Apparently this commercial aired in 2001.
Nothing to see here.
Apparently this commercial aired in 2001.
Nothing to see here.
See it. A technically imperfect movie, but an amazing look into how insane late war Germany was.
I’m real curious what my Army bros think of it.
I’ll talk in a comment later about somethings that may be spoilers.
I just checked it out on their website. It looks a bit more speculative than other parts of the internet were making it sound. That’d be a defensible reason why the media aren’t all over it.
I dunno about the specifics, and I tend to be a skeptic where tech R&D is concerned. Sometimes I’m right, sometimes I’m wrong, and I know I’ll be wrong in the future.
It’d be pretty nice if it works out, even if it’d obsolete that part of the Mahouka plot.
Yes, you may purchase this for my birthday.
No, seriously. Buy this for my birthday.
I was a bit slow to spring this on some people I know. Maybe also just barely too tactful.
“You know, even if you do manage to make electric cars practical, the requirements are just going to be changed to wind-up.”
Go check tomorrow’s Freefall.
That’s another mystery of the series, heavily foreshadowed, with a fitting solution, that came as a huge surprise to me.
I think this is…a war crime? I don’t know. A work buddy wants to bait rabbits or coyotes and do the same thing. I’ll have to show him this.
I’m just…disgusted and intrigued.
The Washington Post seems wrong again.
As far as the latter is concerned, the central question is what entity, if any, does Panetta have loyalty to? Many of the alternatives have been discussed elsewhere.
The best match, as far as the former is concerned, seems to be loyalty to the Democratic Party. The timing would be right now to be doing so in order to manage the harm Obama may do the the Party’s reputation. A Democrat coming out prior to a significant electoral defeat can be establishing a paper trail for their claim of future competance.
On the other hand, Panetta may be able to predict that he won’t be able to count on post Obama administration appointments anyway, so he might as well position himself as best as he can for a speaking career.
HT, Moe Lane.
Today’s Stand Still. Stay Silent has some bits that were not analyzed to my taste when I was able to look at the comments.
Needless to say, spoilers, so go here if you want to read this post-apoc zombie fantasy first.Continue reading
One thing I’ve seen apparently overlooked.
Moore is close to and has some ties to Norman. Norman might be the most leftwing part of Oklahoma, with the highest concentration of out of state crazy.
Hence Moore might not be the best proxy for the saner and more rural parts of the country.
Some explanations immediately come to mind.
General prospects for administration messaging are so dismal that a contentious cofirmation hearing is seen as a necessity.
Scandal messaging has some bombs ready to blow, and switching out the point man on handling that is necessary.
The former feels more likely. Yes, the Clinton swap for Kerry, but the latter would be proactive. If this administration has the ability to be proactive about managing its failures, and actually uses of it, I hate to imagine what it would be like without it.
The administration gives the impression that it is purely reactive when it comes to errors. Also, blind.
Some user sending in a postcard, because this administration as IT does not have QA or tech support: “This seems like it might be a bug.”
Administration/Media Response: “The developer is ever so wise and magnificent to anticipate the need for such a feature. It is so beneficial that it did not need to be documented until now.”
“It crashes, and the data cannot be recovered.”
“Let me be perfectly clear, working as intended, Republican wreckers and breakers.”
Public officials should not openly give advice to terrorists, especially those with hostages.
It is bad policy.
Pretending to negotiate is one thing. That can be a legitimate ruse to position things for one’s attacking forces.
Threatening terrorists can be appropriate, and can be phrased as advice. This does not describe the incident I am speaking of.
Giving crazy, deranged pie in the sky advice damages the dignity of the public office.
Giving practical advice risks the terrorists acting on it, and letting their actions splash on the official.
Either way, it confuses the presentation of policy, and undermines the manly firmness with which a government ought to respond to terrorism.
Hat tip to Moe Lane. I’m not sure that Herp McDerp over there is wrong.
Release date has pulled in to 17 Oct.
The (sparse) previews still look decent. It’s still the only movie I can pretend to give a shit about left this year…
or drooling mouth-breathers. You know, whatever.
Because you need this that’s why.
There are essentially two standard models for the purported militarization of America’s police force. I suspect one has issues. I have two or three supplemental or alternative models that I think better than the one.
One of the latter provides an at least semi defensible explanation for BLT’s observation about apparent spending priorities.Continue reading
A Japanese company claims to have reached the next level in developing the most genuine looking sex doll which comes complete with realistic feeling skin and authentic looking eyes.
Orient Industry say their new range of dolls, made from high quality silicon, are so realistic there is very little to distinguish them from a real girlfriend at first glance.
Josh Marshall is the editor and publisher of Talking Points Memo, a left of center blog. His recent editorial about the military equipment that almost every police officer now has echoes what a lot of us on the libertarian/conservative side have been saying for a while.
We take it as a given that most police departments will have a SWAT team, a relatively small group and amount of armament for an active shooter or hostage situation. But the Ferguson PD seems tricked out with a number of armored vehicles and quasi-military type gear. The militarization of local police forces is a story probably most of us are familiar with at some level. There’s also been a lot of counter-terror pork distributed to local police departments around the country, either buying bizarre arsenals to face terrorists they’ll almost certainly never encounter or surplus military supplies being cast off by US deployments abroad. But with all that, WTF?
When the Tea Party first started, before the big money got involved, most of the participants were spurred by the incredible over-reach of government. It was a mood that had been growing under the Bush administration, the Patriot Act chief among them. It was a mood that came to the boiling point under Obama with ObamaCare. Obviously, the Left has defended an ever more powerful government as being necessary for their Social Justice agenda. Which puts fellows like Josh Marshall in a hard position. At some point there is an event that highlights how oppressive our government might become that makes people like Marshall go all “WTF!”...and that creates a cognitive dissonance.
Now a growing number on the Left have to deal with the concept that a government that is allowed to do whatever it wants without the consent of a majority of the people is going to become oppressive. That giving government a free reign because it advances your agenda might be a Bad Idea (tm). This is actually not the first time someone on the Left has said this. In fact, Mikhail Bakunin, one of the founders of the modern communist movement warned of this, that such power is not collectivism but oppression. Of course, Marx and the boys tossed him out of the party, and Mr. Marshall is coming close to stating the Leftist Heresy that “too much government is a bad thing.”
There is a good chance that we are well and truly fucked.
When I recently told a friend who was lamenting the recent events in Iraq I told him that the whole conversation was largely academic since 60% of the world population may be dead in the next six months anyway. His response?
“Don’t tease me.”