Tuesday, May 24, 2016

I don't think Ray Mabus has to worry about getting a ship named after him

Mabus, who is the secretary of the Navy, has been hell-bent ever since he took office to turn his part of the military into a lovely social experiment, with all combat jobs open to all genders -- and you thought there were only two -- apparently without regard for the person's actual physical ability to do the job. I think it is possible he as finally gone too far:
One of the most time-honored phrases in the Marine Corps — "every Marine a rifleman" — could get an update as the service's top leaders consider new gender-neutral job titles for all positions.
The Marine Corps is conducting a sweeping review of its military occupational specialty titles, Capt. Philip Kulczewski, a Marine spokesman at the Pentagon, told Marine Corps Times. The move follows a January directive from Navy Secretary Ray Mabus that Navy and Marine leaders ensure all job titles are gender neutral as ground combat jobs opened to women.
Because Mabus is a Social Justice Warrior, there apparently are no restrictions on changes he is willing to make. SJWs feel the need to control the language as well as the actions of other people, regardless of how stupid the result is. Mabus clearly falls in that camp:
Initially, a Navy official told Marine Corps Times that Mabus didn't intend to change iconic titles like infantryman, rifleman or midshipman. Instead, the official said, he only wanted titles to change the titles if "man" stood alone as a separate word, as in reconnaissance man or field artillery sensor support man.
But a Marine official with knowledge of the review said "every single" title, billet and job description is being looked at.
I will leave you to your own conclusions as to why the SJWs want to enact these kinds of changes. But I think we can rest assured that future generations, looking back on the de-militarization of our military, will not look kindly upon people like Ray Mabus.  His efforts to turn the Marines into some kind of social club will not be appreciated in the future when we need a military organization that is proud to be "first to fight" rather than proud to be "gender-inclusive."


I know there's a bunch of countries in South America, but I feel like I am closing in on unanimity. We recently got our first visitor from Paraguay. and without checking a map, I'm not sure how many South American countries are yet to visit. That sounds like too much work to me, but I know it can't be too many.

In any event, we have Paraguay which, like Argentina, was a favorite post-war haven for Nazis on the run. That doesn't make them bad people. It just is.

Anyway, the Republic of Paraguay is:
a landlocked country in central South America, bordered by Argentina to the south and southwest, Brazil to the east and northeast, and Bolivia to the northwest. Paraguay lies on both banks of the Paraguay River, which runs through the center of the country from north to south. Due to its central location in South America, it is sometimes referred to as Corazón de Sudamérica ("Heart of South America").
About 6.5 million people live in Paraguay, which has a long history of military dictatorships and isolationism. They apparently have some serious episodes of stupid in their history, as well:
Solano López led the nation into the Paraguayan War in 1864 against Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, and was overwhelmingly defeated in 1870 after five years of the bloodiest war in South America. William D. Rubinstein wrote: "The normal estimate is that of a Paraguayan population of somewhere between 450,000 and 900,000, only 220,000 survived the war, of whom only 28,000 were adult males."[19] Paraguay also suffered extensive territorial losses to Brazil and Argentina.

During the pillaging of Asunción in 1869, the Brazilian Imperial Army packed up and transported the Paraguayan National Archives to Rio de Janeiro.[citation needed] Brazil's records from the war have remained classified.[20] This has made Paraguayan history in the Colonial and early National periods difficult to research and study.
OK, Paraguay is pretty small. Argentina and Brazil are pretty big. Uruguay is a whole bunch bigger than Paraguay, too, and not just in size but in population. Paraguay was asking for it. No wonder they got their asses kicked. But I digress.

Paraguay has a fairly healthy economy, one of the best in South America, based on manufacturing and minerals. On the other hand, about a third of the country's population is pretty damn poor. So there's that.

Paraguay, apparently, is largely unspoiled, which I guess comes from being poor as shit. They have great jungles and stuff, including impressive waterfalls, such as the Iguassu Falls, here:

Sounds like a beautiful country. So give a big Eff You welcome to Paraguay.

Update: Not sure how I forgot about this:

Kitty in a box

You know I'm going to post this shit. We have kit-tay, they do cute things, and Mrs. Wolves takes pictures of them if you had a spouse and s/he sent you pictures for your blog and said, hey, these would be good for your blog, what would you do? If you claim you would ignore the pictures, you are a lying sack of poo. So I put them up. Mischief, apparently very comfortable in a box:

She stayed there a while:

No doubt there will be more kit-tay pictures. get used to it.

This shit is getting old

Once again, I had a project drop dead beneath me unexpectedly. This could chap my ass real quick if it continues. And it will. I think this is a result of predictive coding, where the firm lets a computer program code most of the documents. We only see the ones the computer can't make a decision on, or the ones that the computer thinks are privileged. The problem, of course, is that predictive coding programs really aren't very good yet, and might not ever be. But courts accept the results, so that doesn't really matter. What you get, then, is bad computer coding replaces bad human coding -- come on, you're read this blog before and know my opinion of most temps -- and does so much faster.

What happened here is the number of documents left that needed human eyes on them were actually far fewer than the firm originally believed would be true. Naturally, the firm's reaction was to cut most of those human eyes. The criteria for getting cut are, as always, random. Good people I know on this project got cut, and shitty reviewers I know on this project did not. C'est la guerre. Once again looking for work. Unemployment haikus coming.

Are we comfy? Do we need a pillow?

I swear the cats run this household, or at least you would think that based on the pictures Mrs. Wolves takes. If a kitty takes over a chair for sleep person, woe betide the person who attempts to oust the kitty so he can sit in that chair. That, of course, means me. Here is Mayhem sleeping in my chair one evening recently:

We were about to watch a "Game of Thrones" episode. I was forced to sit elsewhere because Mrs. Wolves refused to let me evict Mayhem. I love my kit-tays as much as the next guy, but this is ridiculous.

Saturday, May 21, 2016

Yeah, that ineffective solar-power plant you're paying more than a billion dollars for is even worse than you thought

The world's largest solar power plant, which has miserably failed to produce the amounts of power it claimed it could, has added to its aura of failure. Not content with killing thousands of birds or falling so short of production goals that if faces shutdown, the plant upped its fail quotient by setting itself on fire:
The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System, a concentrated solar thermal in California and the world's largest solar thermal power station, suffered a small fire on one of its three boiler towers Thursday, according to the Associated Press. The fire caused the boiler tower to be shut down while firefighters ascended 300 feet to deal with the blaze, leaving the plant at one third power since another tower is already down for maintenance.

The Ivanpah plant works by using its massive fields of mirrors to direct sunlight towards the top of the three 459-foot boiler towers, which then creates the steam to drive turbines that create the actual electricity. But several misaligned mirrors directed some of this sunlight to the wrong place, starting a fire amidst some electrical cables, San Bernardino County, California fire Capt. Mike McClintock told the AP. Plant personnel had the fire out by the time firefighters on site.
You had one job: generate power. You failed. Did you have to make things worse by setting yourself on fire? Did you have to take a situation where you were figuratively setting fire to $1.6 billion in taxpayer subsidies and make it literal? Apparently, yeah. Still think it's a good idea for government to use your money as venture capital on jackass schemes?

Wow. Who could have seen this coming? Part II

Starting before the Democrats jammed Obamacare down our throats despite polls showing most folks didn't want it, opponents predicted that the law would drive up costs and force insurers out of the market. Emperor Barry I and his minions insisted this was poppycock, and by the way don't you love the emperor's new clothes? Well, many of us thought it might not work out well by changing insurance from covering risk by charging premiums appropriate to that person's risk into just covering every possible event without regard to anything except that the government just told companies to cover those risk events. We predicted that insurers would not want to play that game. Further, we predicted that charging older, sicker people less and trying to put the costs onto the backs of younger, healthier people also would not work. Hey, guess what?:
 Consumers have their plans cut out from underneath them each year as insurers have either pared back plans or exited exchanges altogether as Obamacare’s economic model continues to fail. At the same time, premiums and deductibles have continued to skyrocket, and tax subsidies cannot hide the impact on families.
What was promised as more “choice” is becoming fewer choices as UnitedHealthcare and now Humana begin to pull out of certain regions. An AP story in 2014 reported that of the 19 nationally recognized cancer centers that responded to a survey, only 4 reported access through all Obamacare insurers. Last month, Blue Cross Blue Shield released a report warning that costs under the president’s plan are unsustainable – fully 22 percent higher than people covered by employers. And The Hill reported that Obamacare insurers lost money in 41 states in 2014, which could determine whether big companies like Aetna stick with it.
Insurance companies are bailing out, because they aren't selling insurance anymore. If a sick person can wait until he actually has to incur health care costs to buy insurance, and the insurance company then has to sell him the insurance, that isn't insurance. It's insanity. It might make libtards feel good because people with poor planning skills or no money can get someone else to pay for their healthcare, but it is a really good way to get companies to stop paying for anyone's health care, including those folks who bought insurance the old-fashioned way, based on the risk that they would need it.

A post at Hot Air pulls together a number of stories that make it clear that Obamacare is not only failing to reduce costs but is failing to provide care. If you go 0-fer on your promises, why should anyone believe you?

The Fiscal Times story sums it up nicely:
Remember the now-infamous promise made by President Barack Obama when pushing the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare? “If you like your plan,” the president repeated on dozens of occasions, “you can keep your plan.”
When millions of Americans got thrown off of their existing health-insurance plans in the fall of 2013, PolitiFact called it the Lie of the Year. Obama ended upapologizing for the lie in an interview with NBC News’ Chuck Todd in November 2013, even if he couldn’t quite bring himself to admit that it was a lie. “We weren’t as clear as we needed to be in terms of the changes that were taking place,” was as far as Obama’s contrition went.

Almost three years later, there is little evidence of any more contrition on that failure, or others in Obamacare for that matter. Earlier this week , Charlie Rose interviewed three former Obama speechwriters on a variety of topics. After discussing their work on lighter-topic speeches, Rose asked whether they felt they had an impact on Obama’s more serious addresses. Jon Lovett replied that he felt most proud of his impact on “the most serious speeches – health care, economic speeches.”
That prompted his colleague, Jon Favreau, to interject. “Lovett wrote the line about ‘if you like your insurance, you can keep it,” he said, as the panel erupted in laughter. “How dare you!” Lovett shot back in mock indignation. “And you know what?” he asked as the laughter continued. “It’s still true … no.”
Are incompetence and deceit humorous? Perhaps in the Obama administration, the answer might be yes. For the rest of us, especially those who find themselves stuck between a federal tax mandate and an insurance market that has narrowed as significantly as its costs have skyrocketed, no is the correct answer.
The people behind Obamacare joke about what a lie it was. Think it's funny?  Gee, I wonder who could have seen this coming?