11 May 2005
The RADIOACTIVE CHIEF blog which you are now looking at, will henceforth be active at http://www.radioactive.chief.com/, so you're invited to check it out - posts will be done over there from now on.
Eventually I hope to figure out transfering my archives over to the new site, but I'll leave them up here also for, well, archival purposes & for link access. This may not be totally Permanent, but things will still be here for the time being.
The new site is not TOTALLY the way I want it to be yet - but it's a reasonable first iteration - and as I continue my initiation into CSS it will only get better! (...he modestly promises!)
08 May 2005
Blog Changes in the Works
I'll still be doing some blogging, but an mostly trying to get the latest revised revision done. The management greatly appreciates your patience.
This reporr states that the "Independent" VT Cong. (who openly calls himself a "democratic socialist") is likely to seek Jumpin' Jim Jefford's seat after his retirement due to medical reasons. The observation is made that Bernie will be the only socialist in the Senate.
The CHief begs to differ - there are a number of qualifiers for this title, it's just that they won't admit it (in public).
Zogby poll results featured on CNN(!) show that Americans are overwhelmingly in support of the concept that a nation should
(a) have borders, and
(b) have control of the borders.
OK, so what's so hard for the President and others to figure out about this. This is by no means anything new.
05 May 2005
UK Election Upset? UPDATE: Not this year!
That would be very interesting. No doubt the MSM will spin it that this is due to his support for the Iraq war - but with a lot of other things going on over there that don't catch the press' attention here, I'm not sure that that's the answer.
It's also worth noting, that exit polls have sometimes blown it, so we'll see if this holds.
UPDATE: It didn't. Blair is a soft socialist, so it's too bad for the Brits, ultimately, but he HAS been a real trooper in the terror war. The Chief's call: it's a wash as to whether it's better one way or another.
04 May 2005
The ooccasion of 60 years after VE Day seems to be making a bigger impact on the Brits than it is over here, even with the final heat of an election campaign over there. One has to thing that it perhaps has something to do with the immediacy of the threat at the time,
Whatever, there are some excellent thoughts presented here by Sir John Keegan, who is a ret'd Royal Army type & who has written a number of books that people even read.
Check it out.
Michele Malkin takes note of a number of on-going circumstances in the current state of the culture war. She most notably comments on some of the humor of Laura Bush at the recent White House Correspondents' Dinner.
In the course of her commentary, she notes the following:
Self-censorship is a conservative value. In a brilliant commencement speech at Hillsdale College last year, Heritage Foundation president Ed Feulner called on his audience to resist the coarsened rhetoric of our time: "If we are to prevail as a free, self-governing people, we must first govern our tongues and our pens. Restoring civility to public discourse is not an option. It is a necessity."
Ms. Malkin is not alone in noting the dubious quality of some of Mrs. Bush's comedic efforts. I don't care to re-elaborate the details - you've no doubt all seen the tape. The Chief had hoped that this vein of humor had left with the Bubbacrats, but apparently not. Oh well. Better luck next time I hope.
The Marine trooper who was subjected to an investigation with the threat of a murder charge for actually acting like he was in combat in a war zone, was effectively cleared of charges by the 1st MarDiv.
A review of the evidence showed the Marine's actions were "consistent with the established rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict," Maj. Gen. Richard F. Natonski, commanding general of the 1st Marine Division, said in a statement.
Thank God for small favors! It was a travesty that this deal went as far as it did, before some reason prevailed, and a good Marine trooper can continue to be just that, without the threat of an idiotic prosecution for the crime of fighting a war.
03 May 2005
This case illustrates once again, the capacities and resiliancies of the human organism, given the chance.
The sad point to be made here once again, is to wonder what COULD have been done if proper treatement had been given to Terri Schiavo, instead of eliminating her as a "useless eater" under the culture of the new American Reich.
It's hard to resist a bit of snarkiness seeing this header on an Argus article.
There's nothing to fault about the message, but in this case it seems to be a case of the good words being drowned out by the lousy actions of the former Senator, who rarely let alleged core beliefs get in the way of a political position, and whose career showed him capable of trimming his sails to meet whatever direction his political wind blew, with a breathtaking disregard for any sort of underlying core philosophy.
Just by way of perhaps the most obvious example, Ex-Sen. Tom was not reticent in noting his Catholicism. One would presume that one's religion, or lack of it indicates something fundamental about "core beliefs". One might even think that adherence to a particular faith would be an indication that there was some agreement, or spiritual resonance between the individual and the precepts of the particular church, etc. that one would affiliate with. One MIGHT think that - but apparently not Ex.-Sen. Tom, who felt no shame at at all in actively supporting the pro-abortion agenda in D.C.
Regarding other issues, for example the need to deal with Sod-em Hussein, during the Clintonista regime, our boy was all for going in like gangbusters and kickin' butt and takin' names! What a different tune he had to sing after Bubba retired, and the White House was under new management! What were the core beliefs there?
It just occurs to the Chief, that perhaps he's being too unforgiving, and perhaps has previously overlooked what HAS to be a Real Solid Core Belief of Ex.-Sen. Tom - a total and sincere dedication to doing whatever was necessary by any means to acquire, maintain, and preserve a position of political power and dominance.
That in itself, may well be the true core belief that is left when all of the details of specific issues and debates are stripped away. Hopefully the graduated take a more positive approach to the remarks than "Political power uber alles."
01 May 2005
H/T to PowerLine for pointing to an article in the Weekly Standard by Stephen Calabresi. He states the source of the Donks opposition to the appointments at hand is fighting an action to prevent minority and/or female nominees becoming "groomed" for possible future appointment to the Supremes.
Makes sense to the Chief! Check it out.
Trivia of the Day: Facts from the 1500's
Here's some historical background on some common customs and phrases that go back to the 16th century:
Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor.
Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children -- last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it-hence the saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Houses had thatched roofs -- thick straw -- piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the dogs, cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof hence the saying "It's raining cats and dogs.
With the same thatching there was nothing to stop things from falling into the house from the roof. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could really mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence.
The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt, hence the saying "dirt poor."
The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet, so they spread thresh (straw) on the floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they kept adding more thresh until when you opened the door it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entranceway across the door bottom to prevent this - a "thresh hold."
In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes the stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while - hence the rhyme, "peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old."
If a group of people were getting together, each family would bring some ingrediants to add to the cooking pot - the meal was "pot-luck".
Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man "could bring home the bacon." They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and "chew the fat."
Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with a high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning and death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.
Most people did not have pewter plates, but had trenchers, a piece of wood with the middle scooped out like a bowl. Often trenchers were made from stale bread which was so old and hard that they could be used for quite some time. Trenchers were never washed and a lot of times worms and mold got into the wood and old bread. After eating off wormy, moldy trenchers, one would get "trench mouth."
Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or "upper crust."
Lead cups were used to drink ale or whiskey. The combination would sometimes knock them out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up - hence the custom of holding a "wake."
England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a "bone-house" and reuse the grave. When re-opening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive. So they thought they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the "graveyard shift") to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be "saved by the bell" or was considered a "dead ringer".
Whoever said History was boring?!
Here's some more in similar vein from the Barking Moonbat Early Warning System.
This caught my eye, with the recent discussions and events in SD concerning mountain lions. Although the 'Florida Panther" has been declared an endangered species, it is genetically identical - the same animal - that elsewhere is called the mountain lion, or puma - and is NOT an endangered species.
In the case in question an animal that was released in an area has discovered is is much easier to dine on the denizens of a local animal park than it is to take the trouble to hunt down deer, or other local wildlife. Too bad for the animals, and their owners say the Feds - but there is no recourse, or solution to be taken.
It's numbers ARE limited in Florida, due to development, but by the same logic ANY animal could be considered endangered in ANY area where it had formerly lived. Imagine the possibilities: reintroduce a wolf pack to Central Park in NYC, with full protected status! Or why not place a herd of bison on the grounds of Denver International Airport? What's the difference? Logically the Chief sure doesn't see one - but there he goes again - THINKING about an issue instead of emoting in favor of wildlife. Oh well.
There is speculation as to whether or not the above-mentioned traitorous weasel will actually be executed. Given today's Alice-in-Wonderland legal environment, one must suppose that anything is possible.
If this doesn't take place - the responsibility will lie upon the President. If this egregious attack and killing of his own officers in a wartime theater of operations cries out for this most severe possible sanction. The only additional comment from the Chief is that lethal injection is far too easy a path out - a firing squad (at least!) would be far more appropriate for this slimebag.
Writing in an opEd in the LA Times, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo does a good job of laying out the current battle lines on the border security and immigration issue. Nothing here for the Chief to argue with.
People who say it's racist to want secure borders are insulting the intelligence of the American people, and such charges betray an empty arsenal of serious arguments....
Last month's Minuteman protest on the Arizona border is only a harbinger of what is to come if political leaders do not take notice of legitimate citizen outrage over these absurdities. Citizens are demanding two simple things — border security and immigration law enforcement. When did law enforcement become a radical idea?
A timely warning indeed!
Going along with previous comments by the Chief, the London Telegraph reports problems with the system of scientific peer review in what are arguably the two most prestigious general subject scientific journals, the UK's NATURE, and the USA's SCIENCE.
It is becoming more and more clear that there has been a pre-determined decision to ape the NY Times so that "all the news that fits, we print". More specifically, refutation of the currently propounded orthodoxy of human-caused global warming is as verboten as was Galileo's exposition of the Copernican solar system in the 16th century.
Two of the world's leading scientific journals have come under fire from researchers for refusing to publish papers which challenge fashionable wisdom over global warming.
A British authority on natural catastrophes who disputed whether climatologists really agree that the Earth is getting warmer because of human activity, says his work was rejected by the American publication, Science, on the flimsiest of grounds.
A separate team of climate scientists, which was regularly used by Science and the journal Nature to review papers on the progress of global warming, said it was dropped after attempting to publish its own research which raised doubts over the issue.
It would seem that in spite of nearly 400 years of scientific progress, in the final analysis, the powers of scientific orthodoxy are just as unforgiving and intolerant of opposition as the religious authority was then. At least now there is only professional ostracism of their opponents as their ultimate sanction, instead of burning at the stake.