Here are some quick thoughts on the news items from the past few days I wanted to write about, but couldn't.
Saved!: It's as if David Duke wrote a comedy for blacks and Robert Byrd found it satirical and light-hearted rather than offensive.
Encouraging travellers to switch from cars and airlines to inter-city trains brings no benefits for the environment, new research has concluded.Q: What do you call a sack of crap without the sack? A: Michael Moore. He's not just full of it. Plus, he really needs to shave his neck and jowls, because he isn't fooling anyone. My only curiousity about his "documentary" is how well it will play with the American public. How stupid are we? I want to find out. Are we smarter than the terrorist-abettors at Cannes? Almost certainly. Will Richard Clarke's confession get enough airtime to completely undermine the premise of the movie, as it should? RAFO.
Challenging assumptions about railways' green superiority, the study finds that the weight and fuel requirements of trains have increased to the point where rail could become the least energy-efficient form of transport.
Engineers at Lancaster University said trains had failed to keep up with the motor and aviation industries in reducing fuel needs.
They calculate that expresses between London and Edinburgh consume slightly more fuel per seat (the equivalent of 11.5 litres) than a modern diesel-powered car making the same journey.
The car's superiority rises dramatically when compared with trains travelling at up to 215mph.
The Drudge Report is more ideologically neutral than the major "news" outlets, according to UCLA and Stanford. Who knew?
Is America finally getting wise and pressuring the Saudis to clean up their own backyard? Saudi Arabia has been the nesting ground for terrorists for decades, but the princes can't hide behind their oil as easily now that we've got Iraq under out belt.