One of my favorite authors, Ian McEwan, weighs in on the prophets of the apocalypse - the day of judgement.
How to resolve that absurd situation about Dunkin Donuts, Racchel Ray and her scarf, Michelle Malkin and a cast of thousands? Here's the best idea yet...
Trippin' Down the Rabbit Hole...
We bump into Deerhoof...
... and find ourselves Reeling In The Years.
Wait! Here's one for my daughter!
We bump into Deerhoof...
... and find ourselves Reeling In The Years.
Wait! Here's one for my daughter!
The Guardian's Jonathan Glancey gets messed-up in an exhibit. David Byrne, the man who wrote the song "Psycho-Killer" returns to his roots in architecture and plays a building.
Two reports on the situation in Afghanistan, a dire one from Der Spiegel, and a more up-beat view from The Economist. The reality is that both see nothing but problems ahead. Another opportunity squandered.
Recently, while watching an NBA playoff game, I saw this advert:
Does anyone else find this sort of thing as odd - or indeed, chilling - as I do? I've never understood the need of the Armed Forces to "advertise" as they are free to recruit almost anywhere they like. I suppose it all falls in line with the corporate model that is the American Way, much the same as the privatization of military contracts has expanded so that the majority of people working/fighting in Iraq are now private contractors/mercenaries, or one can look to the fact that something like 60% of intelligence work is farmed-out to private enterprise (some very notable people are cashing big checks).
But what's with this ad? What's with the Above All tag line? Sounds very "Uber Alles" to me. And just how many countries or non-state actors are capable of blowing a satellite out of the sky? Perhaps three; China, Russia and the US, but that's a stretch. We've been largely unable to create a missile defense after wasting billions over the years on Reagan's Star Wars variants, although geo-syncronous satellites are an easier target. I wish I knew someone with a subscription to Jane's Intelligence Digest... This ad strikes me as fear-mongering more than anything else - something we've had quite enough of over the last seven years, thank you.
Does anyone else find this sort of thing as odd - or indeed, chilling - as I do? I've never understood the need of the Armed Forces to "advertise" as they are free to recruit almost anywhere they like. I suppose it all falls in line with the corporate model that is the American Way, much the same as the privatization of military contracts has expanded so that the majority of people working/fighting in Iraq are now private contractors/mercenaries, or one can look to the fact that something like 60% of intelligence work is farmed-out to private enterprise (some very notable people are cashing big checks).
But what's with this ad? What's with the Above All tag line? Sounds very "Uber Alles" to me. And just how many countries or non-state actors are capable of blowing a satellite out of the sky? Perhaps three; China, Russia and the US, but that's a stretch. We've been largely unable to create a missile defense after wasting billions over the years on Reagan's Star Wars variants, although geo-syncronous satellites are an easier target. I wish I knew someone with a subscription to Jane's Intelligence Digest... This ad strikes me as fear-mongering more than anything else - something we've had quite enough of over the last seven years, thank you.
As I was driving yesterday afternoon, I saw a bumper sticker on a car in front of me that said something like "Marines: Winning battles one kill at a time!". This video has been around for a while, but it is a good reminder of how horrible war really is. (To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Turner and I are not related).
A timely reminder from Hendrik Hertzberg - Memory Lapse. What will be left of Hillary when all is said and done? Jeffrey Toobin on The Dirty Trickster, Roger Stone. The McCain's are an uncharitable bunch... at least to those other than themselves.
Which came first? Biblical literalism or stupidity?
On a brighter note, the future lies ahead.
Which came first? Biblical literalism or stupidity?
On a brighter note, the future lies ahead.
Freeman Dyson wrote a review of some books on the subject of global warming for The New York Review of Books. It is well worth reading. In his concluding paragraphs, he discusses how... "(e)nvironmentalism has replaced socialism as the leading secular religion. And the ethics of environmentalism are fundamentally sound." - a point we should all take to heart, because "Environmentalism , as a religion of hope and respect for nature, is here to stay. This is a religion that we can all share, whether or not we believe that global warming is harmful."
Green is good. This kid gets it.
Green is good. This kid gets it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)