Archive for the ‘Stupid is as Stupid Does’ Category

More lies from the Herald

September 22, 2007
“Heralding” The Truth And Setting The Record Straight
 
Friday, September 21, 2007
 

The Miami Herald, which on several occasions over the years has called for renewal of the Clinton Gun Ban, has done so again, and made some irresponsibly inaccurate claims in the process.

 

The newspaper brought up the issue again in September, after Shawn LaBeet, a/k/a Kevin Wehner, used some sort of AK-47-type rifle to murder one Miami-Dade police officer and wound three others, after two of the officers followed him to his house in connection with a possible burglary. Several years before, LaBeet had faced charges of aggravated assault and battery with a firearm, for shooting his girlfriend in the leg after marijuana turned up missing from his house.

 

Following LaBeet’s shooting of the police officers, the Herald’s editorial staff claimed that the Clinton ban should be reinstated not only because of that crime, but also because “Seung-Hui Cho used a high-capacity assault weapon to kill 32 people at Virginia Tech last April.”

 

The newspaper was wrong on both points. Expiration of the Clinton ban, which took effect in 1994, had no effect on foreign-made AK-47-type rifles, because those rifles were banned from importation by a more restrictive BATF regulation in 1989, which BATF made even more restrictive in 1998. And, as widely reported in numerous other newspapers and in official reports, there were no “assault weapons” at Virginia Tech.

Meanwhile, Herald columnist Ana Menendez said that America is a “thoroughly messed up society,” and that LaBeet’s rifle “can fire 600 rounds in one minute.”

 

Of course, if Menendez had bothered to get her facts straight before voicing her opinion, she would have discovered three things. First, while a fully-automatic assault rifle may have a cyclic rate of 600 rounds per minute, La Beet’s so-called “assault weapon” was a semi-automatic.

 

Second, while a fully-automatic rifle might be capable of firing 10 rounds per second, and there are 60 seconds in a minute, to fire 600 rounds would require 19 or 20 magazine changes, depending on how many rounds were loaded into standard-capacity 30-round magazines. (Typically, only 28 or 29 rounds are loaded, for improved reliability). The magazine changes alone would require almost all of Menendez’ “one minute.”

 

Third, due to the heat build-up associated with firing ammunition, the sustained rate of fire for such a rifle is roughly one round every 4-5 seconds. For example, the Army states that the sustained rate of fire for an M16 is 12-15 rounds per minute–enough for defending the country, but apparently not enough for a newspaper columnist pushing an agenda against gun ownership.

 

Since neither the Herald’s editorial staff nor its hyperbolic columnist were interested gathering the facts on the so-called “assault weapon” issue, they also failed to mention that several studies conducted for Congress under the auspices of the National Institutes of Justice, and by the Congressional Research Service, found that the Clinton ban’s gun provisions had no discernable effect on crime, and its magazine provisions may have increased criminally-inflicted gun woundings.

 

For more information on the Clinton Gun Ban, please visit http://www.clintongunban.com/.

source:http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3241

IS AMERICA RACIST? « Neil McKenty Weblog

September 21, 2007

IS AMERICA RACIST? « Neil McKenty Weblog

The very first thing that I noticed was that this was hailed as “The first Civil rights” demonstration of the century. Someone has had their head stuck in the ground. This is so ignorant that I will not even bother to post citations about all of the other actions having to do with civil rights that have been performed since the century began.

Should the “white” kids have put the nooses up on the tree? Of course not, that was just plain dumb. Should the “black” kids have retaliated with violence? No, there are a lot of better ways that the situation could have been addressed.

Can the discrepancy in health insurance and economic circumstances be extrapolated across the rest of the country as racism as the story implies? Ask Walter Williams about that…

Frankin’ Foods got nothing on this!

September 17, 2007

The new supermarket near our house has an automatic water mister to keep the produce fresh.

Just before it goes on, you hear the sound of distant thunder and the smell of fresh rain.

When you approach the milk cases, you hear cows mooing and witness the scent of fresh hay.

When you approach the egg case, you hear hens cluck and cackle and the air is filled with the pleasing aroma of bacon and eggs frying.

The veggie department features the smell of fresh buttered corn.

I don’t buy toilet paper there any more.

Stolen from…


http://TexasFred.net/

• Sick Bastards Protest At Ground Zero « Ed Gruberman كافر#comment-147

September 12, 2007

• Sick Bastards Protest At Ground Zero « Ed Gruberman كافر#comment-147

Great story about some really disturbed folks.

Gun Town wants free fire zone!

August 25, 2007

coltgunsitess.jpghttp://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/cobb/stories/2007/08/21/guntown_0821.html

Yes, this one will make it into the stupid is as stupid does category. Case in point; Chris Smith will remember this incident if he reads this.

Several years ago the Bloods and Crips were in a turf war involving Denver’s City Park. One day it evolved into gunfire, and a small child was hit by a bullet. Now, what the gun haters will not tell you is that it was far from a single shot that was fired. The gang members, true to form were undisciplined in their firearms training, and resorted to the spray and pray method. While they did indeed hit a child in a stroller, and spread terror, they were just plain ineffective. That, good people, is why one good man (or woman) with a gun can defeat many that have guns, but are in fact inept in their proper use.

It doesn’t matter one bit where the venue is, be it a school, a park, or a government building. Disallowing the good people to be effectively armed only creates free fire zones for those that would do harm to others. Would it stop all of the violence that may occur? Of course not. But at least those with decent morals, and determination would stand a chance against the maniacs that roam this world that we live in.

Just War Doctrine, and what it means. « Conservative Libertarian Outpost

August 25, 2007

Just War Doctrine, and what it means. « Conservative Libertarian Outpost

Just War Doctrine, and what it means.

August 25, 2007

I was in a Yahoo Chat room, and a young woman was on a rant. Nothing new about that, but her subject was war. War is inherently evil was her premise. Further, anyone that ever engages in war is evil, at least that is her hypothesis. I happen to believe a bit differently. I questioned her about her beliefs and while I believe that she is, or was sincere; She is horribly misinformed. It has been some time since I studied ethics in college, and high minded Kantian philosophy has to step aside in favor of Utilitarianism when someone is pointing a weapon at you or your loved ones.

That being said, the earliest documentation of the idea that war can or cannot be justified that I am aware of is found in the writings of the Roman Catholic Church. From that we find the following;

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraphs 2302-2317, authoritatively teaches what constitutes the just defense of a nation against an aggressor. Called the Just War Doctrine, it was first enunciated by St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD). Over the centuries it was taught by Doctors of the Church, such as St. Thomas Aquinas, and formally embraced by the Magisterium, which has also adapted it to the situation of modern warfare. The following explanation of Just War Doctrine follows the schema given in the Catechism.

At we find further discussion.

Just-war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be either theoretical or historical. The theoretical aspect is concerned with ethically justifying war and forms of warfare. The historical aspect, or the “just war tradition” deals with the historical body of rules or agreements applied (or at least existing) in various wars across the ages. For instance international agreements such as the Geneva and Hague conventions are historical rules aimed at limiting certain kinds of warfare. It is the role of ethics to examine these institutional agreements for their philosophical coherence as well as to inquire into whether aspects of the conventions ought to be changed.

As I said at the beginning. I believe differently than that young lady. I believe that war cannot only be justified but that it is in fact mandatory under certain conditions. I do not believe, as do so many of my fellow Libertarians, that all war needs to be reactive, that is, after the fact (of having been attacked.) Preemptive war can be justified in many cases; It is called being “quicker on the trigger.” Now, before all the Christians jump all over me about the commandment “Thou shall not kill.” Go find a Diaglot, a word for word translation, and read the actual commandment; “Thou shall not commit murder” is what it says.

So young pacifist lady, sleep well, because rude men stand guard protecting you.

War, what is it good for..?

August 25, 2007

I was looking through the wordpress categories this morning, and there seemed to be a theme. One even asked “War what is it good for?”

One thing that I am sure of, is that the people that hate war the most, are those that have fought in them. That being said, each has also said that it was something that had to be done. It has removed tyrants from oppressing people. King George, and Saddam Hussein come to mind. It has relieved the world of totalitarians bent on destruction or the imposition of their political or religious beliefs. Ever hear of a guy called Adolf Hitler?

Certainly war should be a last resort in all but a few select cases, but it is not at all the evil boggy man that so many these days want to cast it as. It removes the evil more often than not. At least in final battles. The by products of war are also something to think about. Advances in medicine and meteorology come to mind.

So, for those of you that claim that war has no value, I will paint a historical picture; Enjoy your gruel as you watch your daughter being raped by the descendent’s of Genghis Khan, you have faith that Allah will rescue you, a faith that was forced upon you…

Global Warming, Global Cooling…

August 18, 2007

Source: Patriot Post 

Yet more about this new religion that is being force fed to us by those that know what is better for us than we ourselves do. What a farce! When, in all of history, or even beyond, has the Earth not been either warming or cooling?

Most of the evidence concerning U.S. temperature trends is collected by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, which gathers information from about 1,200 weather observation stations across the nation. These stations are small wooden sheds with thermometers, which are read at intervals, mostly by volunteers. Many are located in sprawling urban and industrial centers, known as “heat islands,” and are subject to higher readings than stations in rural areas where temperatures are subject mostly to “land use effects.”

Most of the recent global-warming alarmists use 1998 as the benchmark for the hottest year on record, but it turns out that their reporting is flawed, the result of a math blunder.

In fact, 1934 was the hottest year on record, and four of the ten hottest years in the U.S. were recorded in the 1930s. The second hottest year on record was 1998, but the third hottest was 1921, not 2006. Notably, six of the ten hottest years occurred prior to 90 percent of the economic growth associated with increased greenhouse-gas emissions.

H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, reports, “Much of the current global-warming fear has been driven by [NASA scientist James] Hansen’s pronouncements, and he routinely claims to have been censored by the Bush administration for his views on warming. Now that NASA, without fanfare, has cleaned up his mess, Hansen has been silent—I guess we can chalk this up to self-censorship.”

New climate reports

In the winter of 2007, NASA satellites indicated that water temperatures in the Gulf of Alaska were dropping, suggesting that cooling Pacific waters may be a precursor to the reversal of a 30-year warming trend. The cooling resulted in the coldest season of Arctic air the lower 48 have seen in more than three decades.

Additionally, Reuters “News” Service reports, “Australian scientists have discovered a giant underwater current that is one of the last missing links of a system that connects the world’s oceans and helps govern global climate. New research shows that a current sweeping past Australia’s southern island of Tasmania toward the South Atlantic is a previously undetected part of the world climate system’s engine-room.”

This, of course, raises an all-important question: How can the climate debate be “settled” if we still don’t know what we don’t know?

Climate modeling

The computer models cited by Albert Gore and company are outcome-based, depending on how a programmer varies some of the five million input parameters or the multitude of negative and positive feedbacks in the program.

Scott Armstrong is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and one of the world’s foremost experts on long-range forecasting. He is author of “Long-Range Forecasting,” the most frequently cited book on forecasting methodology.

Armstrong and Kesten Green of New Zealand’s Monash University examined the IPCC’s report, and, at the 27th Annual International Symposium on Forecasting, they concluded, “Claims that the Earth will get warmer have no more credence than saying that it will get colder.”

Armstrong bet Gore $10,000 that he couldprovide a better climate forecast than that of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which Gore cites regularly. “The methodology was so poor that I thought a bet based on complete ignorance of the climate could do better,” said Armstrong. “We call it ‘the naive model’.” Gore’s office replied, “Please understand that Mr. Gore is not taking on any new projects at this time.”

The warming Solar System

As it turns out, there are some other planets in our solar system which are experiencing global warming—and these planets don’t have SUVs.

Mars is getting hotter. NASA scientist Lori Fenton reports that the Red Planet has warmed by around one-half degree Celsius in the last three decades, which likely contributes to the retreat of Mars’s southern polar ice cap.

According to Habibullo Abdussamatov, director of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, “The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars. Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance.”

On Neptune, MIT researchers say that planet’s largest moon, Triton, has heated up significantly since 1989, when the Voyager space probe sent back readings from the planet. Astronomer James Elliot and colleagues from MIT, Lowell Observatory and Williams College report, “At least since 1989, Triton has been undergoing a period of global warming. Percentage-wise, it’s a very large increase.”

Imke de Pater and Philip Marcus of the University of California, Berkeley, report that Jupiter is growing a new red spot. “The storm is growing in altitude,” de Pater says, which indicates a temperature increase in that region. The researchers think that, near term, the temperature on Jupiter may increase six degrees Celsius in large areas.

University of Hawaii astronomer David Tholen and his colleagues report that even though Pluto was closer to the Sun in 1989, they are not surprised by a warming that began this year. “It takes time for materials to warm up and cool off, which is why the hottest part of the day on Earth is usually around 2 or 3 p.m. rather than local noon,” Tholen said. “This warming trend on Pluto could easily last for another 13 years.” They predict Pluto’s temperature will rise two degrees Celsius before its next cooling trend.

The Climate Inquisitors

If you are a scientist, politician or journalist, and refuse to comport with Albert Gore’s eco-theological orthodoxy, you’d best put on some body armor.

Speaking to Al Gore’s minions during “Live Earth: The Concerts for a Climate in Crisis,” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., said of political leaders who suggest global warming is not predominantly manmade, “This is treason and we need to start treating them as traitors.” Junior added, “Get rid of all those rotten politicians we have in Washington, DC.” We presume his bloated uncle is excluded?

The University of Oregon’s George Taylor is that state’s official climatologist, but Gov. Ted Kulongoski wants to strip Taylor of that title because his skepticism about CO2 as a primary factor in global warming interferes with Oregon’s goals to reduce CO2.

Elsewhere, the Weather Channel’s Dr. Heidi Cullen is demanding decertification of weather reporters who dare question global-warming orthodoxy.

Academicians who express their skepticism about global-warming causes are at high risk of losing research grants. Conversely, those who advocate for CO2 causation are in line for some big-money handouts. Thus, when academicians say “green,” they aren’t necessarily referring to the environment.

“Journalist” David Roberts is setting his sights on the “denial industry,” proclaiming, “When we’ve finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we’re in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards [read: ‘skeptics’]—some sort of climate Nuremberg.”

Nonetheless, some of the most ardent global alarmists are starting to change their tune. In 2005, Chris Mooney wrote “The Republican War on Science,” a thorough indictment of the GOP’s attempt to discredit scientific work on climate change. When he started research for his latest book, “Storm World: Hurricanes, Politics, and the Battle over Global Warming,” he assumed it would be more of the same. Then, after meeting with leading climatologists, he concluded, “There’s a wide range of respectable positions here. In the end, I had to write a completely different book.”

Quote of the week

“The world meat industry produces 18 percent of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions, more than transportation produces. A gallon of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream requires electricity guzzling refrigeration, and four gallons of milk produced by cows that simultaneously produce eight gallons of manure and flatulence with eight gallons of methane. The cows do this while consuming lots of grain and hay, which are cultivated by using tractor fuel, chemical fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides, and transported by fuel-consuming trains and trucks.” —George Will

Abbott and Costello in the computer age

August 17, 2007

You have to be old enough to remember Abbott and Costello, and too old to
REALLY understand computers, to fully appreciate this.
For those of us who sometimes get flustered by our computers, please read on
.


If Bud Abbott and Lou Costello were alive today, their infamous sketch, “Who
s on First?” might have turned out something like this:

COSTELLO CALLS TO BUY A COMPUTER FROM ABBOTT

ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?

COSTELLO: Thanks. I’m setting up an office in my den and I’m thinking about
buying a computer.

ABBOTT: Mac?

COSTELLO: No, the name’s Lou.

ABBOTT: Your computer?

COSTELLO: I don’t own a computer. I want to buy one.

ABBOTT: Mac?

COSTELLO: I told you, my name’s Lou.

ABBOTT: What about Windows?

COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here?

ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with Windows?

COSTELLO: I don’t know. What will I see when I look at the windows?

ABBOTT: Wallpaper.

COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer and software.

ABBOTT: Software for Windows?

COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can use to write proposals
, trac k expenses and run my business. What do you have?

ABBOTT: Office.

COSTELLO:! Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend anything?

ABBOTT: I just did.

COSTELLO: You just did what?

ABBOTT: Recommend something.

COSTELLO: You recommended something?

ABBOTT: Yes.

COSTELLO: For my office?

ABBOTT: Yes.

COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office?

ABBOTT: Office.

COSTELLO: Yes, for my office!

ABBOTT: I recommend Office with Windows.

COSTELLO: I already have an office with windows! OK, let’s just say I’m
sitting at my computer and I want to type a proposal.
What do I need?

ABBOTT: Word.

COSTELLO: What word?

ABBOTT: Word in Office.

COSTELLO: The only word in office is office.

ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.

COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows?

ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue “W”.

COSTELLO: I’m going to cli ck your blue “w” if you don’t start with some
straight answers. What about financial bookkeeping?
You have anything I can track my money with?

ABBOT T: Money.

COSTELLO: That’s right. What do you have?

ABBOTT: Money.

COSTELLO: I need money to track my money?

ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer.

COSTELLO: What’s bundled with my computer?

ABBOTT: Money.

COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer?

ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge.

COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer? How much?

ABBOTT: One copy.

COSTELLO: Isn’t it illegal to copy money?

ABBOTT: Microsoft gave us a license to copy Money.

COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money?

ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!

(A few days later)

ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you?

COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?

ABBOTT: Click on “START”………….