Our Grand Cherokee died, more or less, so we got a Wrangler (pre-owned by long margin). Cruel Wife gets her car back and I get a jeep back. I am tickled. It drives like a jeep, it rides like a jeep, and it is noisy. The short wheel base will murder you if you don’t respect it. And I love it.
Well. I am probably busier than any other time in my career at this moment. It is kind of a crushing load felt by everyone in my company (and our families). So I come home and don’t want to blog.
But here we are, hmmm?
A constitutional law guy does nothing and then gets elected to be president based on no demonstrable merit whatsoever. Then, after years of trailblazing goat-paths through mediocrity, somehow manages to blame the system, saying it is broken. And in his complaints, he manages to twist reality so badly it almost tears the fabric of space and time.
President Obama is taking a swipe at the Founding Fathers, blaming his inability to move his agenda on the “disadvantage” of having each state represented equally in the Senate.
Yeah, that is pretty effed up, all right. Screwed up by the very senate you own… Tragic.
At a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night, Mr. Obama told a small group of wealthy supporters that there are several hurdles to keeping Democrats in control of the Senate and recapturing the House. One of those problems, he said, is the apportionment of two Senate seats to each state regardless of population.
If I need to explain the ways in which that is wrong you probably wandered over here by mistake, but I wanted to point the situation out.
“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said.
He is missing the point. That was the intent.
Here is the part where his logic is like a bag of cats, and you can smell crazy all over it.
“So there are some structural reasons why, despite the fact that Republican ideas are largely rejected by the public, it’s still hard for us to break through,” Mr. Obama said.
There isn’t a lick of logic there.
Should women get paid leave for menstrual cramps? Boy that sure is a litmus issue for this election year, isn’t it?
I notice that the flaw “hubris” hasn’t changed much. Especially in weather modeling.
What is so entertaining is that they can claim that previous statements could be called wrong no matter how vocal and strident they were before (but wrong) and this time claim certainty that they are incontestably right. On Themageddon…
“There’s no serious dispute any more about whether the globe is warming, whether humans are responsible, and whether we will see large and dangerous changes in the future – in the words of the National Academy of Sciences – which we didn’t know in the 1970s,” said Michael Mann, a climatologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park. He added that nearly every U.S. scientific society has assessed the evidence and come to the same conclusion.
His stance in Chillageddon in the 70’s?
“Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in their view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.”
Yeah, but this time the hysteria is based on fact, right?
They don’t even have the grace to be ashamed.
Read Full Post »