Archive for 2022

GOOD: A new, inexpensive catalyst speeds the production of oxygen from water. “Oxygen evolution reactions are one of the reactions common to the electrochemical production of fuels, chemicals, and materials. These processes include the generation of hydrogen as a byproduct of the oxygen evolution, which can be used directly as a fuel or undergo chemical reactions to produce other transportation fuels; the manufacture of ammonia, for use as a fertilizer or chemical feedstock; and carbon dioxide reduction in order to control emissions.”

JIM TREACHER: SNL Finally Realizes Russia Is No Joke.

If you want me to pick sides, I’m rooting for the underdog in this fight. Ukraine has been invaded by a bully, it pisses me off, and it’s nice to see this volley in the war for American hearts and minds. The whole world is watching, and Putin has lost the messaging war before he’s even taken over the country he’s invading.

It’s just galling to see it from the same people who gave us this:

And the audience in 2008 said: “Ha ha ha! Those dumb Republicans, thinking they know anything about Russia. Remember Russia? They used to be the bad guys, but not anymore. And they’ll never be the bad guys again, once we elect Obama!”

None of them are asking why this is happening now, instead of four years ago. It never even occurred to them. Or if it did, they know better to give voice to it.

It’s nice to see them come around, I guess. It would just be nice if they could admit we were right about the Russkies all along.

The hollow virtue signaling is its own reward for them, of course. As a great man once said, “SNL has become a show only for journos.” The press loves this stuff, and none of them will bother asking themselves why their political party is the one that keeps screwing everything up and making such empty gestures necessary.

I suspect executive producer Lorne Michaels is thrilled that his creation has ultimately become the equivalent of state-run TV, carefully toeing the Democratic Party’s line. But as one of his first writers noted decades ago, “You can only be avant-garde for so long before you become garde.”

AT THIS POINT THEY KIND OF HAVE TO, SINCE THEY’VE BEEN LOSING: Russia is taking off the gloves in Kharkiv. “What makes this significant is Kharkiv’s Russian identity. The city is located close to the Russian border in northeastern Ukraine. A majority of its residents speak Russian. It’s Exhibit A in Putin’s argument that Ukrainians are Russians at heart, one people united. And now here he is dropping cluster bombs on them to subdue the city.”

Of course, this puts paid to any hope Putin has of conquering Ukraine and holding it, as he doesn’t have enough troops to occupy the country against resistance, but then again that ship has already sailed. At this point Putin just needs enough of a short-term win to negotiate without losing too much face, before he’s deposed for wrecking the Russian economy.

Plus: “Which brings us to one last significant aspect of this. Why can’t the fearsome Russian military subdue a city located right on their border? They have should have no trouble supplying their troops there given Kharkiv’s proximity to Russia. Why are blunt instruments like aerial bombing needed to weaken the locals’ resolve? To put that differently: Just how good is the Russian military, really?”

I’ve been wondering why the invasion didn’t start out with an air-superiority campaign. Now I’m wondering if they didn’t do that because they couldn’t — not enough working planes, not enough logistical/mechanical capability to support the needed sortie rate, etc. Russia hasn’t fought a war against a peer or near-peer since 1945. There’s a lot of corruption in their system, and a lot of bogus good news passed up the command chain. (Where did the term “Potemkin village” come from?) I know some people wondering when Putin’s going to send in the A team, and it’s beginning to look like this is the A-team. Between this and the United States’ Afghanistan debacle, can anybody here play this game?

VIA A FRIEND: “I’d like to personally thank Putin for ending the pandemic.” Heh. Yeah, pretty much.

HAHA: The new talking point has gone out: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is all the fault of Ron DeSantis. “This is a weird thing for libs to complain about, because then they turn right around and scold us for criticizing Biden. After four long years of staunch #Resistance, now they tell us dissent is treason. If DeSantis had said anything about Ukraine, these same people wouldn’t like that either. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. . . . The governor of Florida is not responsible for U.S. foreign policy. The president of the United States is. But he’s currently a Democrat, so the Democrat press must protect him by attacking his opponents, no matter what they say or don’t say.”

Plus: “Biden would be utterly humiliated right now if he had any idea what’s going on.”

KRUISER’S MORNING BRIEF: CPAC Hangover Edition.

Megan Fox is filling in for Kruiser today, who got trapped in Orlando Travel Hell last night.

BIDEN, THE EMBARRASSMENT: Former senior Pentagon appointee and all-around-smart guy Jed Babbin counts the ways Biden is lost in the fog of war in Ukraine.

WHY IS BIDEN SIDING WITH PUTIN? “President Biden’s ambassador at the United Nations, in a startling development, is siding with Russia against Ukraine’s challenge to Russia’s standing as a permanent member of the Security Council capable of vetoing its resolutions.”

Okay, actually I understand what’s going on here, but there’s some nice lawyering by the Ukrainians:

The Ukrainians are arguing that, in actuality, the United Nations Charter — the foundational treaty of the world body — does not list Russia as a member of either the Security Council or any other part of the UN. The membership of the Security Council is listed in the treaty’s article 23. It says:

“The Security Council shall consist of fifteen Members of the United Nations. The Republic of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America shall be permanent members of the Security Council.”

No resolution to change that was passed in 1991, when the USSR collapsed and Russia, in a letter to the UN secretary general, claimed the USSR’s security council seat, which is precisely the point Ukraine is making. . . . The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was a confederation of 15 countries. During its existence only Ukraine and Belarus voted independently of the Soviet Union. USSR members that are now independent countries — including the Baltic states that are now members of NATO — might have as much of a claim as Russia to the USSR’s permanent seat.

Ambassador Thomas Greenfield’s error as to what the charter says stands in sharp contrast to the written record pointed out by Ambassador Kyslytsya. He pointed out the language of the charter in an open meeting of the Security Council Thursday, when Ms. Thomas Greenfield was present.

America’s resistance to that interpretation of the charter is especially curious as countries around the globe — inspired by the bravery of the Ukrainian people and their president, Volodymyr Zelensky — play catch-up in the effort to increase diplomatic and economic pressure on Russia.

The Security Council is due to gather this afternoon to take to the General Assembly an American resolution that Russia vetoed late last week. In the Assembly, which includes all 193 UN members, no country has a veto power. None of its resolutions, however, can be enforced. Unlike Security Council resolutions, Assembly votes are mostly toothless declarations.

Nice legal work, even though it won’t carry the day.