Dennis the Peasant

Evidently Dennis, Rather Than Dr. Chu, Is The One Being Silly...

Progressive dim-bulb/enviroweenie Bradford Plummer points out that Dr. Chu's idea to paint the world white isn't silly at all:

British reporters (and Matt Drudge) have been having gentle fun with Energy Secretary Steven Chu's recent remarks that we should paint our roofs white to slow the pace of global warming. But Chu's totally right! The science on this is clear: Replacing black asphalt on roofs, parking lots, and sidewalks with brighter material would reflect more of the sun's rays and do quite a bit to cool the planet.

..........

To give an easy example, just refitting the 30 billion or so square feet of commercial roof space in the United States would be the equivalent of taking roughly 75 million cars off the road for a year. And, as a bonus, buildings with white roofs tend to stay 30 percent cooler than their black-topped counterparts during the summer, which curtails energy use. Obviously this wouldn't stop global warming, but on the list of pain-free measures that would make a fair bit of inroads on the problem, this has to rank very high up there.

Dr. Chu's totally right? Gag me with a spoon, Andrea... That is so not happening.

I love the fact that Plummer considers the refitting of 30 billion square feet of commercial roofing to be easy and pain-free.

Today's Fearless Prognostication...

Swami Dennis the Peasant looks into the future...

I will bet dollars to donuts that within a month of the November, 2010 elections, Republican politicians, partisans and operatives will begin navel-gazing on the subject of why they aren't getting much support from Latino voters.

Morons.

It Seems I Misunderstood Dr. Steven Chu...

 

Oops. Well, there's half a day I'll never get back.

Update: Well, based on a few emails I've received, it seems a number of you didn't get the above joke. Discounting the idea that it wasn't funny in the first place, what appears to be going on is this: Lots of you didn't read about the Obama Administration's Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu, coming up with this jaw-dropping bit of brain-fartery:

As a weapon against global warming, it sounds so simple and low-tech that it could not possibly work. But the idea of using millions of buckets of whitewash to avert climate catastrophe has won the backing of one of the world’s most influential scientists.

Steven Chu, the Nobel prize-winning physicist appointed by President Obama as Energy Secretary, wants to paint the world white. A global initiative to change the colour of roofs, roads and pavements so that they reflect more sunlight and heat could play a big part in containing global warming, he said yesterday.

Now I fully understand that Dr. Chu has more brains than God, but folks, this really is pathetic. I would suggest that whatever merits Dr. Chu might possess in the way of being a brilliant scientist don't seem to be translating well into the public policy arena... 'Cause one of the first rules of governance is to avoid proposing world-saving environmental policies that fail the Laugh Test.

Then again, maybe Dr. Chu wants second billing on Joe Biden's comedy tour. 

Enough Already...

For all of the crummy things I managed to do in my 52 years of sinning, at least it can be said that no one can call me a lawyer. I loathe lawyers, and always have. On a professional level, any CPA would view a lawyer much in the way a cobra regards a mongoose. Given that, the idea that I would be interested in burning bandwidth over President Obama's choice of Sonia Studebaker - or whatever her name is - for the Supreme Court should appear to all of you as a bit far-fetched. And for those of you who don't take hints all that well, let me spell it out...

This is going to be a Sonia Sotomayer-free zone. Period.

Here are a few of the many reasons for this state of affairs:

1)  I ain't a fuckin' lawyer, so the idea that I can provide insight as to her qualifications, etc. is pretty much a laugh waiting to happen. OK?

2)  You ain't a fuckin' lawyer either. So the idea you can provide insight is also a laugh waiting to happen. OK?

3)  Even if you are a lawyer, chances are you don't do much in the area of constitutional law. Just because you're a fuckin' lawyer doesn't mean you know all aspects of the law. So unless you have some kick-ass constitutional law qualficiations, put a sock in it.

4)  And besides, if you are a kick-ass constitutional lawyer, what the hell are you doing at my site? Being here pretty much disqualfies you on the grounds that you lack sound judgment.

5)  Regurgitating talking points from paid political partisans and journalists (99% of whom are journalists because they were too stupid to get into law school) does not qualify as either educational or interesting.

6)  Two weeks ago none of you had the faintest fuckin' idea of who Sonia Studebaker was.

7)  There's no chance she won't be confirmed. So, if you're a Democrat you're getting huffy for no particular reason, and if you're a Republican you've simply decided that hitting yourself over the head with a 2x4 sounds like a good idea.

8)  Yeah, yeah, yeah... She said a Latina woman is better than a white man. Blah, blah, blah, woof, woof, woof and big fuckin' deal. It's not like you haven't heard that sort of racial/gender/identity bullshit out of the mouth of half the "persons of color" and/or femnist womyn you've dealt with over the past 20 years. It's part of the joy of being a white male. Deal with it.

So that's it. If you want to tell penis jokes or point out that Dr. Steven Chu appears to pretty much be a moron, this is the place to be. If you want to argue over Sonia, take it elsewhere.

And Remember, This Guy Is A Professional Writer...

Noted businessman, journalist, born-again believer and Iranian hit squad dodger Roger L. Simon is also a legal scholar. Who knew?

Anyway, here's the first paragraph of Da Raj's take on the Sotomayor nomination:

No doubt Sonia Sotomayor’s obscure appearance on a Duke University panel will be one of the video hits of the Internet this week and possibly for a few weeks to come. It should be. What’s interesting - and revealing - about the video is the collusive laughter between Sotomayor and the audience about legislating from the bench - something Obama assured us in his introduction of the jurist she does not do. Maybe Sonia should try stand up.

Man, can that son-of-a-bitch write, or what?

Question the First: How does one have an "obscure appearance"? I'll just bet what Da Raj meant was that Sotomayor made an appearance on an obscure Duke University panel. Just a guess on my part, though...

Question the Second: What exactly is "collusive laughter"? How does one distinquish "collusive laughter" from "non-collusive laughter"?

Maybe it's time to start a "This Week's Roger L. Simon Sentence". Or is that more abuse than even you, my hardy readers, can cope with?

Wednesday's This Week's Amanda Sentence...

Sentence #1:

Having had weeks to prepare for Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court hasn’t helped Republican hysterics take the time they need to think very carefully about launching attacks (god forbid they should accept that Obama has a right to nominate justices, of course---no matter who it is, they’re going to shit bricks, 100% regardless of the person’s views or qualifications, simply because they just don’t accept Obama’s right to hold office) so that they don’t sound like braindead morons who are too laden down with sexism and racism to even respond coherently to this nomination. 

97 words. Goddamn it, I thought we had a classic 100+ word Amanda Sentence. It's been so long...

Sentence #2:

They’ve got no excuse---26 days is ample time to come up with attacks that aren’t blatantly racist and sexist, even if they are fundamentally racist and sexist.

28 words. I suppose it would never occur to Amanda that if someone is fundamentally racist and sexist, they might not care whether their attacks are either racist or sexist. That's kind of how the whole racist and sexist thingy works.

Sentence #3:

Thanks to reader Catherine for waking me up with a reminder that, as we all suspected he would, Douche-hat is going to give into the urge to use his NY Times column to hump his favorite theme, which is that women are a sick, weird subspecies of human that, while looking human, are simply too disgusting with their girl bits and overwhelming desires to be treated like human beings.

70 or so words. As you might have gathered, Amanda's a bit miffed that she wasn't offered the column the New York Times gave to Ross Douthat. Fortunately, Amanda's handling it with the sort of dignity and class we've come to expect from her.

Sentence #4:

Well, someone’s full of shit.

5 words. That goes without saying, Amanda.

Sentence #5:

If you believe that men and women log in the same number of work hours, and there’s a growing gap between them of happiness, then there’s only one explanation, I’m guessing: women are simps.

34 words. "Simps"? Must be some sort of femnist terminology I've missed along the way...

Sentence #6:

I wish I’d known about this while I was there, or I would have made a special effort to go see the exhibit.

23 words. Can anyone tell me why the word "or" is included in this sentence?

Sentence #7:

Repackaging plain, old-fashioned sexism as if it’s somehow brave and insightful is Slate’s schtick, and they do it because it flatters the sensibilities of people who know, deep down inside, that they’re not rebels, not interesting, and basically reactionary.

40 words. Huh. I thought that was Pandagon's schtick.

Sentence #8:

I’ve worked in a lot of different environments, but one thing I’ve noticed across the board is that single, childless women get promoted a lot faster than mothers, and this is true even in environments where the bosses try to be conscientious of not discriminating.

45 words. That was especially true of the Edwards campaign, what with John out trolling for nookie day and night...

Sentence #9:

The only thing that’s gotten really up my ass is the way the word “terrorist” has crept into the discussion, being used even by liberals and even by Obama, even though the case hasn’t been made against a single Gitmo prisoner in question.

43 words, 3 of them being "even". The word "terrorist" has crept into Amanda's ass? There was a discussion going on in Amanda's ass? Who knew?

This Week's Special Grand Jury Prize For The Most Insightful Insight About Gender, Politics And Body Parts...

Gender is a fundamental aspect of politics, and it’s impossible to separate people’s feelings and anxieties about gender from the reasons they vote this way or that.  Specifically, one’s tendency to be a right winger is quite dependent on whether or not someone is into phallic worship, coupled with a strong fear of castration.

How do femnists and progressives repeat this sort of stuff to each other without laughing out loud?

..........

Be sure to vote early and often, and this week, voting will be its own reward.

Wherein Roger L. Simon Scares And Bores Himself At The Same Time...

From deep thinker, born-again believer and Iranian hit squad dodger Roger L. Simon:

What scares me most about Barack Obama is the narcissism/megalomania. It’s a consistent theme throughout his life with which I (first introduction of the “I” word) could bore you to death.

That's right, Roger L. Simon bitching about someone else's narcissism/megalomania. Pot? Meet Kettle.

Question: If something really scares you, how can it bore you at the same time?

It's bad enough that Da Raj can't do enough fact checking to get the name of a murdered journalist correct in his big tome on finding God. Now, however, he's to the point where he can't write two sentences without contradicting himself.

Oy.

I Thought This Was What They Wanted...

For as long as I can remember, progressives have been arguing that the Bush Administration's Global War On Terror was fundamentally flawed because what was required was not military action, but rather law enforcement action. Then along comes a law enforcement (rather than military) triumph in thwarting jihadist terrorism, and progressives - incredibly - can do nothing but trash it!

Amazing.

Here is Talking Points Memo's take on the FBI's thwarting of the plot to bomb several New York synagogues, which is as good an example as any of this bizarre phenomenon:

The Newburgh Four -- And The Goverment Mole Who Betrayed Them

We're starting to get a rich picture of the four hapless Jihadis who were arrested Wednesday night for plotting to bomb two New York synagogues, as well as the FBI informant who deceived them. And the overall portrait that's emerging is that of a group of struggling, disaffected petty criminals, who bonded at a Newburgh, NY mosque over having spent time in prison, before being taken in by a Pakistani immigrant looking to win leniency for a crime of his own.

There's little doubt the bumbling would-be bombers went far enough with the plot to demonstrate that they had the intention to commit terror, and for that they'll pay the price. But the whole tale comes off perhaps more as a sad glimpse into the lives of a loose group of aimless and obscurely embittered Americans than as a dire illustration of the threat of home-grown terrorism.

.....

It's easy to laugh at this gang of goons -- and we've done our share of that. But, frankly, it's also hard not to feel some compassion for what looks like a group of struggling, credulous, under-educated men, existing on the fringes of society, who lacked the intelligence or willpower to avoid getting taken in by a government informant anxious to mitigate his own situation, and by their own vague understanding of radical Islam and the hole it might fill in their lives.

And as for what this might say about the threat of home-grown terror, it's almost reassuring that the biggest terror bust we've seen in a while has this sad-sack group at his [sic] center.

If Barack Obama's national security speech last week sounded muddled - and it should have had you been paying attention - there can be little doubt as to why: How can you be a serious, responsible political leader on national security matters on the one hand and attempt to appease folks who think(?) like Zach Roth on the other?

 

Everything You Need To Know About President Obama's National Security Speech In One Simple Sentence...

Well, I've read President Obama's national security speech twice, and this is what I come up with in the way of translation:

The Bush Administration fucked it all up, and the Obama Administation intends continue down that same path.

I can't say I disagree much with the President's assessment of Bush's War on Terror, but once you look behind the rhetorical flourishes, it is apparent that the status quo remains intact. For all the hysteria in the media and the blogosphere, it appears the fundamental differences between Barack Obama and Dick Cheney have to do with tactics, rather than strategy. I find that very depressing.

Friday's Music Videos: Do Da Gitmo Shuffle... Boogie Your Bad Self On Down, 'Cause You're Gonna Be There For A While!

I managed to find a much better video of R.L. Burnside doing Rollin' and Tumblin' than the one I posted a few weeks ago. Nobody did this song better than R.L.:

What R.L. understood was that when playing Rollin' and Tumblin' on electric guitar, it's the lick that counts... not the song. And that's why everyone from Cream to Bob Dylan never got this one right; the only thing that matters is that guitar lick.

Here's the superb I Gotta Get You Girl from Junior Kimbrough:

I love Kimbrough's electric guitar work.

And then there's Sallie Mae by another master blues guitarist, T-Model Ford:

Finally, we'll finish up with Mississippi Fred McDowell doing John Henry:

Blues guitar just doesn't get any better than that.