Who has more creds, McCain or the NYT?

The New York Times threw some mud at McCain in the form of a front page story insinuating McCain had a sexual relationship with a lady lobbyist, eight years ago. As a pay back for favors rendered, McCain wrote letters to the FCC prodding them to settle a station license case. The NYT story was weak, no named sources, no solid accusations of wrong doing, just innuendo, and eight years old.
McCain responded vigorously, derided the editorial judgment of the NYT, denied any involvement with the lobbyist (with his wife standing next to him on the podium) and his campaign organization called and emailed all his important (and not so important) supporters. Heck, I got an email about it, and I'm more of a well wisher than an important supporter. Then, somehow, Rush Limbaugh dropped his anti McCain stance and lit into the NYT for running a smear.
Far as I can see, McCain has more credibility with the country that the Times does, and the event is going down as a vicious smear by the left wing MSM rather than an accusation of wrong doing by McCain. I guess the Times has finally managed to discredit them selves with the electorate.

Who to point the finger at? Microsoft or HP?

Andrew Garcia, blogging for E-Week, gives a luke warm review of Vista SP1. He finally installed Vista onto his everyday use PC, as opposed to the magazine's lab machines that he doesn't have to face up to every day. Andrew finds the Vista won't work his HP Laserjet 1000 printer. "The HP website had a note from December 2006 saying Vista drivers were coming soon, but there has been no further news in the intervening 14 months. It's disappointing, but I can't blame Microsoft for HP dropping the ball."
Well Andrew, I do blame Microsoft for making unnecessary Windows changes that broke a working driver. Every couple of years Microsoft changes Windows and everyone in the industry has to redo all the drivers for their products, just 'cause Microsoft changed the way Windows works, again.

Heparin from China

The Wall St Journal has an article about a Chinese heparin maker. Exterior photo shows a beat up one story garage like building, surrounded by piles of junk. Description of the raw material (pig gut) and processing steps (concrete fermentation tank) are disgusting. The thought of feeding anything coming out of that yucky place into a live patient, anywhere, is stomach turning. Patients ought to beware of heparin, since it might have come from there.
The reporter then veers off into fantasy, suggesting putting in a paperwork system that would allow back tracking from a bottle of heparin to the serial numbers of the pigs it was made from, pig by pig. Three thousand pigs go into each kilogram of purified heparin. After a patient curls up and dies from bad heparin, does he care which pig from China killed him? Especially as said pig long ago became pork fried rice? Effort should go toward inventing a more sanitary method of making heparin, not doing paperwork to document how dirty the current product is.

Spiderwick Chronicles

Enjoyed it last night in the newly remodeled Jax Jr theater up here in Littleton. It's a fine kid's fantasy movie, with a mostly child cast. I figure watching kids movies helps keep me young. I won't spoil it by rehashing the plot here. The hero is very well played by Freddie Highmore, a boy about the age that Daniel Radcliffe was when he started playing Harry Potter. Actually he plays a twin brother (Simon) and himself (Jared) and the Hollywood magic makes both twins show together in the same scene as slick as Disney was with Hayley Mills playing both twins in The Parent Trap many years ago. It's a better movie than The Golden Compass, nearly as good as the Disney Narnia movie, but not up to the level of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings.
It's a proper movie with a brave hero who faces his challenge squarely and defeats it. Kids aged four to fourteen will love it, along with grownups who can still get in touch with their inner child.

Mentally ill smoke 44% of all cigarettes (WSJ)

Wow. Page D1 of the Tuesday WSJ had this amazing fact. In short, the Journal is saying that smoking is a sign of mental illness. That oughta do as much for the anti smoking crusade as the spread of smoke free buildings did. I write this as a reformed two-pack-a-day smoker. The article goes one to detail problems with Chantix, a give-up-smoking drug. There are reports that Chantix causes suicidal thoughts and erratic behavior. Some 34 suicides have been recorded among 4.5 million Chantix users, which makes Chantrix a thousand times safer than driving to work. Not to worry, some lawyer is working up a class action suit as I write this .
Another sign of cluefulness. "all quitters should know; nicotine withdrawal can cause wicked depression" . All smokers know this. Trust me.

Obama on TV

Last night Obama beat Clinton in Wisconsin. This makes him so famous that the TV people ran a 40 minute, uncut segment of Obama speaking live at a rally in Houston, TX. It was a fine performance by the best orator in the race. Thru the fine flow of superb rhetoric, I caught two things I didn't like so much.
He opposed standardized testing. That's a pander to the teacher's unions. Teachers complain that they are forced to "teach the test". As a parent, I want them to teach the material in the test, rather than wasting class time discussing multi culturalism, moral relativity, the unfairness of life, peace and justice, oppression of the American Indians, the evils of corporations, comparative worth, the evils of the Bush administration, global warming, environmentalism and other fads. I want the teachers to stick to reading, writing, arithmetic, and US history. For extra credit they could teach music, art, and geography.
He opposed NAFTA. That's a pander to organized labor. As a US manufacturer I like NAFTA. It gives my salesmen in Mexico and Canada a big edge over my Japanese and European competitors who have to pay a tariff that I don't have to pay.

Who needs a little cargo plane?

They call it C-27, it's a small transport, that looks like a twin engine version of the old reliable C-130. It is a 10,000 pounds of cargo aircraft, considerably smaller than the 40,000 pounds of cargo C-130. Range and airspeed are about the same. Short field capability (important to supplying troops in the field) is hard to judge. Somewhere on the web the C27 claims to operate off 580 meter (1500 foot) runway and the C-130 claims 660 meters (2000 feet). However there are pictures on the web showing a C-130 landing and taking off from an aircraft carrier, and those are only 1000 foot long. Apparently the Navy considered using the c-130 for carrier on board delivery (COD). Testing showed it was possible, but the C-130's wing only cleared the carrier's island by 15 feet, which is pretty hairy. The Navy went ahead and developed a special COD aircraft to reduce the pucker factor on their fliers. Price for the smaller aircraft is supposed to be $37.4 million whereas you can have a brand new C-130J for $50 million. In short 30% more dollars gets you a plane that carries four times as much. The only real justification for the smaller aircraft is better maneuverability. I remember flying down valleys in the old twin engine C-123 and the thought of doing it in the much bigger C-130 is kinda scary.
A Pentagon plan (not yet funded or even approved) would buy 78 C27's, give 54 to the Army and 24 to the Air Force. You wonder why they don't just give all of them to the Army. A single squadron of 24 unique aircraft doesn't make sense. Any aircraft worth owning is worth owning in quantity. Doing all the special training, both air crew and mechanics and buying all the special ground support equipment doesn't make sense for just a handful of aircraft.