Obama plans to debut his fully-spun, focus-tested Afghanistan policy soon. The Brits can hardly wait.
The Times tells us the messages will be many:
Over the next week, he will deliver multiple messages to multiple audiences: voters at home, allies, the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the extremists who are the enemy. And as Mr. Obama’s own aides concede, the messages directed at some may undercut the messages sent to others.
He must convince Democrats, especially the antiwar base that helped elect him, and the slim majority of the country that tells pollsters the conflict is no longer worth the sacrifice, that in sending more troops he is not escalating the war L.B.J.-style. In fact, some of those involved in the deliberations on an Afghanistan strategy say Mr. Obama will argue that providing the additional numbers is the fastest way to assure that the United States will be able to “finish the job,” because it will speed the training of the Afghan national army.
"Finish the job"? The first rhetorical sleight of hand will surely occur with the definition of the job. And I know that Obama's speechwriters are struggling to explain why Afghanistan in late 2009 is so dramatically different from Iraq surge debate of late 2006, when Obama was leading the charge for conditional surrender. Or I suppose Obama could finally admit his position then was a crock.
I don't know about multiple messages, but after this speech Obama will be offered multiple crow sandwiches from the left and right.
I AM NOT A FOREIGN POLICY GENIUS LIKE JOE BIDEN OR HILLARY CLINTON, BUT...
This is interesting - the Times discusses yet another audience:
Pakistan poses a particularly difficult problem. Mr. Obama has been highly attuned to the need to declare that the United States is not in what he recently called “an open-ended commitment” in Afghanistan.
But for years, throughout the Bush administration and into the Obama administration, American officials have been making trips to Pakistan to reassure its government that the United States has no intention of pulling out of Afghanistan as it did 20 years ago, after the Soviets retreated from the country. Inside the Pakistani Army and the intelligence service, which is known as the ISI, it is an article of faith among some officers that the United States is deceiving them, and that it will replay 1989.
If that happens, some Pakistanis argue, India will fill the void in southern Afghanistan, leaving Pakistan surrounded by its longtime enemy. So any talk of exit strategies is bound to reaffirm the belief of some Pakistani officials that they have to maintain their contacts with the Taliban — their hedge against Indian encroachment.
So the bright lights at the White House have Obama preview his Afghan strategy in a joint press conference with the Indian Prime Minister, prior to hosting the PM as the guest of honor at Obama's first state dinner. Geez, those are pretty subtle signals; I wonder how they might affect Paki paranoia?
God, I love stuffing.
Posted by: bunky | November 25, 2009 at 11:47 AM
TM,here's an http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2008/03/obama-flips-his.html>old post worth revisiting from March 2008.
Synopsis:
Campaign advisor Samantha Power: "We can't take what candidate Obama says about pulling all troops out of Iraq within 16 months as gospel for what a President Obama would do."
Obama spokesman David Plouffe: "Yes we can!"
Obama: "As I have always said,let me be clear,I would never have put troops in,and I will immediately begin pulling them out."
And you reminded us that a month earlier...
Obama (to Steve Croft of 60 Minutes): "I reserve the right as commander in chief to break my promises about pulling troops out."
And....scene.
Posted by: hit and run | November 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM
"And as Mr. Obama’s own aides concede, the messages directed at some may undercut the messages sent to others."
You know, when Yassir Arafat pulled this crap, he got away with it by speaking English to one side and Arabic to the other.
Posted by: Bill Peschel | November 25, 2009 at 11:59 AM
I have no particular sympathy for Pakistan--rather the reverse. They've contributed mightily to the world's troubles. OTOH, I am in favor of professional conduct of our foreign policy, including acting in such a way as reveals our deep understanding of the dynamics of any particular situation. This is amateur hour. All over again.
Posted by: anduril | November 25, 2009 at 12:10 PM
I love the president's run-up-to-the-announcement remarks:
Translation: I have no idea what I'm doing. So I'm going to talk about how I'm going to be clear in the future. That will give me time to figure out what I want to do, maybe. After announcing in March that I knew what my strategy was.
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Obama's message to the Chinese last week seems to have worried the Indians. I doubt the awesome honor of being chosen to receive the first Obama state dinner was reassurance enough, as the WH claimed.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Perhaps in his "real" announcement, President Obama will remind us about how he's indicated to Karzai that corruption in the Afghani government needs to be dealt with.
Then Obama can explain why he's given/offered 40 ambassadorships to big Obama campaign donors.
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Crittenden on a roll with a series of alternative Obamaverse quotes from "history":
“I Have Seen The Enemy And I’m Thinking About It”
Posted by: Mike Huggins | November 25, 2009 at 12:24 PM
There is simply no way to justify an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan in the wake of the current Jihadist surge there.
The problem for Obama, even though he seems sympathetic to the jihadi ideology, is that he can't accept their terrorist methods.
Posted by: MikeS | November 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM
New troop announcement: 30-34K; see Stanley We're in charge, and our homework is better than yours!!
Posted by: bunky | November 25, 2009 at 12:37 PM
The problem for Obama, even though he seems sympathetic to the jihadi ideology, is that he can't accept their terrorist methods.
Ayers' history never bothered him.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 25, 2009 at 12:47 PM
I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we are doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive.
You have to admit it'd be worth a try. They've tried everything else.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 25, 2009 at 01:04 PM
"and our homework is better than yours!!"
Yeah, right, General McClellan.
Posted by: Mike Huggins | November 25, 2009 at 01:08 PM
I posted last night, but the Times in Karachi/Lahore has reported that the U.S. has been secretly negotiating with the Taliban.
The meeting of principals was said to begin on Monday, which is Sunday afternoon here. LUN
Posted by: matt | November 25, 2009 at 01:17 PM
Uh oh. Back to IE.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 01:19 PM
(Close italics.)
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 01:20 PM
Obama to give his primetime Afghanistan speech Tues. night at West Point.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 25, 2009 at 01:25 PM
"Obama to give his primetime Afghanistan speech Tues. night at West Point."
So, we wait another week?
They don't have a clue what they are going to do.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 01:31 PM
Yeah, its front page news here in Europe especially in the British papers (beside the fact that the real scuttlebutt evolves around the UK inquiry into the run up to the Iraq War, read that to be "lets screw Tony Blair"). But more importantly, the Chelsea V. Porto match tonight is really what they are talking about since John Terry says "we're ready to be invincible, again!". You see, the word invincible is an English word the English like to use especially when it comes to fine food, fighting forces, cricket, rugby, football and classic wines. But since I am a Chelsea fan, they are right in that respect.
On the way back to Orlando via Manchester we will stop at the Nursery Inn and pay homage to our lost friend and compatriot. Long live the biting wit, sarcasm and wisdom of Peter Bocking.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | November 25, 2009 at 01:40 PM
They don't have a clue what they are going to do.
WaPo's report seems to agree with you. They outline what Obama has decided to do...then say he hasn't committed to it yet. Sheesh.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 25, 2009 at 01:54 PM
Getting ready for OUR turkey next Tuesday at West Point:
"No one has any illusion that this is the campaign, that you can just turn this thing around with a speech," a senior administration official said. "A lot of this strategy depends on things we can't control -- the Afghan government, the Taliban, the role of Pakistan. This is one of those issues that defines the extent and the limits of the president's power. (WaPo)
Pre-CYA
Posted by: Frau Erntedankfest | November 25, 2009 at 02:40 PM
I think I'm going to be ill...Drudge reports that ABC will air an Oprah/Obama Christmas Special.....
Posted by: matt | November 25, 2009 at 02:43 PM
Great idea, JIB! CBS! has a very fair report on the CRU kerfuffle..
Posted by: clarice | November 25, 2009 at 02:47 PM
Clarice, are you on the left coast yet?
Posted by: DrJ | November 25, 2009 at 02:50 PM
think I'm going to be ill...Drudge reports that ABC will air an Oprah/Obama Christmas Special.....
I'll be watching Bing Crosby and/or Judy Garland's Christmas specials on DVD... much more relevant.
Posted by: peter | November 25, 2009 at 02:53 PM
Oprah had her highest ratings in years when she interviewed Sarah Palin. Do you think she can top with her Christmas show? What if she doesn't? Oh I could get excited about that.
**BREAKING** ABC Announces Oprah-Obama Christmas Special
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:00 PM
ABC will air an Oprah/Obama Christmas Special.....
Are there any sharks involved?
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 03:03 PM
I wonder if Obama will kiss us .. before he has sex with us. I expect a full "mudslide."
Posted by: Neo | November 25, 2009 at 03:09 PM
I haven't read the thread yet, but this is just obscene. How much did this cost?
Obamas Erect Glass Pavillion on White House Lawn for Lavish State Dinner
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:13 PM
Your tax dollars at work:
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:20 PM
Lets admit it.
The Once is living the Imperial Presidency until 2012 when the expiration date is due.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | November 25, 2009 at 03:23 PM
Just one of those chandeliers would pay for my rent for a year, maybe my food budget too. This just makes me sick.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:24 PM
Just wait until the economy gets going.
The Obamas will be able to really do a state dinner then, instead of doing on the cheap.
LOL
Posted by: Neo | November 25, 2009 at 03:27 PM
Ah Jack: I hadn't heard that about spray on tans, but to answer your question - I don't think Donny had a spray on. He is pretty pale. BTW, everyone thought Mya would win, so it was a surprise for Donny to win out at the end. His next to last performance was a real show stopper and the audience responded with their votes.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:29 PM
Well, at least Obama didn't kill 200,000 puppies and kittens to pay homage to the Indian Prime Minister! What would PETA say!!
Seriously, I don't have a big problem with the opulant state dinner. It might actually help send a couple of good messages. And I hope Obama says something coherent to the people next Tuesday, after he has ruminated on this for such a long time.
What I actually doubt is if he and his closest advisers have the intestinal/political fortitude to see through ANY strategy in Afghanistan. To loosely paraphrase von Moltke the older (I think), no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.
So when parts of this Incredible Plan that the Obama Jedi have figured out invariably goes south on them, will they adjust and keep slogging forward?
And if things do go south for a while, does McChrystal get hung out to dry?
Posted by: E. Nigma | November 25, 2009 at 03:32 PM
So, will Oprah trade out the Obama's Christams pain, heart attckes, staring through heads....... or will she go along and make sure everyone remembers why we voted for the things?
Police had to 'do not approach' the Obamas in the old days.
Posted by: welplandandsafeliklasttime | November 25, 2009 at 03:33 PM
I think I need to go for a walk, ugh I can't walk, oh well I'll just rant here.
Another Photo-Op: Obama Will Deliver Afghanistan Address at West Point
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:36 PM
WE.ARE.DOOMED!!!!
Help Wanted: No Private Sector Experience Required.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 03:44 PM
Hey,
I just got this Turkey cooking recipe' from the BBC Enviro-Science page.
1) You take the turkey, dress it and baste it, and put it in a big pan.
2) Carefully place the big pan containing the turkey inside the hole of a swimming pool intertube.
3) Place the swimming pool intertube on top of an ice flow at the North Pole.
4) When the ice melts and the intertube is floating in the melted Arctic Ocean, the turkey will be completely cooked by AGW. Slice up and serve. Voila! Enjoy!
Posted by: daddy | November 25, 2009 at 03:52 PM
That is an interesting chart, Sara. Amazing to think that such government addicts as Kennedy and Carter hover around 30 with Clinton slightly higher....makes Obama's numbers in comparison even more dismal.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 25, 2009 at 04:10 PM
Please can we not have a photo op with Ibama's thanksgiving with Bill Ayers or whoever he is breaking bread with tomorrow.
I think it will be funny when Oprah does a prime time special with Ibama and fewer people tune in than watched Sarah.
Posted by: Jane | November 25, 2009 at 04:11 PM
Please can we not have a photo op with Ibama's thanksgiving with Bill Ayers or whoever he is breaking bread with tomorrow.
I think it will be funny when Oprah does a prime time special with Ibama and fewer people tune in than watched Sarah.
OT - check out the LUN. It is hysterical - via Don surber
Posted by: Jane | November 25, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Geez - typepad is a joke. But still check out the LUN
Posted by: Jane | November 25, 2009 at 04:16 PM
Yes, I am, DrJ --with little time or access to the IT..
If the CRUballs are taken before a firing squad in the next couple od days I may be the last to hear of it. OTOH the weather's gorgeous and we have the beach practically to ourselves.
Posted by: clarice | November 25, 2009 at 04:25 PM
A rare view inside a can of Whoop-ass! LUN
Posted by: Janet | November 25, 2009 at 04:30 PM
Shouldn't FDR have gone to West Point in 1944 for a prime-time televised speech announcing his decision to devote over 70,000 men to Normandy?
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 04:33 PM
On the way back to Orlando via Manchester we will stop at the Nursery Inn and pay homage to our lost friend and compatriot. Long live the biting wit, sarcasm and wisdom of Peter Bocking.
Posted by: Jack is Back
Hear, hear, JIB.
Posted by: Daddy | November 25, 2009 at 04:43 PM
That's great, JiB, I'm so glad you're able to make it.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 25, 2009 at 04:47 PM
Just got the following in an E-mail from the Union:
"These actions also confirm what we have been pointing out for some months, the economy has turned around..."
Whew. That's a load off my mind.
Posted by: Daddy | November 25, 2009 at 04:51 PM
How wonderful, JiB! I am jealous.
Posted by: centralcal | November 25, 2009 at 04:57 PM
Headline at Gateway Pundit reads:
Obama's Grandmama is in Mecca for "Hajj" Cereemony
With this:
But but but but bubbie was a Christian last year. Like grandma, like grandson.
Saudi Arabia: Obama's grandmotherin Mecca for 'Hajj' ceremony
Mecca, 25 Nov. (AKI) - The grandmother of US
president Barack Obama has arrived in Saudi Arabia for the 'Hajj' or Islamic
pilgrimage to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, a Saudi daily said on
Wednesday. Sarah Obama, 87, is being accompanied by a nephew and Obama's cousin,
Omran.
On Wednesday Sarah Obama was in the valley of Mina with an
African delegation, according to the Saudi daily Okaz.
Obama, the mother
of the American president's father, lives in a village in Kenya and is one of
the many guests of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz
al-Saud.
About two million Muslims converge on Mecca each year for the
Hajj pilgrimage but Saudi officials were expecting fewer pilgrims this year due
to the threat of the H1N1 virus known as swine flu.
Crowds of pilgrims
have been converging on the holy city of Mecca in recent days, and started the
Hajj rites on Wednesday.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 05:09 PM
Obama drops below 50 in RCP average for the first time. (49.9, but I'll take it.)
RCP Obama Job Approval
Posted by: Porchlight | November 25, 2009 at 05:15 PM
TM you expect foresight and forward thinking and three dimensional analysis from the gang that cant shoot straight? Its a struggle for this clown show to remember the pattern on a stroll around the grounds ( is it left right left right or ???? ). No if you can get the guy at the top to understand that the US President does not bow to royalty, and everything is not about him, I am afraid that the three dimensional chess will elude us for another 3 years.
Posted by: Gmax | November 25, 2009 at 05:16 PM
Am trying to remember if it was yesterday or the day before that AGW Eco-Alarmist Tim Flannery admitted on TV:
">http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_global_warming_conspiracy_news_spreads/"> Sure for the last 10 years we’ve gone through a slight cooling trend."
Well apparently Flannery was wrong because today the BBC's Environmental Annalyst, Tim Harrabin tells us:
"This year will be one of the top five warmest years globally since records began 150 years ago, according to figures compiled by the Met Office."
In case JOMer's were led astray by Eco-Alarmist Flannery's comments, Harrabin, who continues to not allow comments ">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8377128.stm"> in this latest post sets us straight:
"Climate sceptics had pointed out that the temperature rise appeared to have stalled in the last decade or so.
But the influence of La Nina declined in the spring and the Met Office project that, barring a very cold December, this year will be the fifth warmest on record.
Other sources say it could even be the third warmest. !!! (My exclamation points).
Harrabin continues: "The last ten years have been in the top 15 warmest on record. And this summer the UK enjoyed temperatures higher than the long-term average.
Although the Met Office was pilloried after forecasting a "barbecue summer", it was their rainfall forecast, not the projected temperatures, that was wrong." (Aha, there's the problem)
"Next year we will see the influence of the warming El Nino current, and the Met Office says there is a 50% chance that global temperatures will hit an all-time high."
Yesterday Harrabin said his CRU source was "99% sure" of the science. Now it's down to a 50% coin flip?
Richard Black BTW was unavailable for comment as he still has writer's block.
Posted by: daddy | November 25, 2009 at 05:24 PM
BREAKING: CHARGES FILED IN KEN GLADNEY CASE!
About time.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 05:31 PM
http://www.mediaite.com/online/hope-is-fading-fast-devastating-take-on-iconic-obama-poster/
Posted by: oster/ | November 25, 2009 at 05:31 PM
I want to take a moment to wish everyone on JOM a
We don't have much to be thankful for at our house this year, but there are things worth more than money. Like yesterday, getting calls from 3 different people asking me for one of my special recipes and letting me know that it wouldn't seem like Thanksgiving without them on the table. It is comforting to know that traditions are being carried on, even in faraway places.
I'm so thankful that I had a chance to have someone like PUK touch my life and all the others who contribute to my knowledge and keep me laughing, both here and around the blogosphere.
I'm thankful after two holidays past of unemployment, my son is working, almost too much. He has to work tomorrow and Christmas Eve/Day.
And I'm thankful that other than my bad back, I'm in excellent health.
And, despite politics, I'm happy to live in a free country where I can cheer or rant anytime the mood strikes me. God Bless America.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 06:04 PM
Daddy, some of that is just playing tricks with levels versus rates of change. It's perfectly possible to have a downward trend since 1998, yet with "the last 10 years ... in the top 15 warmest on record." Of course, on top of that it's a bogus statement, since "on record" could either mean the last 100 years, which is nothing in geologic time, or it could mean over the last millenium but based on CRU-style data massaging, which likes to conveniently smooth out the medieval warming period.
Posted by: jimmyk | November 25, 2009 at 06:06 PM
Well, heck, if Dubai can do it, why not us?
I'm sure the Chinese will be forgiving.
LUN
Dubai World Seeks to Delay Debt Payments as Default Risk Soars
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 06:10 PM
Don't know if I could find it again, but one of the commenters at WUWT took the Adjusting Algorithm from CRU and applied it to level numbers, and declining numbers, and-----yep-------wound up with a Hockey stick.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 06:19 PM
See some cool pics of others celebrating Thanksgiving thru the years.
Thank Yourself
The one of the troops reminded me of W's secret">http://a.abcnews.com/images/Travel/ht_bush_iraq_2003_081217_ssh.jpg&imgrefurl=http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/YearInReview/popup%3Fid%3D6479889&usg=__phD4J3rCXTU6jwbNh14Ti1LQ1uo=&h=411&w=531&sz=53&hl=en&start=1&sig2=EuoDJp9AidLOqEkGpk7qsw&tbnid=gHGCt3rYSSwwMM:&tbnh=102&tbnw=132&prev=/images%3Fq%3DBush%2BIraq%2BThanksgiving%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den&ei=v7sNS-qkD5KwswPDhcXZCg">secret Thanksgiving Iraq trip in 2003 and how different from the glass tent WH of today.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 06:21 PM
More on the Gladney beating charges from Big Government:
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 06:25 PM
Via Blogs for Victory:
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 06:40 PM
JMH, since you are our leading observer and critic of Presidential style, I thought you might enjoy this.
Posted by: Elliott | November 25, 2009 at 06:47 PM
Isn't that what this comment from FOIA\documents\osborn-tree6\summer_modes\pl_decline.pro is about, jimmyk?
; Now fit a 2nd degree polynomial to the decline series, and then extend
; it at a constant level back to 1400. In fact we compute its mean over
; 1856-1930 and use this as the constant level from 1400 to 1930. The
; polynomial is fitted over 1930-1994, forced to have the constant value
; in 1930.
Why else pick the year 1400?
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 06:50 PM
I dont know but survey after survey finds Democrats with about a 40% ceiling in polling, even in the very blue to indigo blue states like NJ ( Johnny Unemployed Corzine ) and now NY. Something might be happening, here what is aint exactly clear.
Partially because CNN put out a ridiculous poll that showed a +6 Democrat advantage in the generic congress polling. No word on exactly how many democrats they had to talk to, but you can be assured its an Adult poll and has over demographic complements of 18-20somethings, Blacks and Jews and may have forgot about put in many independents as well.
Posted by: Gmax | November 25, 2009 at 06:54 PM
Isn't that what this comment from FOIA\documents\osborn-tree6\summer_modes\pl_decline.pro is about, jimmyk?
; Now fit a 2nd degree polynomial to the decline series, and then extend
; it at a constant level back to 1400. In fact we compute its mean over
; 1856-1930 and use this as the constant level from 1400 to 1930. The
; polynomial is fitted over 1930-1994, forced to have the constant value
; in 1930.
Why else pick the year 1400?
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 06:54 PM
Ooops.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 06:58 PM
Here's the one I'm thinking of, you'll have to follow the URL to see the graph and code though, I'm not good posting images.
NikFromNYC (10:07:52) :
Here is the output of some code from a Briffa related file. If you run a flat temperature graph through it if gives a Hockey Stick. If you run an inconveniently divergent tree ring graph through it, it acts as a trick to hide the decline.
http://i49.tinypic.com/m9vcxv.jpg
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 07:06 PM
Are you saying these bastards committed fraud? Whether actionable or not, its fraud if they put out test results based on models that were rigged. Tars and feathers boys...
Posted by: Gmax | November 25, 2009 at 07:12 PM
Happy Thanksgiving day!
Posted by: Elliott | November 25, 2009 at 07:12 PM
Here's the one from your link, Po.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 07:20 PM
Holy snipes, I go from Pofarmer post to Megan McCardle, who heretofore had almost been making excuses for this miscreants, and she now seems to be on the same thing. The main CRU model was apparently rigged to get the desired result. The IPCC is based almost entirely on the CRU model. No wonder why they did not want to release the data and allow others to retrace their steps and find the same results. Get a damn rope...
Posted by: Gmax | November 25, 2009 at 07:21 PM
Ah, it got cut off at the end, thanks to these great avatars.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 07:21 PM
"Are you saying these bastards committed fraud?"
No, no, no - they instigated, perpetuated, collaborated in hiding, denied, were discovered enqaging in, solicited commission of and committed fraud.
To be quite generous.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | November 25, 2009 at 07:31 PM
I think it will be funny when Oprah does a prime time special with Ibama and fewer people tune in than watched Sarah.
I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some Organizing for America "get out the vote" style action prior to the show, to bump up the ratings.
For myself, throughout Oprah's long and illustrious career, I have watched exactly one episode (guess which one). I don't plan to watch a second.
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 07:39 PM
BREAKING: CHARGES FILED IN KEN GLADNEY CASE!
But how can that be? Weren't the libs assuring us that he fell and injured himself?
Oh, you mean they're filing charges against Gladney for making a public nuisance of himself through his overwhelming clumsiness?
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 07:41 PM
The emails proposed the excuse that the programming subroutines might be so special that they shouldn't be shared, and therefore the code itself shouldn't be shared, due to the proprietary nature of the subroutines. Here's one of the famous subroutines:
pro funct_decline,x,a,f,pder
;
cval=0.251499 ; need to update to ensure a smooth join
z=x-1930
f=cval+a(0)*z+a(1)*z*z
;
if n_params() ge 4 then begin
pder=[[z],[z*z]]
endif
;
end
There's that year, 1930, again. (Is that the max temp in the 1900s, from the graph above?) And note the factor, cval=0.251499, which needs an update "every time" anything is changed.
;
;*** MUST ALTER FUNCT_DECLINE.PRO TO MATCH THE COORDINATES OF THE
; START OF THE DECLINE *** ALTER THIS EVERY TIME YOU CHANGE ANYTHING ***
;
I know next to nothing about this subject, and never messed with the IDL language, but the code files sure seem to contain some suspicious comments. I searched the files on terms like "fudge", "artificial" and "alter" to find the procedures I quoted from in the other thread. The real pros must be having a field day with these files right now.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 07:44 PM
Sorry. To be precise, it's not a "factor"; it's a constant.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 07:48 PM
1 - didn't they used to state dinners in the White House?
2 - has anyone noticed the networks are promoting Obama's speech on Tuesday as if it were the final episode of this season's Survivor?
Posted by: matt | November 25, 2009 at 07:53 PM
this is good. I was in Costa Mesa, CA this afternoon and pulled up to a light. The traffic sign next to me had a sticker on with the rainbow Obama logo. I did a double take when I saw the image of a little boy peeing on it.
I really don't think the Left realizes just how upset a very large segment of the population is. This is becoming viral.
Posted by: matt | November 25, 2009 at 07:57 PM
Happy Thanksgiving Day,Elliott.
Posted by: hit and run | November 25, 2009 at 08:01 PM
Thanks extraneus!
But wait, it gets BETTER.
CRU issues a release!
"That the world is warming is based on a range of sources: not only temperature records but other indicators such as sea level rise, glacier retreat and less Arctic sea ice.
Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Center in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them."
As Gomer Pyle would say, well Gooooollllyyyyy! Ya mean other "independent" (wink wink) researchers got the same results?
They really do think they're stupid.
Somebody pull these guys off the stage before somebody gets hurt.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 08:05 PM
OH, and look, there's two graphs at the end!!!! HEH, I'm sure these are assembled from MUCH better data.
Whadda buncha smug assholes.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 25, 2009 at 08:07 PM
I'll tell you how bad it is Matt: I was going to the farm to get vegetables on Sat and I was driving on this country road behind a prius with an Obama sticker on the back. (As Caro said, they come from the factory that way.) To top it off, they were driving very slowly and I am the most impatient person on the planet.
For the entire trip I fantasized about rear-ending that stupid prius, and thinking that would serve them right. I settled for tailgating them to the point where they knew I was pissed.
And to serve me right, they turned into the same farm so I had to meet their gaze.
People are not happy - including me.
Posted by: Jane | November 25, 2009 at 08:07 PM
Elliott,
Are you still in Europe?
Posted by: Jane | November 25, 2009 at 08:08 PM
Jane, those veggies will be so good!
Posted by: caro | November 25, 2009 at 08:15 PM
I guess because the local radio stations made a tradition of playing it, the Wednesday night before Thanksgiving always reminds me of the Batdorf and Rodney song, "Home Again."
Posted by: peter | November 25, 2009 at 08:17 PM
You mean they had to meet your gaze, don't you?
Posted by: Extraneus | November 25, 2009 at 08:19 PM
WUWT has another uh-oh.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | November 25, 2009 at 08:28 PM
WUWT has another uh-oh.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | November 25, 2009 at 08:29 PM
Jane, those veggies will be so good!
Not as good as the veggies from Michelle's garden that they served to the Indian PM.
Yes, they really did. I thought the soil tested toxic?
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 08:34 PM
Happy Thanksgiving, JOMers!
Oeee, Clarice, it sounds so beautiful where you are.
CLIMATEGATE
Chaco, tku for yr reply in last thread that so far, from
what you've seen, the contents of the CRU docs are 100% damaging.
Wow, then it is likely a computer file was compiled by CRU to hide/delete incriminating evidence of their fraud to evade FOI response and then a whistleblower rescued and published the data.
Gmax, Rick and Extraneus - hm hm hmmmmmm :)
Now, where does CRU get its funding from?
UK? UN? If UN, then it's our money, too.
Posted by: BR | November 25, 2009 at 08:41 PM
Speaking of bumper stickers, I saw one of the ones with the Obama logo on it as the O and the whole thing read "O No."
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | November 25, 2009 at 08:46 PM
CLIMATEGATE
Oh, and Daddy, Jimmyk and Pofarmer, too.
And Jim Ryan :) Wow!
Posted by: BR | November 25, 2009 at 08:48 PM
BR:
Now, where does CRU get its funding from?
UK? UN? If UN, then it's our money, too.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzI2OWQzODMzYzNmY2Y3YTdkZDE4NTQ4MTgwZDljY2Y=>Mark Steyn says this:
Posted by: hit and run | November 25, 2009 at 08:52 PM
There is unintentional humor, being behind someone is a SUV or even a midsized sedan
with an Obama sticker, talk about not getting the point. So Megan seems to have come to her sense, then again she should have known enough not to fall for the AGW
in the first place
Posted by: narciso | November 25, 2009 at 09:00 PM
narciso, also good is being behind a Prius dating from before the election, sporting a "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" sticker. Of course they believe precisely the opposite now.
Posted by: PD | November 25, 2009 at 09:04 PM
Roger Pielke Sr on "independence".
Wow, then it is likely a computer file was compiled by CRU to hide/delete incriminating evidence of their fraud to evade FOI response and then a whistleblower rescued and published the data.
No, I really don't think that makes sense. It's much more likely that it's either (1) someone slicing through a big directory gathered to meet the FOI requests, or (2) someone making a a collection of stuff when it became clear CRU was going to blow off the FOI requests.
If you think about it, you don't gather a bunch of things together on a computer to hide them.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 25, 2009 at 09:07 PM
I wonder if the Serious Fraud unit at Scotland Yard is on the climate case yet or if they're deleting documents and running the shredders in East Anglia overtime?
Posted by: matt | November 25, 2009 at 09:20 PM