Archive for November 30, 2009

I’ll wager they will sell out in a day

Posted: November 30, 2009 by datechguy in doctor who, hobbies
Tags: , ,

At about 3:20 p.m. today my oldest son sat down to each an early supper since he had to work tonight at 5. He then told me something he had seen on the Life Dr. Who and Combom site concerning the Royal Mint coming out with Dr. who coins.

I checked out the Royal mint site and sure enough they have medals of base medal coins of the <a href=””>10th doctor, K9 and the Daleks for £9.95 each (about $16.41 each. I also noticed that they had Silver medals of the Doctor and the Daleks at £35 ( 57.75 each) and a full Gold medal of the Doctor and the Daleks at £150 each ($247.50)

The Silver medals are limited to 5000 each and the Gold to 500. causing me to regret not having large sums of disposable income because they will turn over VERY quickly.

I gave a call to the mint and the lady there told me that they were absolutely swamped. They hadn’t even gotten the medals in the the computer system yet so all the orders were on paper. I picked up 2 each of the base metal ones and one each of the silver. Can’t afford the gold which is a shame because I don’t think they will last past tomorrow if even.

Like the 1st year issue quarter sovereigns if I was working I would have picked up a few to sit on but I can’t justify the expense without work and don’t want to teach my kids speculation when money is tight.

If you want some for yourselves I wouldn’t wait for the day to end.

Rush Limbaugh 11/30/09 :

Rose Mary Woods where are you now?

DaTechGuy 11/29/09:

The woman above is Rose Mary Woods. She was President Nixon’s secretary who claims to have “accidentally” erased the 18 1/2 minute gap in the Watergate tapes. Lets pretend it is 1973 and All the Watergate tapes were erased and only “reconstructions” created by the Nixon White House were available. Would you have taken the Nixon White House’s word that the tapes were “accidentally” erased? Did you take Rose Mary Woods word? Is that credible?

It’s a cheap ego boost but it might drive hits so i’ll take it.

Robert Stacy, Michelle and oh just look at memeorandum thread and start clicking if you want details and it is all over it.

What I have to say is indirect commentary, much less important than the actual act but very telling…

In the first hour or so of Morning Joe today Mika was simply giddy with the idea that Mike Huckabee said on camera that he will likely not run since he doesn’t have the support of the base, she snidely talked about him not passing the “purity test” of the GOP and stressed it as an insult.

At this point Joe and Willie brought up events in Seattle and the fact that the killer was released by Mike Huckabee’s and will become his Willie Horton Moment.

You should have seen Mika’s face, it twisted and changed as if someone had run over her puppy. However later in the show the subject of “purity tests” came up again without the Huckabee connection and she was herself again.

Although the blindsiding of Mika, famous for wanting to deal with “hard news” was funny the real story was the fact that Joe and Willie knew all about what was going on in Seattle and it wasn’t making the news, the Houston Chronicle headline was shown but no further discussion.

Was it due to the race of the subject? Was it because it was concerning a released felon? I think it is because it has no bearing on their media template or ability to hit conservatives in general. It can only hurt Huck and they perfer Huck after all he is very beatable, even by Obama.

Today they briefly mentioned ACORN wanting to change it’s name, the dumping of documents? Not a word.

This is really about the News selection, the people at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN et/al they KNOW about these stories, (Charlie Gibson not withstanding) and they choose to pretend otherwise or are ordered by their bosses to do so.

They are some of the best of the media’s coffee clatch crowd but are still part of that crowd and want to stay there. There is only so far off the reservation you can go and still be welcome at the parties and get the attention for the shows. That is the tightrope that they choose to walk. Re-admittance to that crowd was Andrew Sullivan’s reward for his change, would he be a regular on Chris Matthews’ show without it?

That’s why Sarah Palin drives them all nuts, she believes what she believes and you can take it or leave it , same with Rush he believes what he believes and doesn’t care what others think about it. They refuse to let others define them. It is a threat to the entire world view of the media culture.

I think their Radio show is going to be interesting, what will they choose to cover?

Note as I’m finishing this post there is 30 min to go in the show and they have hinted they will touch the topic again. Lets see…

Update: Nope Joe didn’t cover it but other liberal outlets are. The Huffpo commentators in particular see Huck’s Christianity and are charging like bulls toward a red cloth.

Meanwhile the Washington post says what I just did:

In a new Washington Post poll, Palin beats other GOP leaders on two questions: who best represents the party’s core values, and who Republicans would vote for if the presidential nomination battle were held today. But she has particular appeal to the loyal followers of Limbaugh and Beck, two of the most popular conservative talk show hosts in the country.

As long as she is unafraid her foes will be.

Speaking of “Talking Points

Do our beliefs form the basis of our partisan and ideological affiliations? Or is it vice versa?

There’s been a lot of recent evidence not only that Republicans disproportionately disbelieve the evidence for man-made global warming but that their skepticism is growing. I think that trend is fairly classed under the general heading of Republican/conservative hostility to science. But the other point interests me no less.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that Mr. Marshall didn’t spend his thanksgiving in a cave somewhere either in a cave or somewhere neither of those phone network maps have coverage and did in fact hear that there is some newglobal warming newsout there.

Don Surber states the obvious:

That is ironic because it is the left — not the right — that is ignoring the growing body of evidence that discredits the theory of anthropogenic global warming. Climategate revealed that data supporting this theory is corrupted by the political agenda and quest for government grants by proponents of anthropogenic global warming at Penn State and at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England.

Today I’m am over an 1:15 into Morning Joe and no mention, the media is doing it’s best to totally ignore this story in keeping with its niche market model. I presume that Marshall has decided to do the same. He should take a lesson from Paul Mirengoff at Powerline:

In the law, the discovery of this sort of intentional document destruction would quite likely give rise to some form of “adverse inference instruction,” wherein the judge would instruct or encourage the jury to assume that the discarded evidence was harmful to the case of the party that destroyed it. I might be hesitant to apply this logic to the world of scientific inquiry were it not for the fact that the CRU scientists have demonstrated as little regard for honest adjudication of their position as your run-of-the-mill spoliator of evidence.

To be sure, the current head of the CRU was not in charge when the data were thrown away in the 1980s. Moreover, climate change was not such a heavily politicized issue in those days.

Still, Roger Pielke, the Colorado professor who asked for the records, is quite correct when he says that the CRU is basically insisting that we trust it, a demand that’s inconsistent with the scientific method for resolving debates.

One need not be a hard-core global warming skeptic to question whether we should alter the way we live in response to predictions based on findings that cannot be checked because the raw data was intentionally destroyed by the outfit that made the findings.

Ah but one apparently does need to be a person not wedded to the hard core left for their readership or customer base. When you don’t care about your credibility anything is possible.