Blogger

Yesterday I wrote about the State of California's lawfare against the Center For Medical Progress to punish them for cutting into Planned Parenthood's business, which consists mainly of collecting money from frightened young girls.

The article I quoted had this bit:

The California Department of Justice, under the auspices of now-Senator Kamala Harris, raided Daleiden’s home for footage in April 2016

Senator Kamala Harris. That's Kamala "possible frontrunning Democratic candidate for president in 2020" Harris. But there's more to the story:

Officials from California Attorney General and Kamala Harris office and Planned Parenthood collaborated to draft legislation targeting the pro-life activist whose undercover videos showed officials for the nation’s largest abortion provider discussing the sale of fetal body parts, emails show.

The emails depict conversations between the state agency and Planned Parenthood over AB 1671, which would amend the penal code to make secretly recording and disseminating communications with health care providers a crime. Gov. Jerry Brown has until the end of the month to sign or veto the bill.

AB 1671 is a response to the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover video series spearheaded by David Daleiden.

So if they were honest, they would just call AB 1671 the "Shut Up About Planned Parenthood's Chop Shops and F* You, Center For Medical Progress In Particular" Act.

But can they get away with this?

Ronald D. Rotunda, a professor of jurisprudence at Chapman University, said the emails show Ms. Harris is a “tool of Planned Parenthood.” He said it is not uncommon for the attorney general to play a role in the legislative process, but added that Ms. Harris in this case was “working with Planned Parenthood to protect it from criminal prosecution.”

I rate this statement: true.

Also, this one.

To describe Kamala Harris' relationship with Planned Parenthood as 'incestuous' gives incest a bad name.

And it gets even better: This latest witch hunt against Planned Parenthood's enemies is led by California's Attorney General, Inspector Javert Xavier Becerra, who is himself a recipient of campaign contributions from PP. It's such a dog's breakfast of conflict-of-interest that it is difficult to imagine it not getting immediately tossed.

But things never seem to work out that way. CMP is probably going to have to appeal a bunch of times, and spend a lot of money doing so. Which, no doubt, is exactly Becerra's intention.

I wish there was *one* crack investigative reporter from the MSM (you know, the kind they all imagine themselves to be), with the guts to ask "Mr. Becerra, isn't this prosecution a conflict of interest for you since you're a recipient of donations from Planned Parenthood? In fact, isn't that pretty much the very definition of 'conflict of interest?'"

Yeah, I know.

Posted by: Open Blogger at 07:52 AM | Comments (259)
Post contains 465 words, total size 4 kb.

<< Page 1 >>
127kb generated in CPU 1.21, elapsed 2.4629 seconds.
45 queries taking 2.3844 seconds, 281 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.