Archive Logo.jpg

January 03, 2007

H&I* FIRES, 3 JAN 2007

Open post for those with something to share, updated through the day. New, complete posts come in below this one. Note: If trackbacking, please acknowledge this post in your post. That's only polite. [Admittedly, I'm fibbing. Trackbacks are still broken]

You're advertising here, we should get an ad at your place...

************************

You know, I wish the UN would make up its mind. Over the issue of genocide in Sudan they say they can't go in or even craft harsh sanctions because of limits imposed by the plank respecting national sovereignty. They're criticizing Ethiopia for going into Somalia and not respecting sovereignty. But when it comes to whether one chooses to use capital punishment, in this case for what would be a Class A war criminal at Nuremberg if he was tried then, it's not okay for the new UN Sec-Gen to respect sovereignty as he did?

Call me when they make sense over there on Turtle Bay. -Ry

***********************

Your phone won't ring anytime soon, Ry. Remember - it's the United Governments. When you look at it that way, it limns much more clearly. -the Armorer

***********************

Fuzzybear Lioness brought up the NYT's latest problem with shoddy journalism in an earlier H&I. That said, mistakes happen. You measure greatness by the response to the mistakes. In this case, the NYT seems determined to measure themselves for the grave of responsible journalism. Byron York today over at The Corner:

THAT'S ENOUGH OF THAT [Byron York]

A few days ago, New York Times public editor Byron Calame revealed that the paper had seriously misrepresented a key fact in a story about abortion in El Salvador. The paper's editors told Calame they have no plans to issue a correction. Now, the New York Observer reports the Times is considering taking action: the action of eliminating the public editor position. Calame's term is up in May, and Times editor Bill Keller tells the Observer there is support for not replacing him: "Some of my colleagues believe the greater accessibility afforded by features like ‘Talk to the Newsroom’ has diminished the need for an autonomous ombudsman, or at least has opened the way for a somewhat different definition of the job," Keller said.

What a bubble these guys live in.

No, they aren't alone. -the Armorer

************************

Chuck's in a funk. Please drop by his place and see if you can brighten things up a little... - FbL

************************

Ry - think of the UN as the NYT with plate glass walls. Won't make it any more easily understood, but it'll be more fun to watch... --BillT

************************

Somebody is either whipped or outgunned. I just know which it would be in my house.;)
ry

**********************

Fun poltiical quiz. I'm a 24. - FbL

**********************

*A term of art from the artillery. Harassment and Interdiction Fires.

Back in the day, when you could just kill people and break things without a note from a lawyer, they were pre-planned, but to the enemy, random, fires at known gathering points, road junctions, Main Supply Routes, assembly areas, etc - to keep the bad guy nervous that the world around him might start exploding at any minute.

Not really relevant to today's operating environment, right? But, it *is*

The UAVs we fly over Afghanistan and Pakistan looking for targets of opportunity are a form of H&I fires, if you really want to parse it finely. We just have better sensors and fire control now.

I call the post that because it's random things posted by me and people I've given posting privileges to. It's also an open trackback, so if (Don Surber uses it this way a lot) someone has a post they're proud of, but it really isn't either Castle kind of stuff, or topical to a particular post, I've basically given blanket permission to use that post for that purpose. Another term of art that might be appropriate is "Free Fire Zone".

Comments on H&I* FIRES, 3 JAN 2007
SangerM briefed on January 3, 2007 04:09 PM

I scored a 21 on the test, but it's a bull$hit test. Regan was not the 100% conservative, the questions were biased in a number of ways, and there is no telling how they were weighted.

For example, a common problem in surveys like this is leading for answers. E.g.: "#21. As a society, we should spend more money trying to find a cure for AIDS than for cancer and heart disease because AIDS threatens younger people."

The "becasue" is what will key people to make an answer if they don't ignore it. In other words, you might feel that AIDS is a greater threat but not because it threatens younger people. This sets up a conflict in anyone who cannot ignore the bias-weight, and they don't lnow how to answer. I'd bet a lot of people choose false, because age of the afflicted is not an important reason to them. The economic drain on society or the contagion issue might actually carry more weight with people, so this question asked with a different bias-weight would get different answers. And my point here is that answering this question one way does not make you a conservative, nor does answering it the other way make you a liberal. Many elderly people are liberals, many young people are conservatives, where is the connection.

I hate when I get caught up in stupid stuff like this... Feh on me!!!

John of Argghhh! briefed on January 3, 2007 05:12 PM

Sanger you liberal you.

I'm Jack Kemp.

Heh.

I didn't like the structure of this one at all.

John of Argghhh briefed on January 3, 2007 05:17 PM

Heh. Snarked by the indirect approach.

I'm going to have to install some ferret traps.

Maggie briefed on January 3, 2007 10:14 PM

Ry - I'm surprised at you. I don't know why people are giggling. My SB is much neater than I....he also irons better. Sailors like things ship-shape! John is putting things in the dishwasher because it's orderly.

Maggie briefed on January 3, 2007 10:30 PM

30. I am Jack Kemp.....but prettier.

"Who do you trust more? The Joint Chiefs or the United Nations" LOL

"Abolish public broadcasting" This one was just silly. Tax dollars account for just 15% of their budget.

SangerM briefed on January 3, 2007 10:44 PM

Actually, abolishing public broadcasting was the one thing I was absolutely certain should be done. And I would gladly pull the plug myself. Either that or I would restructure the organization so that people who reported anything but the provable truth as news would not only be fired, but would be heavily fined as well. It is after all a public trust, not a liberal welfare crutch, and I would love nothing more than to be the one to tell NPR to clean up and balance the reporting or to get new reporters. And editors. And producers. I don't want news slanted my way, I don't want news slanted any way, and that's where I have a problem with NPR.

I used to donate heavily to them. I stopped that several yaers ago, and now I don't even listen to NPR. It's credibility is virtually nil with me.

ry briefed on January 3, 2007 11:18 PM

Aw. Come on.

That was some good natured ribbing right there. He's threatened me with being made a privy plack honoree, you know. That's probably the one scoring snark I'll have all year while he'll have hundreds(I'm an easy mark, like the post he made for people to write down what a goofball I was in oh so many ways)! Don't be 'the mom' and kill the fun Maggs. Of course it's all fun until someone loses and eye(or get's bit by a ferret).

I came up 27. That's about right for me I think. Center-ish, but with some strong conservative tendencies.

I'm with Sanger on NPR and CPC---if only 15% comes from the gov't then they can get along with out it and fight for themselves in the market place. And to say that there isn't a slant? You have to live in Alter-land to believe that.

And let's get rid of NEA(arts, not edu). A great nation may deserve great art, but that doesn't mean we want it or need it(what with homelessness still in existance we shold be paying for ART?).

FbL briefed on January 3, 2007 11:23 PM

Light up, guys! :) Of course it's a silly little quiz. Notice I called it "fun," not "determinative," or "good" or "well-made."

Barb briefed on January 3, 2007 11:56 PM

Interesting - but meaningless as noted above. I scored a 36, just to the right of Kemp - which is actually about where I sit. And I would help you pull the plug on NPR, Sanger & Ry. Not that I listen to it unless forced to.

John of Argghhh! briefed on January 4, 2007 07:16 AM

Heh. NPR. I used to do a lot of driving between Fort Sill and KC, or between KC and San Antonio during the 90's. I had presets on the radio for all the NPR stations on the route.

I *liked* NPR then. They had lots of talky, story-telling shows and segments that gave voice to people or stories the MSM simply didn't have the time or inclination to touch. Sure, there was a liberal tint to a lot of it, but it was still fun and informative. We donated.

Then Bush got elected, and they rapidly morphed into rabid little toy poodle gnawing at W's trouser cuffs.

And many of the little voices and stories got lost as they succumbed to their inner liberal and suffered from Bush Derangement Syndrome - covering stories the MSM covered, only with an even more liberal sneer.

We quit donating money.

I wonder if they can find their way back? I'd be willing to donate again if they'd do something other than sneer at me.

Sigh. But it wouldn't kill me if we killed them, either.

John of Argghhh! briefed on January 4, 2007 07:19 AM

Light up, guys! :)

While the Castle is not a No Smoking Zone per se, we prefer you take your habit outdoors, near the moat, where the monster loves the smell of burning tobacco.

Just sayin'.

Maggie briefed on January 4, 2007 09:31 AM

Ry - I am not speaking to you any further. Call me "mom", humph!

I wasn't advocating continued funding to CPB, I was saying that stopping tax dollars would not abolish public broadcasting. It will continue with private and corporate donations. That's the way it should be. If you like it, you should chip in, if not then you shouldn't be forced to support it with your taxes. I, myself, watch and listen and I am looking forward to next weekend's "Henry VIII". I clicked off stopping funding on the quiz.

Cricket briefed on January 4, 2007 01:38 PM

I scored a 28. Then I went to the link Ry posted about the new SeeLected UN Sec Gen. What an agenda.
He wants to restore trust in the UN and leave the death penalty to the various nations, but wants to address problems in Africa.

Lessee how this one goes, cause if there is ever a misguided body, that pack of one worlders is it.
I don't know that I want trust restored in the UN.

But that's just me.

FbL briefed on January 4, 2007 02:03 PM

Hey, John! No going back and changing other peoples' comments. I KNOW there was an "en" on the end of "light" in my comment! :P

John of Argghhh! briefed on January 4, 2007 02:16 PM

Heh - wanna see the email notification?

8^)

MCart briefed on January 5, 2007 12:28 AM

34. Who the hell is Jack Kemp, and why isn't Barry Goldwater on this ridiculous scale?

Cricket briefed on January 6, 2007 08:57 AM

Yeah, why no Barry Goldwater? He Could Do No Wrong. Even the Democrats respected him.

Harvey briefed on January 7, 2007 07:10 AM

36 - would've been higher, but I trusted the Post Office over the Pentagon.

Post a comment









Remember personal info?