Slouching Towards Oblivion

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Dems v Repubs

The Repubs have a real problem with trying to figure out what to do with their crazies (aka Tea Partiers), and the Dems are pretending they don't have much the same problem.  There are lots of "lefties" who're speaking up and speaking out against what they believe are the ways Obama has betrayed them.

I guess I have to admit that even tho' I really knew better, I've been on the Obama band wagon.  I'll forgive myself for this, considering the simple fact that anybody is preferable to a complete fucktard like Jr Bush.

Anyway, Obama seems to be just as beholden to the Oligarchs as any of the rest of 'em, it's just that he seems to be a little less of a fucktard than Bush.

Weather And Climate

Some of the best I've heard on what climate change is really all about - in language I can understand. (via Balloon Juice comments)
It’s very, very simple. There doesn’t even have to BE a model, much less anything predictive- in fact it’s the opposite of predictive.
Weather is a chaotic system. Climate is a gauge of the energy in that system. Climate can be tracked in a broad, general sense. Weather cannot- it is chaotic, meaning it follows the mathematical rules of chaos as first discovered by Lorenz with (surprise!) a toy weather modeling equation.
Chaos works like this: if you have very little energy, things are stable. As the energy in the system increases, the range of possible states expands. At some points, the system can fall into predictable chaotic patterns: in weather, this would be knowing the general force of storms and cyclones, having a basic idea of how big these things are.
As the energy increases, the range of possible states continues to expand, and what you used to know about ‘how big tornadoes are’ stops being useful.
I’ll repeat that: as the energy increases (as the climate imperceptibly creeps upward in temperature), you stop being able to predict how big things like storms and cyclones will be.
If the CLIMATE stopped heating, and cooled off, the WEATHER would return to the tornado sizes people are used to.
It’s not going to do that.
As the CLIMATE continues to heat, by seemingly meaningless numbers (what’s a degree or two? right?), theWEATHER can and will start throwing up outlier events, storms and tornadoes that are unprecedented in size and destructiveness.
What we don’t know (?) is whether this is also causing the earthquakes- seems likely enough but I don’t know the laws under which tectonic plates move, they might not really be fluid enough to have chaotic behavior.
Weather does.
Climate sets the base energy level for weather.
Climate change directly causes the increase in potential destructive force of weather, because weather is a chaotic system.
It has NOTHING TO DO WITH STUDY OR THEORY! It is a mathematical formula like 2+2=4! There is nothing even slightly ambiguous about any of this!
Right now I would say, as a longterm plan get the hell out of any place, anywhere in the world, that is ‘tornado alley’ or ‘hurricane central’ or any of that. Seriously.
Because this is just a little teaser of what we will end up facing in just ten years and it’s too late to change that even if everyone suddenly woke the FUCK up.
Please, work to communicate these very basic and obvious points, because it can get worse or it can get ridiculously worse- and we as a species are stupid but we don’t really deserve what chaos can throw at us. The planet will be fine- it’s a big rock. Life on it? That’s the 100-year, 1000-year question.

another commenter asks:
I’ve heard of really, really terrible tornado seasons in the past. If this one is a result of the damage we’ve caused our own climate, why weren’t those? (If the question makes sense).

jinxtgr replies:
...As to the terrible tornado seasons: weather is chaotic. It ALREADY wasn’t stable. It’s too big to be stable.
The reason for terrible tornado seasons in the past is that weather was already chaotic.
Climate change means that it’s still chaotic but the possible maximum destruction goes up and up and up.
It’s not the fact of ‘fluke bad weather’ that’s an issue: that was already inherent in the system. What we are changing, and changing rapidly, is the scope of what that can mean.
Think of it like this: any given weather event could be considered as a marker for future events within one order of magnitude. So you get a tornado- might get another one a tenth the size, might get one ten times the size, don’t expect a thousand times the size.
Get one ten times the size, now expect a possible maximum of ten times the size of that, because you’ve established what’s within the range of possibility. Get one twice as bad, suddenly you’re considering possible storms 200 times as bad as what you once thought normal.
In a situation of climate change never assume a record weather event is something that will hit and go away forever, because it’s just demonstrated the range of the pattern of behavior. Not the maximum limit- it just demonstrated the range weather goes across now. You can safely expect that any given weather event is part of a chaotic pattern and that pattern just showed you weather could go there, anytime.
Because outlier weather can’t happen. It’s always part of the chaotic system, always showing the possible range of behavior.
If that seems like it’s worse than it used to be… o_O then what the hell have I been saying? That’s the whole point of climate change.

Monday, May 23, 2011

A Quick Thought

On marriage equality.  I watched a YouTube clip of Minnesota lawmakers passing an  amendment proposal against gay marriage.



And I keep wondering, what is it that some people have against equality? Why are so many people so dead set against seeing other humans as equal - deserving of respect and opportunity?

I think my answer is simpler than it seems. We're competitive. One of our great strengths is that we know we have to compete; we know we have to get out there and scrap and dig and fight to carve out a life for ourselves. That's a good attitude when it comes to having to win your crust of bread for the day. But when it becomes so integral to the philosophy of how you live our life that you're willing to do anything and everything not just to gain some advantage for yourself, but to actively use the coercive power of law to put your competitors at a disadvantage, then you've lost your way. You're sure as hell not being true to the US Constitution's efforts to restrict power and to balance those competing interests.

Friday, May 20, 2011

Today's T-Shirt

Today's Public Service Reminder

Interesting

Wisconsin State Sen Lena Taylor rips into the "voter ID bill" - and makes a pretty good impression IMO.

What really stuck for me tho' was her mention of Martin Luther King being a card-carrying Repub. It always startles me a little when I'm reminded of how everything seems to flip over once in a while. In the American South during Jim Crow, the Democrats were guys like Lester Maddox and Strom Thurman and George Wallace, and they were all Democrats because Abe Lincoln was a Republican. So it just makes sense that MLK would line up with just about anybody other than those guys. It's good to get these little refreshers once in a while.

Feeling A Little Awkward

David Frum has always struck me as kind of a simpish poser, and it bothers me that I find myself agreeing with him more often the last coupla years.  It could be only that I think it's good when somebody on the Repub side stands up and calls "bullshit" on them once in a while - and he's been doing that a lot lately.  Maybe that's it.


Noah Kristula-Green makes the important point that Stanley Druckenmiller’s weekend WSJ interview has blossomed in a matter of days into something like GOP orthodoxy. We’ve evolved in the space of a decade from “deficits don’t matter” to “defaults don’t matter.”
It seems flabbergasting that a conservative party could arrive at this destination.
Yet the new mood exemplifies the trend we have seen over the past three decades, whereby one after another the “rules of the game” have been discarded as the two parties play politics ever more savagely.
The filibuster evolves from extraordinary procedure to routine super-major requirement.
Secret holds on presidential nominees proliferate.
And now even the debts and obligations of the United States become a tool of politics.
Everybody seems to assume that the rules will be reasserted before the game gets too dangerous. Maybe. Let’s hope. But one year’s outrageous innovation has a bad habit of becoming next year’s new normal. Anything a Republican Congress can do to a Democratic president, a Democratic Congress can do to a Republican president. Americans like analogies to ancient Rome: a republic felled by overcentralized power. They owe it to themselves to study the Polish commonwealth: a republic wrecked by an irresponsible legislature.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Thanks, Dr Caldicott

That was just loads of fun.

Privateering

Classic - this comes as no shock to people, and so there's no general outrage, and so underfunded law enforcement agencies end up looking and acting a lot like the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Yo, Democrats

This is the kind of crap that drove me away from the Repubs, and just lends real credence to what used to be the bullshit about "both sides do it". So could ya not do this anymore please?

ER

When you try to force-fit healthcare into the Standard American Business Model, you're probably going to get some pretty ugly results.

NYT:
In 1990, there were 2,446 hospitals with emergency departments in nonrural areas. That number dropped to 1,779 in 2009, even as the total number of emergency room visits nationwide increased by roughly 35 percent.
Emergency departments were most likely to have closed if they served large numbers of the poor, were at commercially operated hospitals, were in hospitals with skimpy profit margins or operated in highly competitive markets, the researchers found.
The number of ERs went down by 27% while the number of ER Visits went up 35%.  In any other business I can think of, that would indicate an impressive increase in Productivity.  But healthcare is not any other business; and Emergency Medicine is a perfect illustration of that fact.

The logic chain is fairly simple.  More patients going to fewer ERs means there are fewer caregivers per patient, which means less time can be allotted for each patient.  But treating Gun Shot Wounds and Blunt Force Trauma and Ischemic Attacks won't take any less time just because your business plan requires a greater throughput of patients.  Even with the amazing tools available to help staffers do things better, medicine is always more art than science.  It's about people; not gadgets.  The proper care of people requires time.  Take away their time, and people die.  Simple.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Gutless

The very concept of taxation has gotten so politically toxic, our esteemed "leaders" have adopted a strategy of using code words and phrases rather than risk being the subject of public wrath if they dare utter any form of the term "tax".

David Frum:
But what this default talk looks like is that the GOP wants a crisis, not a deal. A deal would involve real pain for real voters: Medicare reductions, farm spending reductions, military reductions, and revenue measures. A crisis creates an exciting substitute for such a deal – especially if the GOP can temporarily and delusively convince itself that it can pin the blame for the crisis on President Obama. That will not be true. The whole world will see that the crisis was avoidable, and will see who insisted on forcing it. And however high you imagine the financial and political price – it will be higher.
It's been going on for a while of course, but it seems we've become so accustomed to the nonsense about how burdened we are; and how the gubmint just takes and takes and takes, that we've made it impossible for analysts and politicians even to say the words.

Frum is trying to make a good point about the difference between what his guys are saying they want and what their actions are saying about what they want, but I think he knows that if he so much as mutters "increased taxation" under his breath, the Tea Harpies will swarm down on him and pluck out his eyes, and nobody will hear what he's trying to say over the ruckus.

The same thing popped up in remarks Obama was making a little while back - maybe a coupla weeks ago.  He was talking about budgets, and he mentioned spending several times, but as he listed the spending cuts, he turned a brilliantly perverse phrase that stuck in my brain. He said (approx), "we also need to look at cutting spending from the standpoint of revenue".

Ever the optimist, I'd like to think all this means they're starting to talk about sensible tax increases in the meetings, and they're just trying to wink at us to let us know they're trying to get something done that includes fixing the revenue problems.

And BTW:
4,000,000 miles of streets and roads
75,000 dams
88,000 miles of coast line
12 super carriers
2 1/2 wars
1,431,000 people on active military duty (plus 200,000 in Nat'l Guard units)
800,000 miles of sewer lines
1,000,000 miles of water lines
95,000 Schools & Colleges
650,000 Cops
1,200,000 Fire & Rescue

All of that requires oversight and maintenance, and expansion to keep up with growth. Contrary to the kind of Wal-Mart mentality that passes for critical thinking these days, you don't get Great for Cheap.  

If we spend the money necessary to bring it all back up to acceptable standards, we’d see an economic recovery that’d blow your lip up over your forehead.

Monday, May 16, 2011

At Random

I just picked (everybody's favorite crazy) Uncle Ron here to illustrate a point.  One of the basic features of political rhetoric is the hypothetical If/Then/Else: "If we do (or don't) adopt my (or my opponent's) policy, then this or that terrible (or really great) thing will (or won't) happen".

They all say this shit all the time, and I have yet to hear any of the Press Poodles ask any one of 'em the basic question:
"Can you give me some examples of predictions you've made that actually came true?"
--AND--
"What predictions have you made that turned out not to be true?"

And when they give you the inevitable bunkum about how "the policy didn't fail; those other guys just failed to do it right", then you could possibly point out that that's almost exactly what some guys in the former USSR said about communism.

Are You Kidding?

This guy is making the case that fast food joints comprise the "new face of American manufacturing", and that it's a good thing.  Seriously, are you fucking kidding me?
Go into the kitchen of a Taco Bell today, and you'll find a strong counterargument to any notion that the U.S. has lost its manufacturing edge. Every Taco Bell, McDonald's (MCD), Wendy's (WEN), and Burger King is a little factory, with a manager who oversees three dozen workers, devises schedules and shifts, keeps track of inventory and the supply chain, supervises an assembly line churning out a quality-controlled, high-volume product, and takes in revenue of $1 million to $3 million a year, all with customers who show up at the front end of the factory at all hours of the day to buy the product. Taco Bell Chief Executive Officer Greg Creed, a veteran of the detergents and personal products division of Unilever (UL), puts it this way: "I think at Unilever, we had five factories. Well, at Taco Bell today I've got 6,000 factories, many of them running 24 hours a day."
So OK, let's make sure we're doing everything we can do to study and improve methods for efficiency and throughput etc, but let's at least acknowledge that we're talking about  assembling a burrito and not a car or a vacuum cleaner or a toaster;  and we need to understand that while there's dignity in all work, it's not cool to consider a job at Taco Bell making chimichangas to be the same as a job at Suzlon building windmills.

Do you not get the feeling that we're being set up for something?

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Sound Familiar?

When you hear any of the latest blather from almost anybody on DumFux News or most politicians (particularly those of a certain "conservative" bent), try to keep this in mind:

Ganser Syndrome:
...a rare dissociative disorder previously classified as a factitious disorder. It is characterized by nonsensical or wrong answers to questions or doing things incorrectly, other dissociative symptoms such as fugue, amnesia or conversion disorder, often with visual pseudohallucinations and a decreased state of consciousness. It is also sometimes called nonsense syndrome, balderdash syndrome, syndrome of approximate answers, pseudodementia, hysterical pseudodementia or prison psychosis. This last name, prison psychosis, is sometimes used because the syndrome occurs most frequently in prison inmates, where it may represent an attempt to gain leniency from prison or court officials.
"Death Panels"
"the social safety net is bankrupting the nation"
"Obama is a Kenyan usurper"
"FEMA camps"
"school vouchers will strengthen public education"
"the states are broke because they pay teachers too much"
"this is a Christian nation"
"thousands of black soldiers fought on the side of the Confederacy"

I keep believing everybody really has the best interests of the USA at heart (in spite of how some of the things I yell about sound otherwise), but I wish some of these clowns would try just a little harder to meet me somewhere closer to reasonable.

Colbert

Why does it always take this kinda weird shit to get us to pay attention?  Maybe we have such a great need to be seen as hip enough to get the joke that it forces us to look into the background to figure out why it's supposed to be funny(?)

Dunno - but it's really interesting.



Huckabee

Mike Huckabee announced he's not running for president in 2012.  I had him pegged as the the guy with the best chance to get the nomination so it comes as a surprise to begin with, but his stated reason seemed a bit odd to me.
“All the factors say go,” Huckabee said during a live, final segment of his eponymous Fox News Channel show Saturday night. “But my heart says no.”
Huckabee noted that while all of the “external” factors pointed toward him running, he only found an “inexplicable inner peace” when he decided not to enter the race.  (from Chris Cillizza, WaPo)
 These guys always talk a huge game about service and sacrifice; and they aren't exactly reluctant about saying Obama is 10 kinds of horrible for the country, but apparently Huck's inner peace just couldn't possibly stand the inconvenience of it all.  Plus, Huckabee did a lot of complaining in 08 about all the mean things people were saying about him.  I guess saving us from the evil Obama just ain't really worth all that.  Phony fuck.

Saturday, May 14, 2011

The Maverick Abides

This does not absolve John McCain for having become such a complete dick over the last dozen years or so, but I still hafta throw him a bone for trying to get back to his old self.
“The trail to bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times. The first mention of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti—the nickname of the al-Qaida courier who ultimately led us to bin Laden—as well as a description of him as an important member of al-Qaida, came from a detainee held in another country, who we believe was not tortured. None of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed’s real name, his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al-Qaida. In fact, the use of ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed produced false and misleading information.”
Here's a decent piece by Joe Conason at Truthdig

Today's Wacky Pix