Good morning and Happy #Festivus. Today we will air some more grievances in the holiday tradition!

I’ll throw in a new wrinkle this year because SO MANY people are joining in with my grievances that I want to highlight how the word is spreading — your government is out of control, and a LOT of us have grievances.
We will talk about Congress, Petty Tyrants all over, foreign aid, wasteful spending, science denying “experts” and other holiday goodies.This is not the time for holiday cheer! That’s for TOMORROW, AFTER we air our grievances.
Later, for feats of strength, we will see who can lift with one hand the 5593 page monstrosity of a bill Congress just passed. Good luck!
I’ll start where everyone in American should begin with their grievances. Congress. Oh, Congress, where to even begin.
Congress passed a nearly 5,600 page bill that was written in secret, put in public 6 hours before the vote, and read by NOT ONE person in the body. Not. One. We will spend all week and probably longer trying to figure out all that was wrong with it. But we have a few already...
Congress gave you $600. Would you like to know what they gave everyone else? #Festivus
$15 million buy high speed boats for Sri Lanka.
$130 million to promote democracy in Nepal. $15 million to promote it in Pakistan. Interesting, since we can’t even seem to validate mail in ballots in the United States properly.
$33 billion to promote Democracy in Venezuela. That seems to be going well so far.
OH WAIT I FOUND IT. We are going to promote Democracy in America with $132 million in “assistance for GEORGIA.” No, wait, that’s the former Soviet Republic, never mind.

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?