This week in the news #53

Saturday, 12 December 2009

Groom creates viral storm twittering from altar

Dude, I know there are a handful of excellent writers on Twitter and micro formats are particularly interesting to me but this is just sort of proof of how completely stupid 99% of Internet content and concerns are. Some dipshit nerd disrespected his bride with a preview of the personality disorder that will cause their divorce and you all eat it up like manna.

Senator Baucus Nominated Girlfriend for U.S. Attorney: Awarded position based solely on her merit

I for one am convinced he is telling the truth though I suspect what he didn’t clarify was that it was the merit of her fellatio.

Climategate

mediamatters.org does a great job debunking the whole thing.

The “trick” being their crowning point. Tripled-crowned king of the village idiots.

They explain that tree ring data from the last 50 years bears no direct correspondence to the measured temperatures around the world. In fact a good swath is in direct contradiction. So it makes perfect sense to drop it.

It stops making much fucking sense when you consider that it’s being treated as reliable at points in history which have sparse, primitive, or nonexistent temperature data. It suggests that their climate models are wrong and only work when there is no undeniable evidence in opposition. And it also reminds that we, in fact, only have reliable global temperature data from the last 50 years because it started with the satellite age.

Before you go insane, I’m not saying global warming isn’t happening. I am saying, and I’m completely right, that worldwide weather is far more complex than any of these ass-hats admits—or, in their defense, probably even understands—and like all the dentists who damn vaccines under the credential “doctor” I don’t see that many of these guys are qualified to work in such a difficult field at all.

There is a good deconstruction of the stuff here: IPCC and the “Trick.”

At war, honored for peace: Obama’s tricky moment

He turned it into a hat trick, didn’t he? Told you so. But actually in his campaign promises he told you first so he’s one up on me after all.

For feds, more get 6-figure salaries

And this would like to stand-up without commentary–

Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months — and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted.

Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time — in pay and hiring — during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector.

The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available.

The growth in six-figure salaries has pushed the average federal worker's pay to $71,206, compared with $40,331 in the private sector.

Tube announcer advises passengers to consider shooting themselves

Finally, some sane and timely advice for the holidays.

digg stumbleupon del.icio.us reddit Fark Technorati Faves

Discussion

Comments


Vagrant

Re: This week in the news #53

I love the institutional responses to climate change. Team Liberal resorts to scolding, grandiose claims and spite. Team Conservative plays stupid, gets paranoid and cries hoax. They deserve to lose their planet.

The rest of us don't.

By Vagrant on 18 December 2009 · 15:16
comment link · reply to this

Ashley

Re^2: This week in the news #53

I could not agree with you more if you were my sock puppet.

Of course “the rest of us” is me and you and a truck full of dogs… oh, I’m not gonna pretend there aren’t millions more but millions against billions is lousy fucking odds.

By Ashley on 18 December 2009 · 15:56
comment link · reply to this

Vagrant

Re^3: This week in the news #53

Save the dogs and children first, always my motto. But, yeah, there's that outnumbered thing to lose sleep over.

I find I have a lot to say on this (global warming, environmental negative externalities). If Team Liberal is truly concerned, as they claim to be, they've picked on hell of a way to address the problem. They're merely replicating the most infantilizing aspects of the system that *created* the problems in the first place. And adding a dollop of goo-goo moralism for their own infantile reasons. No wonder they have so many people ready to oppose them on an ad hominem basis. It's not wholly unreasonable to say their solutions are wrong because they're theirs.

It goes without saying that they're going to adopt a pointlessly coercive hair shirt remediation program and use it to funnel wealth to cretins like Al Gore. This, in spite of the fact that good old fashioned trickle down graft would work wonders in a short time, and leave their corrupt asses sitting even prettier.

I think one is forced to conclude that the Team Liberal players have no room for complaint if they form the main course of a Team Conservative cannibal feast. Perhaps Team Conservative will contract mad cow disease and make it a virtuous circle.

By Vagrant on 19 December 2009 · 11:25
comment link · reply to this

Your information (required) Name*
Email*
Website

* Indicates required fields; email is used for validation and is not displayed on the site.

Your comment
Commenting on This week in the news #53
Title

Body is limited to ≈1,000 words. Paragraphs—but not line breaks—are automatically inserted. Valid XHTML is required. These are the allowed tags–

<a href=""></a> <br/> <acronym title=""></acronym> <abbr title=""></abbr> <code></code> <pre></pre> <tt></tt> <ins></ins> <del></del> <hr/> <cite></cite> <b></b> <i></i> <sup></sup> <sub></sub> <strong></strong> <em></em> <h1></h1> <h2></h2> <h3></h3> <q></q> <blockquote></blockquote>