Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

Newer Entries »

We’re FEMA, we don’t need no steenking standards

Thursday, September 22nd, 2005

In another stunning display of FEMA idiocy, registering for disaster aid through the internet requires you to use IE6 as your browser and to have JavaScript enabled. See eWeek’s article about it. I just checked the FEMA site in question myself and that really is the case. Un-be-lieveable.

And even if IE6 weren’t required, why the heck are they requiring JavaScript to be enabled? Sure, it might make things look slicker, but is it really needed for what, ultimately, is going to just be a form submission. Sure, JS can do client-side input verification, but it wouldn’t be hard to have the server do it and come back with an appropriate error page. I concede it’s a fair point that that would put more load on the servers. So you have the slick page that you figure most people use and then an alternate page (something that can be used by lynx, say?) for others.

And how much do you want to bet the FEMA page doesn’t follow the government’s own 508 standards?

Posted in geekage, politics, technology | 1 Comment »

Failed floodwalls were likely within their design specs

Wednesday, September 21st, 2005

Looks like the floodwalls that failed weren’t built right in the first place. (via WaPo)

So when do the moonbats start claiming that Bush used a time machine to go back and sabotage the construction?

Posted in politics | 3 Comments »

If FEMA had existed during the Revolution

Wednesday, September 21st, 2005

It would probably go something like this…

Imagine FEMA commanding the Battle of Lexington and Concord:

You there, Danvers militia! You haven’t reported to us yet! Stop that firing right now! Take your Minutemen to the Respect Thy Neighbors’ Papist Faith Seminar and await further orders. … Menotomy Minutemen! Where do you think you’re going? Who authorized you to defend that village against Redcoats? It’s not even on the map. It says here “Arlington.” You haven’t even filled out a Sparsely Populated Urban Warfare AQ-207-1 form!!! Get back to the stonewall!

(via HubBlog)

Posted in funny, local, politics | 2 Comments »

In whose interest are they working?

Tuesday, September 20th, 2005

Surely I can’t be the only person to wonder how much of the sometimes insane shrillness of DeLong and Krugman (especially the latter) comes from having their hopes of getting a sinecure with a Gore or Kerry administration so rudely dashed.

That said, at least DeLong still often has interesting stuff to say, as opposed to turning into a complete partisan hack a la Krugman.

Posted in economics, politics | 1 Comment »

2005 McArthurites

Tuesday, September 20th, 2005

The list is out.

Posted in politics, science, technology | 1 Comment »

I know our bureaucracy is stupid…

Tuesday, September 20th, 2005

…but I didn’t expect the stupidity to be that blazingly obvious.

Posted in politics | 1 Comment »

To be a government of laws, not men

Thursday, September 15th, 2005

One of the most frustrating things in watching those excuses for elected officials grill Roberts (when they’re not burning up their time making incoherent speeches instead of asking questions) is the frightening number of times they want to pressure Roberts into saying that he’ll make decisions that lead to “correct” results instead making correct decisions.

It’s the job of a judge to follow the law as she is writ, even if that leads to results that everyone, even the judge, thinks are unfortunate at the time. To do otherwise is to render the law irrelevant. What’s the point of a constitution or statute books if judges are to ignore them whenever the judge things ignoring them leads to a “better” result?

Posted in law, politics | 1 Comment »

Great summary of Day 2 of the hearings

Thursday, September 15th, 2005

From a comment over at Althouse’s blog. Snarky, but oh, so true. And these hearings are prima facie evidence for repealing the 17th Amendment.

Specter: Do you agree, as I do, that you will refuse to say anything meaningful about Roe V. Wade?

Roberts: I would just like to say, stare decisis, precedents, stare decisis and precendents, precendents and stare decisis, and in closing, Casey.

Leahy: Is the president EVIL or just evil? And why you hate sick children?

Roberts: Could you at least pretend to have paid attention to what I wrote? And just so we’re clear, every time I say “with all due respect…” what I really mean is “Could you be any more of a d*ckhead?”

Hatch: I’ve been in Congress a very long time and I know stuff.

Roberts: I believe judges should be thoughtful and pay attention to all issues under review.

Kennedy: We all know you hate black people so get it over with and say somethng insulting.

Roberts: Reagan was right, you were wrong, the Supreme Court agreed with us, get over it.

Grassley: I like flowers. Do you like flowers? I think flowers are pretty.

Roberts: Thank you for giving me the opportunity to bring the issue of precedents to the table. Also, sometimes the court has to decide hard cases and they should do so in a thoughtful manner. cough Precedents cough

Biden: I would like to use my time to read these overly clever questions my staff wrote for me: baseball, baseball, baseball, Ginsburg, Ginsburg, Ginsburg….and now my Sam Kinison impression, SAY IT SAY IT AH AH AH AHHHHH!!!!!!!

Roberts: Once again, the Supreme Court concluded that it was a correct reading of the law, so talk to the hand, analogy boy.

Posted in funny, law, politics | 1 Comment »

Blame the poor or blame the system?

Saturday, September 10th, 2005

Jane Galt has a good post up here on the interplay between choices individuals make and the forces that act on them re: being in poverty.

It sounds oh so Glenn-y, but Read The Whole Thing(tm).

Posted in politics | 1 Comment »

Newer Entries »