tdaxp

Today evaporated in unfinished code optimization for Jim River Reports, a Greencine online-rented dvd viewing of

House of Flying Daggers

The problem is that Options 1 and 3 could mean a real weakening of U.S. interests at the United Nations, with every word from Bolton facing colonoscopic scrutiny in the media and Congress. In such a climate, Bolton will find himself under debilitating restraint when deciding whether to call for the resignation of corrupt U.N. officials, block potential Security Council memberships, or call for sanctions against Iran and North Korea. If Bolton enters the stage with incendiary flourish, it's likely a sign that he's contemplating accomplishing much in the year before he departs for the Great Think Tank in the Sky.

And before Bush nominates Rudy Giuliani to replace him.

All the more reason for Kim Jong Il to take a pragmatic view of the talks in Beijing.

``Am I here to make social change so women can smoke cigarettes and drive cars? No.'' said Becker. ``We're here to provide security and build infrastructure and a democratic society.''

The bottom line about abortion is this. Do you trust women to make their own moral judgments? If you are anti-abortion, then no. You do not. You have an absolute moral position that you don't trust anyone to question, and therefore you think that abortion should be illegal. But the second you start making exceptions for rape or incest, you are indicating that your moral position is not absolute. That moral judgment is involved. And that right there is where I start to get angry and frustrated, because unless you have an absolute position that all human life (arguably, all life period, but that isn't the argument I'm engaging with right now) are equally valuable (in which case, no exceptions for the death penalty, and I expect you to agonize over women who die trying to abort, and I also expect you to work your ass off making this a more just world in which women don't have to choose abortions, but this is also not the argument I'm engaging right now), then there is no ground whatsoever for saying that there should be laws or limitations on abortion other than that you do not trust women. I am completely serious about this.

The disenfranchised (whether by self-determination or by exterior exclusion), the subcultural or countercultural elements, the criminals and hermits of a society, are likely to be the canaries in the mine: A 5GW force will use the weight of the dominant segment(s) of society against that society and not waste effort on the seemingly powerless members of that society, and the oddball elements of a society are more likely to be sensitive to changes in the majority opinion than those who hold the majority opinion. (I’m not excluding the 5GW potential for using criminal elements and homeland terrorists against a society, however.)

Robert Novak's 7/30 column essentially adds little to the SD blog controversies, but liberal SD Watch relates a phone conversation with one of Novak's reporter: "The Novakista didn't know who [one anonymous blogger was but knew of him. He wanted me to spill the beans. ... My lips are sealed. ... So, I upheld the leftyosphere's vow of omerta. Novak Researcher Dude also thought I was a former Daschle staffer. I am not, just a friend and supporter who did a very small amount of legal work for the campaign committee much prior to the election." A few pro-Daschle bloggers self-outed before the Novak column was published, which only names 1 and doesn't say which blog he wrote. Conservative Ryne McClaren comments on the outings: "Now here's my question: If you start a blog, wouldn't it just be a hell of a lot easier to start signing your name to your posts on Day 1?"