I Miss California
Just Sayin'
Because It's True?
So True
Of Balloons and National Security
From Greg Fallis:
Jesus suffering fuck. Republicans are terrified of everything but guns–the one thing we KNOW kills thousands of Americans every goddamn year. They're terrified of gay folks, terrified of the entire concept of gender that's not based on a toggle switch, terrified of people of color, terrified of beliefs that don't fall within their wildly idiotic interpretation of Christianity, terrified government agents will break into their homes and seize their gas stoves, terrified of books they haven't read, terrified of surgical masks, and now they're terrified by a Chinese balloon.
"My concern is that the federal government doesn't know what's in that balloon. Is that bioweapons in that balloon? Did that balloon take off from Wuhan?"
This was no ordinary fucking idiot who said this. This was a special fucking idiot. This fucking idiot was Congressman James Corner, the Republican Chair of the House Oversight Committee. And he said it on FOX News, of course, the primary venue for fucking idiots. This fucking idiot has access to a massive amount of information; he's a fucking idiot with a staff whose job includes researching issues of national concern and informing him so he won't come across to the public like a fucking idiot.
I'm not a member of Congress. I don't have a staff. But I have a Chromebook (I could have just used my cell phone, but the display is smaller and my eyes get tired). So let's see if we can answer Corner's concerns.
Did the balloon take off from Wuhan? Nope. Okay, first–because words matter–it's a goddamn balloon. Balloons don't "take off." Balloons are inflated and released. It's not a fucking missile. Beyond that, we can with a certain level of accuracy backtrack the balloon's path based on its current height and known patterns of wind currents. And hey, a whole bunch of meteorologists did just that, and we can say with confidence it was released somewhere in west central China. Wuhan is in east central China. So, nope.
Do we know what's in the balloon? Yes and no. I mean, yes we know what's IN the balloon, since all high altitude balloons are filled with some lighter-than-air gas, like helium or hydrogen. But he's talking about the payload. The stuff the balloon is carrying. And no, we don't know what the payload is. However…
Is the payload a bioweapon? We don't know, but almost certainly nope. First off, it would be massively stupid for China to attack the US. Secondly, even if China was stupid enough to attack the US, a localized bioweapon attack would be an incredibly weak opening salvo of a war. Thirdly, even if China was that stupid, a high altitude balloon would be a really inefficient and ineffective delivery system for a bioweapon attack.
Here's a question this particular fucking idiot didn't ask, but is being asked by lots of other fucking idiots: A) Could the balloon be carrying surveillance technology? Sure. But why? China launches a lot of rockets capable of carrying sophisticated surveillance technology–and by 'a lot' I mean they're second only to the US in the number of racket launches. If China wants to conduct surveillance of troops/bases/deployments, they have the capability to do it without resorting to a balloon.
The thing about balloons is they're at the mercy of the wind. And yeah, we know general wind patterns at different altitudes, so while it's possible (by changing the altitude of the balloon) to generally guide a balloon, they can't be sent to spy on a specific target location. In addition to the wind, high altitude balloons are sensitive to the weight of the payload, to the amount of helium/hydrogen used for inflation, and even the air temperature at the time of release. Balloon guidance is largely a crap shoot; you know the odds, but you don't know the outcome. To attach surveillance tech to a balloon and hope it drifts by something worth seeing is a really dumb surveillance approach.
Another thing. People keep saying "This balloon is the size of two (sometimes three) school busses," as if that's somehow threatening. The balloon IS A BALLOON. Even a really big balloon is just a latex membrane surrounding a lighter-than-air gas. The balloon may be really big, but that doesn't mean the payload is really big. If the payload was the size of a couple of school busses, then the balloon carrying it would probably be the size of a football stadium.
But but but the military says they won't shoot it down because of the risk of "debris could land on people or homes". So doesn't that mean the payload must be big? Nope. It means if you shoot a missile up in the air, the missile will come back down. That's how gravity works. Could the US military shoot down the balloon over a rural area to minimize the risk? Sure. But the least expensive air-to-air missile (AIM-9X Sidewinder) costs US$430,818. Add in the cost of jet fuel (and that shit ain't cheap) and we're talking about spending maybe half a million dollars to take down a balloon. A balloon, for fuck's sake.
So just what in the popcorn fuck IS the balloon and what's it real purpose? I don't know. But I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out to be just an underinflated weather balloon. Underinflated because a properly inflated weather balloon is designed that as the balloon gains in elevation the gas inside it expands to a volume larger than the balloon's capacity to expand, at which point it…pops. The payload then returns to earth on a parachute. An underinflated balloon won't reach that height and so won't expand beyond its tolerance. It can just wander along until the elevated UV light at that height degrades the latex and it pops on its own.
Is this situation a violation of US air space? Yes. It may be accidental, but yes. But it seems highly improbable that the balloon or its payload, whatever it is, is a threat to US national security.
The actual threat to US national security is the Republican Party.
Classified Docs for Dummies
Don't Fuck With Greta Thunberg
I Was Wondering the Same Thing
I Know the Wheels of Justice Grind Slowly…
That's What I Was Thinking…
Wut?
Shady Till the End
Sunday Funnies
For Those of You Who Have to Deal With This Nonsense…
Just a Little Reality Check
From Reluctant Rebel:
David Frum:
But if both Republicans and Democrats, left and right, suffer political violence, the same cannot be said of those who celebrate political violence. That's not a "both sides" affair in 2020s America. You don't see Democratic House members wielding weapons in videos and threatening to shoot candidates who want to cut capital-gains taxes or slow the growth of Medicare. Democratic candidates for Senate do not post video fantasies of hunting and executing political rivals, or of using a firearm to discipline their children's romantic partners. It's not because of Democratic members that Speaker Nancy Pelosi installed metal detectors to bar firearms from the floor of the House. No Democratic equivalent exists of Donald Trump, who regularly praises and encourages violence as a normal tool of politics, most recently against his own party's Senate leader, Mitch McConnell. As the formerly Trump-leaning Wall Street Journal editorialized on October 2: "It's all too easy to imagine some fanatic taking Mr. Trump seriously and literally, and attempting to kill Mr. McConnell. Many supporters took Mr. Trump's rhetoric about former Vice President Mike Penceall too seriously on Jan. 6."
The State of Affairs
? ? ?
Getting Down to Brass Tax
From Darwinfish2:
There are now three guaranteed certainties in this life, Death, Taxes, and Republicans trying to get out of paying taxes. I saw this a couple weeks ago and it got me thinking:
First, I don't know who was "crying" about Elon Musk buying Twitter instead of "solving" world hunger. Yeah, it would have been nice for a guy like Musk to spend some of his excessive dough on projects that would better our surroundings. And he likes to pose as quite the philanthropist, but I think he prefers his vanity projects.
And since when can $80 billion "solve" world hunger? There are far too many factors and variables to make it so that no one is ever hungry again. $80 bil wouldn't make a dent. It may help a select group of people for a finite amount of time, but that's not a solution. A serious solution would look too much like Socialism and that's the last thing people who like this meme would want. Or, it might look like this idea from the 80s:
But I was really more interested in the IRS bit. This Democrat is thrilled that the IRS is getting rejuvenated. The last administration was keen to let the whole organization whither on the vine and die so that the richest among us could still use all the tax lawyers at their disposal to ensure that the national tax burden rested on the rest of us, and not them.
I don't think the IRS is interested in chasing down us commoners for audits. Where's the payoff in that? (Other than enjoying the sadism.)
If I'm a guy working for the IRS and I want to produce results, where do I look? I look where the money is, with the rich, and not with the working stiffs. Chasing down the average citizen is a waste of time and resources. I'd want to be able to say to my boss at review time, "I recovered X-dollars' worth of unpaid taxes," where "X" is the largest number possible.
Republicans know this, probably because their rich donors pound it into their heads, so they want the IRS to be as under-manned, under-funded, and under-equipped as possible. So when the new funding bill wanted to bolster the T-men, they figured they need to get the commoners good and scared about getting audited by gun-packing federal agents. It's the tax equivalent of the "death squads" they trotted out to make everyone afraid of Obamacare, and just as misleading.
I Don't Know Who Did This…
Maybe You're Right
Bank of America Says the Quiet Part Out Loud
From Mock Paper Scissors:
Guys, if you can believe it, Bank of America is really hoping for widespread unemployment:
The hope from Bank of America is that more people will be unemployed and workers will have lost this rare moment of bargaining power. Fat cats in corner offices believe that paying workers causes inflation, and not the record-breaking profits from price gouging.
We also note that the Federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr was last updated 13 years ago, and after inflation, people making U.S. minimum wage are earning less now than 60 years ago. That should put a smile on B of A executives vulpine faces.
At This Point, What's One More?
Just a Thought…
To Unaware To Even See The Irony
? ? ?
The raid on Mar-a-Lago was based largely on information from an FBI confidential human source, one who was able to identify what classified documents former President Trump was still hiding and even the location of those documents."
[source]