perfidy

A platoon of the 506th PIR is pinned down on a mountainside, surrounded by an unexpectedly large - and growing - number of jihadis. They parachuted in the night before, to set up an observation post to monitor traffic in this remote region. The American troops have a good defensive position. They could hold it forever against the ill-trained and under-equipped mujj. But no position is secure when you run out of ammo. And that time is not far away.

The nearest airbase is five hundred klicks to the south. Two transports have been shot down in past month, and brass is concerned about losses. They're not about to lose millions of dollars of expensive transport. But the sergeant seems serenely unconcerned about remf penny-pinching cowardice. The reason becomes clear when a low hum begins to sound from behind the ridge above them.

Seconds later, a flock of jeep sized helicopters popup over the ridge – each clearing the ridge by inches, and each in exactly the same place. The drone cargo helicopters (operated by some spec-4 in Bahrain, the sergeant imagines) circle the paratroopers’ small defensive enclave. As each passes over the small beacon the troops placed in the small clearing, the jeep helicopter snap-flares to a complete stop, and drops a cargo pallet out before moving on. In ten seconds, a ton of ammunition, mortars, and (thank you, God! cigarettes) has been robotically, automatically delivered.

Over at Murdoc’s post on the V-22 Osprey, James left a comment that really caught my imagination.

Stepping back though - advances in tech are rendering alot of its functions redundant. For example GPS guided air drops could replace many of its cargo functions.

Personally, I think a hummer based ducted fan UAV that can carry about 300- 500 lbs of cargo would be more effective. (Basically it would enable the creation of a GPS unmanned mobile resupply function) Think of just in time resupply chain.

Of course, appealing to the “advances in technology” idea is sure to catch my imagination. I can’t believe I never thought of this, but it is so obvious in retrospect.

The advances that are driving the rapid development of reconnaissance uavs (and soon, ucavs) could just as easily drive the development of cargo uavs. Once we’ve got the trick of using flocks of uavs dependably, there’s no reason not to scale up the size of the vehicles. There’s no inherent reason that drones need to be small. (And the Global hawk isn’t tiny, even now.) The same intelligence that will keep a recon uav on station for days at a time, and maneuver it to the targets it needs to provide imagery for would guide a cargo plane or helicopter from a depot to wherever troops need supplies.

An automated airdrop mechanism wouldn’t be too hard to develop – just something that would open a door and kick out a pallet on command. GPS and local beacons would make it all work. And because there’s no pilot, there’s no risk to flying in low and slow for deliveries.

James’ idea of humvee sized ducted fan uavs is right out of Bladerunner, and it would be cool as hell to have those. It would be cool as hell to have manned versions as gunships, too. But people have been trying to get the ducted fan thing to work for decades, with not even as much success as the V-22. But the same software that would work for fixed wing uavs would also work for rotor uavs.

The HURT system I posted on earlier, matched up with a inventory/supply management system, could easily form the basis of a nearly automated tactical combat supply distribution system. Palletized supplies would be automatically loaded on unmanned cargo planes and helicopters, and these would be automatically organized into flocks for delivery to troops in need. The management of the individual uavs would be independent of the management of the supplies, the system and its operators would handle the coordination.

Ms. Miers nomination has certainly stirred up the hornet's nest amongst the "conservative" rank and file. What we can glean from scant information about her centrist notions on affirmative action, RvW, and other "conservative" causes cause consternation or optimism, in accordance with the beholder's eye. Of course, there's that complete lack of any public record that really leaves us all pretty much scratching our heads.

The religious right just can't understand why their payoff isn't the nomination of a prominent judge who loudly agrees with (and even repeats!) their slogans. Someone who doesn't "legislate from the bench", whatever the hell that means -- I have yet to meet a GOP voter who can successfully articulate an instance of this with any level of specificity. What I mostly get is, "you know -- when they write laws and stuff". Yeah, like when? Where?

Most people just don't get what the Supreme Court does, most of the time. The Supreme Court serves as a check on the power of government. The constitution is the only law of this land that tells the government what it may and may not do. When the Supreme Court (or any other court) is interpreting the constitution, the primary reason it is done is to ensure that your freedoms remain intact, despite the "best intentions" of those in power.

Do you seriously want to dissolve the ability of the Supreme Court to enforce constitutional limits on government? That is a notion of stunning foolishness. Should we wait for a four-year election cycle and use our votes as the sole means of checking government power? One look at the democracy-destroying nature of gerrymandering should convince us all of the inefficacy of that.

What good is a constitution if there is no-one to enforce it? What good is a right to vote if the rules of the game are manipulated by a party immune to constitutional review? The only right to a vote you have is that guaranteed to you by the constitution. Enforcement of the constitution is the cornerstone of democracy.

But back to our Ms. Miers. Why Miers? Does Bush just, uh, like her or something? Does he like her more than Laura? Maybe so. Maybe he really was the "best governor ever!". We should see if she ever lived in Arkansas.

But maybe there's something more to this. The crowd currently in control of the White House (I hold out the possibility that Bush is a member) knows that the GOP is based on an unstable amalgam of a number of groups: The Religious Right, the Anti-Democrats, the Business-Firsters, the Establishment Preservationists, the Fuck-You-I'm-A-Winners, and the Xenophobes. What do they all have in common? Each of these has a single issue that overwhelms all other concerns for them. They are all single-issue voters, so if you tell them what they want to hear on their single issue, they'll vote for you even if you're completely screwing them over in every other way.

I’m using common terminology for the Religious Right, but perhaps you are somewhat mystified by my other GOP-voting categories.

I’ll cheerfully and hopefully place my GOP-voting Perfidy colleagues in the “Anti-Democrat” category. Anti-Democrats vote for the GOP because there’s only one thing they know for sure – as bad as the GOP and all that crooked crowd are, the Democrats are worse. Can’t argue with that – it’s a purely subjective take on the political situation, and they’ve got a right to it.

Business-Firsters want deregulation and low business taxes. They’re a very small group, but they have the money and use it to influence the political process. They want deregulation so they can screw over the public at large while avoiding any responsibility for doing so. They want low business taxes so they can make as much money as possible doing it. Long term, they want something even better than deregulation. They want de-de-regulation. That’s when the government says it’s completely legal for them to do what they want, and it’s illegal for their competitors to do the same thing.

Establishment Preservationists, besides being an ass-kicking name for a band, refers to those wealthy families and groups who believe that change is all fine and good right up until it place them or any of their possessions into any form of risk, or opens them up to any kind of competition. For example, civil rights are fine unless there’s too many brown people showing up in the neighborhood. That “changes” the nature of the establishment, and is thus UnAmerican. The most important example is that of preservation of social class – any changes that would jeopardize the social class (derived from economic status) of those currently at the top is an egregious, UnAmerican change. Can’t have those.

Ah, Fuck-You-I’m-A-Winners: Just like kids playing basketball on the playground, they are all utterly convinced that someday they’re going to be playing in the NBA, or on top of the world. And they’re going to do it by following a system: If they have the right attitude, and connect with the right people, they’ll get what they deserve! Of course, when their spiraling credit card debt hits them between the eyes, they whine about their taxes being too high. When they don’t find themselves “on top”, it’s someone else’s fault. They’re dreamers, and schemers, and playing fair isn’t even slightly on their minds. It’s about getting ahead, and about the competition. The GOP has a special pitch for these folks: They tell them they’re the smart guys, that they get it, and that those stupid liberals just don’t understand the fundamental natural laws, the kill-or-be-killed of it all. They tell them they’re on the team, and that’s all the Fuck-Yous need to hear. They’re a part of the winning team. Virtually all Fuck-Yous circle the drain for a while then end up down, out, and confused, but by that time they’ve voted for the GOP often enough that they become automatic Anti-Democrats.

Xenophobes are the special sub-breed that can’t stand the damn foreigners – they’re like Establishment Preservationists who don’t have money as an excuse. In spite of the fact that declining birthrates mean that structures like Social Security are going to be in trouble they figure that permanently shutting the doors to immigration is the solution to their problems. And screw tourism – we don’t need’em. When pressed they are unable to connect immigration to whatever is troubling them in their personal lives, but dammit, you have to hate somebody, and immigrants are the easiest of all targets.

And the Religious Right? They’re single issue people – abortion. They know that doesn’t play all that well so they’ve jumped on the “legislating from the bench” bullshit so they have at least one secular issue they can talk about. But since they don’t know what it means and can’t cite any examples of it, they’re back to what they really care about, which is abortion.

You may notice the unsurprising lack of the “fiscal conservative”. Fiscal conservatives are currently in hibernation. They find themselves largely in the Anti-Democrat category. If in the future the GOP once again establishes any minute form of credibility when it comes to financial issues, they will re-emerge. In the mean time, they are sliding further and further towards the Democrats. They might even vote for one, someday, or even in the next election. Damn, never thought that would happen.

No, really, I’m getting back to Miers this time – I swear. If you’re the political genius in charge of the GOP, you know that you need to find a way to keep this whole darn crazy thing together. If you gave the religious conservatives what they wanted (abortion), you run the risk of having them look at any other issue. And then you’re dealing with the population at large – a significant portion aren’t going to like what they see in the GOP.

So the very best chance the GOP crowd has to stay in power is to do precisely what George Bush always advocates – Stay The Course. Don’t solve the problems, or give anything to any part of the base that will truly satisfy that base. The cultural war must be continued, for that distraction provides the leverage necessary to win elections, while engaging in policies that harm those who vote for you. If you can’t prove you’re right, then for God’s sake, obscure the fact that you’re wrong.

Harriet Miers keeps the cultural war alive. She’s one skirmish in a larger war.

...if such indictments even occur, that is.

I've been struck by the blood-in-the-water partisanship this saga has engendered, even as it's seemed clearer and clearer that no crime was committed under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Yeah, I know, she either was or she wasn't covert, and we can argue about that all day long. Well, you can, because I don't really care. We can also argue about intent to disclose known classified information for the purposes of thwarting the agent's mission, but you'd have trouble finding justification for any assertions of "intent", "known classified" and "thwarting". That, and, well I really don't care about that part either.

The part I do care about is the assumption underlying all this nastiness.

Via an op-ed found in today's Houston Barnacle, which attempts to compare & contrast the role of the press in what the author appears to think are the two defining scandals of our time, the discerning reader can learn that:

The break-in at the Watergate was carried out by a team of burglars hired by a White House operative. The current probe points to a scenario in which the dirty work apparently was done, perhaps unwittingly, by reporters who were fed classified information from officials out to get even with Wilson.

The op-editorialist issues some weasel-like qualifiers and then states with authority what everyone knows, just knows!, about the story, namely that officials were "out to get even with Wilson".

I demur. They weren't trying to get even with him, because it's not like they got Valerie Wilson fired, demoted, or anything else. Absent Administration knowledge of some Joe Wilson peccadillo that relied on the illusion of regular congress with an undercover (or, not, but I still don't care) CIA operative, revenge isn't a credible assertion. Some would call it clarification, some rebuttal, and still others an attempt to discredit Wilson. Sadly, leaving him alone to continue thinking himself crucial and important would have been enough to do that, without any effort on anyone else's part. Wilson, undone by his own yammering cake-hole, would have faded from view many months ago.

There may be indictments, but my guess is that they'd be for obstruction of one sort or another, rather than for a violation of Title 50421 of the US Code. Which is a real shame, because while Joe Wilson is a fatuous fabulist, the world could have found that out with no outside help. And the underlying theme, that revenge somehow played a part in this drama, is hogwash.

Other views exist. But they, too, are focused on everything but the stupidity of the underlying assumption.

Via the 'Dredge Report, we find a story that tracks down the truth, corners it, and has it cowering in fear before skewering it with something pointy. We've run out of names on the hurricane list. The next named storm will have the awe-inspiring moniker "Alpha," and given that we have more than a month left in the season, we might be confronted by the terrifying spectre of hurricane Delta rampaging through the Gulf of Mexico like a sorority chick on spring break going through sissy drinks. (Maybe hurricane Phi Mu (a fat but slow category three) would be lingering off to the side, not really hitting anything but seeming vaguely embarrassed to be there, yet determined to stick it out and make sure that Delta gets home without too much vomit or roof fragments in her hair.)

The DCeiver has some thoughts for how the National Weather Service could improve matters by changing its system of nomenclature:

We want to fear these storms. We really do. But I'll be damned if I run from Hurricane Florence. I already have had the experience of being in a mandatory evacuation over a Hurricane named Bob. I didn't want to evacuate. I felt like a grade-A pussy running from someone named Bob. I still feel that way.

... If the National Weather Service wants to get serious about protecting people, they have got to rethink this name thing. They need to start giving these storms some names that absolutely leave NO doubt that they are going to seriously FUCK US UP. Names like Hurricane Deathbroth or the Kneecapper or Margaret Thatcher. Something that's going to inspire the average person to fear for their lives.

Look at the names they're getting into next year. Hurricane Beryl? Hurricane Ernesto? I can see a little germ of fear growing in the face of a hurricane named Oscar, maybe. I knew a thorough-going bitch named Joyce once. But most of these names are just no good! Nadine is the cute barista at the coffeeshop across the street. Tony is the lead in West Side Story. Isaac is the Love Boat bartender. No, no, no. These are mixed messages!

What we need is a hurricane named, let's say, The Penetrator. You tell me that The Penetrator is coming ashore in 24 hours and I am gone like Keyser Soze. Use the names of famous human predators, like Adolph or Idi Amin or Attilla or Affleck, and people will break out in a mad dash for higher ground. Think about it--when the media reports on the "aftermath of Leslie", how worked up do you expect the Federal responders to get? But if you have reporters beaming out picture live from the devastation wrought by The Defecator--then we'll see some motherfuckers rolling out to save some people on roofs!

Amen.

Loyal Reader #0016, Edog, reminds me of this device, one of those gobsmackingly obvious inventions I've seen in a while. And one of the silliest.

From the FAQs:

Q: "Is there a battery attachment?"
A: No. The Banana Guard was designed for its intended purpose only as a device to prevent banana trauma during transport.

(Is it any wonder they're Canadian?)

Of course, I've been trying to remind myself for months to order a couple of these for me and Goodwyfe Johno so we can commute with bananas. It's all about priorities, people! Hats off to Edog!

Turbonegro used to be such fun! Leather-clad (and sailor-suited) glammed up Norwegians (some of whom may or may not have been midgets) singing freaky songs influenced by Priest and the Crue and Kiss the Scorps and Slade and especially Tap with titles like "Rock Against Ass" and "Rendezvous with Anus," all delivered in slightly Continental English with not the slightest hint of a smirk. Their 1998 album Apocalypse Dudes is one of my absoluto favorito butt-rock albums of all time, a pitch perfect slab of 80s-glam-metal punk goodness spiked with equal parts tribute and irony.

Their name, by the way, is reputedly an un-politically correct anti-racist jab at Norwegian xenophobes. According to the band, "A turbonegro is a large, well-equipped, armed black male in a fast car, out for vengeance. We are his prophets." Okay, then. We have a band of ugly, ballsy, raucous anti-racists operating in Norway's famously messed-up freaky metal scene, singing big hooky songs about boobs and rock and sex and stupid crap like that. Take it from me: when they were on their game, as on Apocalypse Dudes, it was something like genius.

Then they broke up. Something about that breakup, short though it was, apparently blew out whatever strange chemistry made them work.Their reunion album, 2003's Scandinavian Leather was panned by the notably harsh critics at pitchforkmedia as "cliched," "exhausted," and as deep and satisfying as Europe's unfortunate musical turd The Final Countdown. Ouch.

I am sorry to report that their new album, Party Animals isn't much better. The hooks are rote, the choruses are stilted, and the funny parts are obvious, and not in a good-ironic way. If Apocalypse Dudes was Robin Williams in 1986, climbing the sets and ad libbing deranged fantasies in front of delerious audiences, Party Animals is Robin Williams in 2005, mugging and sweating and mugging and grimacing and mugging and begging with his eyes for you to love him! For a paycheck! For one more shot at subbing for Bruce Vilanch on Hollywood Squares!

Party Animals does contain a few bright moments. "Blow Me Like The Wind" is fun in a sub-Spinal Tap way, and "All My Friends Are Dead" does the same thing as Jim Carroll's "People Who Died" except without quite as much angst. But on the other hand there are tracks like "Wasted Again," which is pretty much a note-for-note ripoff of The Dead Boys' "Sonic Reducer," "If You See Kaye (Tell Her I Love Her)," a mere excuse to spell If-You-See-Kay over and over for two and a half minutes, and the stunningly dumb-in-the-bad-way "City of Satan." In general, it is difficult to tell what is meant as ironic skewering of 80s-metal cliches, and what is just tired acquiescense to same. Although the sounds are in general inoffensive enough, you will get far more bang for your buck out of your old copy of Love at First Sting or Holy Diver, and that's not to mention Smell The Glove. Moreover, the very idea of an inoffensive Turbonegro album should give you, dear reader, some idea of how very far they have fallen.

It's not that Party Animals is a particularly awful album; it's not. To be awful the band would have had to try much harder. But it's also not any good, and I can't see much point in Turbonegro having made it, either. Turbonegro deserve some sidelong praise for their past successes and for helping other Scandanavian bands get a break- the Hives apparently owe their careers in part to Turbonegro's help- but if they're in it for the thrill, I think the thrill is gone, and if it's for the money, the pity's gone too.

Robert Prather and Insults Unpunished are back from their lengthy hiatus. (Thanks to Kathy for the heads up. We probably owe her money.) Glad to see that he's back, and Sgt. Hook, too.

Robert has a post on peak oil that is kind of a complement to my recent post on abiogenic petroleum. Even if all the oil we'll ever have is what we know about now, it's still not the end of human civilization.

Outside the Beltway has an informative round up and lots of links to reaction on SCOTUS nominee Harriet Miers' answers to the Senate questionaire. Looks like the Judiciary committee looked at it and told her, "do over!" And next time, answer the questions with more "particularity and precision." And that command came from both Republican and Democrats on the committee.

Of course, the fact that she only spent 3-1/2 pages answering the substantive questions is, to put it mildly, less than impressive. Indeed, her answers amount to a regurgitation of the first few days of an undergraduate ConLaw course.

I'm ever more convinced that she just ain't it. Loyal is a good, but not sufficient recommendation for a position as important as this. And we've had very little evidence that she has any qualifications beyond loyalty - except perhaps that she is also nice.

Bush needs to take the hit and nominate someone who is manifestly qualified. Doesn't need to be a judge necessarily, but someone who has a record of thinking clearly on constitutional issues.

EDog happened upon an interesting web game. Using Google's marvelous image search, search on the following items, and post the first image returned. 

The town where you were born

[The rest are below the fold.] 
The town where you live now

I forgot to enter the state. This cool map was near the top of the list when I added Virginia:

Your name

This guy was apparently at Kent State the same time I was going to school only twenty miles away. If I enter my blognomen, I get:

Your grandmother's name (Pick one)

My grandmother didn't look like that. At any point in her life.

Your favorite food

I cheated. This was actually image number three. But it's much more amusing than the first one.

Your favorite drink

My second favorite drink retrieved another cool image:

Your favorite song

Your favorite smell

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez claimed in a BBC interview that the United States is planning to invade his country. That's what the headline said. But the actual quote is, "We have detected with intelligence reports plans of a supposed invasion, one that would never happen. But we have to denounce it."

I'm sure the Pentagon has plans to invade Britain and Canada, too. Doesn't mean we're going to. While Chavez is certainly higher on the list of potential libervasion targets than Paul Martin or Tony Blair, I'm also certain that there are many countries ahead of him in line. Like Syria and Iran. With our military stretched out the way it is, we're not going to go around invading countries for shits and giggles. Chavez is an annoyance, not a threat. And he does still sell us gas. No real problem there. Just more hysterical windbaggery from a leftwing dictator.