Monday, February 28, 2011
British prime Minister, David Cameron
The Klown hopes Farrakhan is right ... for once.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Poor wittow babies
Pure genius
We put indented plates on bus stop, mall, and park benches, so that when people sat down, the message was imprinted on their thighs. This meant that as well as having branded seats, a veritable army of free media was created, with thousands of imprints being created and lasting up to an hour.
Great... what could possibly go wrong?
Robots might one day trace the origin of their consciousness to recent experiments aimed at instilling them with the ability to reflect on their own thinking.Riiiight... it's MUCH better to have robots who are "already superhuman" with the ability to continue functioning even if something goes wrong. What could possibly go wrong?
Although granting machines self-awareness might seem more like the stuff of science fiction than science, there are solid practical reasons for doing so, explains roboticist Hod Lipson at Cornell University's Computational Synthesis Laboratory.
"The greatest challenge for robots today is figuring out how to adapt to new situations," he says. "There are millions of robots out there, mostly in factories, and if everything is in the right place at the right time for them, they are superhuman in their precision, in their power, in their speed, in their ability to work repetitively 24/7 in hazardous environments—but if a bolt falls out of place, game over."
Full article here.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Hey look -- a science-tific study
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Connecticut Legislature At Work

Snopes.com report.
According to one description I read, the screen behind Rep. Hennessy is showing baseball scores, and one of the screens in the row ahead is on Facebook.
Moronic Media Matters claims Wisconsin protests and Tea Party protests are the same thing
In what amounts to an amazing display of left wing lunacy even by Media Matters standards, the Soros-backed scandal sheet has attacked Fox News yet again.
What has the evil Fox done now? According to Media Matters, “Fox News’ coverage of the Wisconsin protests over Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal to eliminate public employees’ collective bargaining rights, among other things, has been marked with repeated attacks on the protesters. However, by contrast, Fox has relentlessly promoted and even encouraged viewers to participate in tea party and “Tax Day” protests over the past few years.”
As much as we hate to admit it, Media Matters may have a point. The two events are exactly alike if you overlook the fact that the Tea Party was a grassroots movement that was entirely lawful, while the strike in Wisconsin is an illegal strike by teachers, or the fact that “doctors” wrote phony sick notes for the Wisconsin teachers which were not really necessary for the Tea Party members as once again THEY WERE NOT ACTING ILLEGALLY!
The liberal left, who consider themselves to be intellectual giants, seems to have a hard time with the word “illegal” as in “illegal strike” or “illegal immigrant.”
Speaking of hypocrisy however, why doesn’t Media Matters show some of the signs from Wisconsin portraying the Governor as Hitler and showing him in crosshairs? Wasn’t that the same “violent rhetoric” that the left was condemning mere weeks ago?
On second thought, Media Matters doesn’t have a point after all.






Source: MediaMatters
Remarkable, right? Liberals do not hesitate to compare their enemies to Hitler. Of course, expect nothing but disgust and disdain if you dare to compare their comrades to Hitler.
They get outraged when "Republicans redefine rape" (I'd share the link to moveon.org but "mysteriously", they don't have a search function on their homepage. Weird, right? I wonder why they'd do that. (As an aside, I got a chuckle out of their "Chip in $_____" box. Those libs are always looking for a handout and are always willing to use some outdated, hokey expression for begging. I'm surprised they haven't pulled out the always-clever "brother can you spare a dime?" that they made so popular after their "American Hero" FDR initiated and then prolonged the Great Depression.)) but it's perfectly fine to have picket signs advertising "gang bangs". Without mentioning the fact that if you need to talk about it, you aren't doing it, these people might want to stop talking about the splinter in their brother's eye and start focusing on the log in theirs. Matthew 7:1-7:5.
The fashion industry is racist.
Of course, nobody discusses the fact that black women dress differently than white women. Nobody discusses the fact that the color of your skin (even among different shades of the same race) drastically affects how clothes look on you. No- the problem is racism. Plain and simple. The debate is settled. Racism is a real problem in America and you need our help with it.(Newser) – Watch almost any runway show in the US and Europe, and you'll find black models in extremely short supply. That's the dirty secret of fashion, say many critics. "The industry is racist. In Milan black girls never work. In Paris it's still the same," British model booker Annie Wilshaw tells the Guardian. "It's 2011 and that's quite disgusting." You "know straight away" when clients are "not talking about a black girl," she adds. "They say they want 'a girl with long hair, who looks like a fairy' or something. When they want a black girl, they will say 'looking for mixed-race girl, tribal-prints location, desert scene.'"Some in the fashion world blame practicalities like lighting and makeup which are different for black models, and therefore more time consuming. Model choice is also "driven by what sells and, in general, white blond girls sell, that's the mindset," says the founder of a modeling agency. "In fact, black girls do sell but they're not given as many openings. It is safer to go with a white girl, and in a recession people are very conservative." But why blame fashion, some wonder. "How can you expect fashion not to be slightly racist when the world is still racist?" asks black model Leonie Anderson.
If everyone would just face the fact that the fashion industry is built upon narcissism, vanity, and status, they'd stop paying attention to it at all. It's all about power and exerting power over others and I don't care how many "powerful black women" you put on the Maury Povich show, the people who are willing to spend the most money on fashion aren't buying it.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
FDR on public sector unions
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
Monday, February 21, 2011
Another example of rampant Libspeak.
First, he proposed a state budget that would cut retirement and healthcare for workers like teachers and nurses, and strip away nearly all of their collective bargaining rights. But even more significantly, he announced last Friday that he had alerted the National Guard to be ready for state workers to strike or protest, an unprecedented step in modern times. ["modern times"? What's the definition? I suspect it's just a way of making the behavior seem archaic and therefore, bad, out-dated, and unintelligent.]
This would be the first time in nearly 80 years that the National Guard would be used to break a strike by Wisconsin workers, and the first time in over 40 years that the National Guard would be used against public workers anywhere in the country. The last time was the Memphis sanitation strike in 1968, just before Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination. [Right... and how is this emotionally highly-charged incident relevant? Did his assassination somehow cause any action by the National Guard?]
The outrage [as if Libs have any other emotion (except, of course, for fear] was immediate [This is probably just an estimate as opposed to an actual, scientific, measurement of time] across [unspecified, unbiased :D] labor message boards, [unspecified] Twitter and [unspecified] Facebook pages. Over the last two days, [probably] tens of thousands have protested in front of the capitol building in Madison in defiance [yet another heroic descriptor] of the governor, some [some=one, but "some" seems like more, so...] even camping overnight.
To understand the visceral, emotional nature of this outcry, you have to understand the history of the National Guard and the labor movement [ONLY from our perspective, of course] -- and what this means for the relationship between labor and the state today.
During the late 1800s and early 1900s, governors often mobilized the National Guard during strikes. Sometimes the Guard was genuinely neutral, assigned to buffer the dangerous zone between strikers and their employers. Other times, the Guard was explicitly charged with breaking the strike. During these instances, violence often erupted between strikers and soldiers with terrible, bloody results [This would be my first indicator to not argue with any military organization... until I was ready].
National Guard soldiers clashed with strikers [and unprepared strikers clashed with "soldiers" too but you know what we meant] in Buffalo, N.Y., Birmingham, Ala., Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, Salt Lake City and Telluride, Colo., at the turn of the 20th century. In just two years, between 1911 and 1913, the militia [Oops! Did we do that again? *blushes*] was mobilized against coal miners in West Virginia, textile workers in Massachusetts, textile workers in New Jersey, and copper miners in Michigan. During an infamous bloodbath in 1914, soldiers killed striking coal miners and their families in Ludlow, Colo., including at least six men, two women and 12 children [Listen, if it happened in 1914, it's likely that we have an exact death count by now, right? Also, how come they don't mention the fact that these striking coal miners put themselves and their families at mortal risk? I don't know about the rest of you, but I learned to pick my battles a LONG time ago... way before I had a wife and children about whom to be concerned].
During the 1934 Auto-Lite strike in Toledo, a battle raged for five days between 6,000 strikers and 1,300 members of the Ohio National Guard, leaving two strikers dead and more than 200 injured [Okay, I might be beating a dead horse here but if you outnumber your "enemy" more than 3 to 1 and you lose, you're bringing a knife to a gunfight. Furthermore, the only reason you didn't fare worse was that the National Guard was trying like hell not to kill or hurt any of you. Of course, 2 plus "more than" 200 of you insisted on having it their way.] Three years later, during the famous occupation of General Motors in Flint, Mich., the governor ordered thousands of soldiers to the factory, as the [slow learner] workers swore to resist them by force.
And in Wisconsin, Gov. Albert Schmedeman used the National Guard to disrupt a 1933 strike by dairy farmers, sometimes with bayonets and tear gas, when they tried to raise the price of milk. [Ever-credible, reliable, and again, unspecified] Newspapers reported that he was preparing for a "bona fide war" [War- you know- the last thing a newspaper wants]. The Guard mobilized again the next year during a strike by the United Auto Workers. It was the last time the National Guard would be used during a strike in Wisconsin. Until, possibly, now.
The use of the National Guard against workers is supposed to be a relic of the past ["supposed to be"? According to whom? It seems to me that or as long as civilians behave civilly, there's no need for "clashes" with the National Guard. Let's face it, ALL of us at one point in our lives wanted to get up in the face of some velvet rope bouncer but only those of us who were also in need of a beating ever did. Sure it's unfair. Sure it sucks. But that doesn't change the fact that you're still not going to win so spare yourself the humiliation/pain.], nearly unimaginable to us [That unimaginability is exactly the reason you people keep repeating the same mistakes expecting different results. Einstein said that repeating the same behavior and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. I say it's the definition of slow learning. Libs and their incessant repetitively insistent behavior reminds me of nothing more than a fly trying to penetrate a plate glass window and wondering if maybe this time it'll work.]. That's because of an uneasy understanding, evolved over time, between citizens and the state over the use of state force against civilians [as if they didn't try anything else first]. In her excellent book "Army Surveillance in America, 1775-1980," historian Joan Jensen argued that this understanding "maintained restraint, sometimes precariously, in using the army to defend the government from the domestic population."
In other words, Jensen argues that the concept of voluntary restraint by the executive branch -- as opposed to codified legal restraint -- is still largely the governing principle at work when deciding whether to mobilize a domestic military force. So Gov. Walker's action is significant because it is an expanded interpretation of the power of the executive office. This would introduce once again the idea that a governor could use the military to impose his personal, political will on a state. [Which is exactly why we need the 2nd amendment. Of course Libs don't believe in guns and that's why this is all so cataclysmic for them.]
The cultural and historical significance of Gov. Walker's action can't be ignored. When he proposes using the National Guard to break a strike, he conjures a period of American history in which labor and capital were locked in violent, terrible struggle, when income inequality had reached epic heights, and workers had to bleed to organize. This is a step backward, not forward, in the march of American progress. [And so are unions but that goes completely unmentioned in this article.]
Link to article here.
The comments are also interesting although they vary widely with sources being from both extremes. As always though, there are a few interesting and rational comments that really shed light on the issue. Here's one of them:
the real truth
Maybe if you realized that the workers only paid less than 8 % of their salary for benefits while you and I pay upwards of 25% or more for bennies- you all would not be stating that the governor is threatening something. Sorry- pay up. Nothing is free anymore and it is time that unions either go away or realize that they will have to pony up just like the rest of us. For way too long these unions have bullied people, politicians and layed the heavy hand in favor of the free handouts given to them by the democrats- FINALLY SOMEONE IS STANDING UP AND SAYING ENOUGH. I do not feel sorry for these workers, I do not feel sorry that they have to pay a little into their pensions. Open 401Ks like the rest of us, pay into your healthcare plan- these unions are one of the big reasons why states and cities are broke- sadly- all I can say is tough.And here's another although I'm not sure the commenter thinks of this as a good thing. But seriously, what union isn't Dem friendly?:
Rachel is right
Rachel Maddow nailed it on last night's (2/17) program. What is happening in Wisconsin is a partisan strike at ultimate destruction of the Democratic Party by eliminating a major source of its support and funding, i.e., a Dem friendly union. This is not the first effort in this direction and it will not be the last.











