Saturday, July 04, 2009

Remember what I said about rain this time of year?

Blew in around 7pm. 'Blew' as in high gusts, pouring rain, but- amazingly- no hail. And, in a magnificent feat of timing, about four minutes before the burgers I was grilling were done.

I was under the carport, so the grill was ok, but I was trying to figure out how to get them into the house without them getting a shower when I spotted the bucket.

Yes, it was clean.


Hell with it, it kept the rain off, and they were good.

Since I haven't heard anything, looks like the big fireworks shows were called off, which sucks. We did need rain, but would have been nice if it'd been after, for those going to them.

Of course, it would also have been nice to receive rain as in 'light to moderate water fall from the sky' as opposed to 'don't try to walk into the wind and breathe, or you'll drown'. In any case, it did indeed water everything. Some sprinkles off & on since, and the weather weenies say chances remain until about 1am. Or so. Damned if you can trust that time.

This morning I ran out to a flea market to look around, and found something I'd been wanting: a cast-iron cornbread pan that makes the ears of corn. Had found several before, but the people were wanting to sell them to collectors, not people who wanted to cook with the damn things; when you ask price and they turn it over, look at a name or makers mark on the bottom and say prices more than I've seen .22 rifles for...

I'll end with words from Mark Steyn on the Palin situation:
In states far from the national spotlight, politics still attracts normal people. You're a mayor or a state senator or even the governor, but you lead a normal life. The local media are tough on you, but they know you, they live where you live, they're tough on the real you, not on some caricature cooked up by a malign alliance of late-night comics who'd never heard of you a week earlier and media grandees supposedly on your own side who pronounce you a "cancer".

Then suddenly you get the call from Washington. You know it'll mean Secret Service, and speechwriters, and minders vetting your wardrobe. But nobody said it would mean a mainstream network comedy host doing statutory rape gags about your 14-year old daughter. You've got a special-needs kid and a son in Iraq and a daughter who's given you your first grandchild in less than ideal circumstances. That would be enough for most of us. But the special-needs kid and the daughter and most everyone else you love are a national joke, and the PC enforcers are entirely cool with it
I don't mind people being tough on politicians, though I'd much prefer a media that actually gave a crap about facts and was somewhat even-handed; I very much mind a bunch of assholes spreading flat lies, and attacking a politician's kids. If your kid is in their 20's or 30's and part of the campaign, they're legitimately part of the story; when you attack a baby with the kind of disgusting crap we've seen, when- as Steyn notes- rape jokes about your daughters are considered 'all in good fun', that's bullshit. And when the media is so bigoted they'll send whole teams of investigators to Alaska to look for dirt on Palin(one of the worst examples of 'reporting' the last while) but won't investigate crap about Obama, they've forfeited any reason for us to believe them on anything: if they'll pull this crap for political reasons, why should we trust them on anything else? When they'll report bullcrap rumors as if they were real, then make 'corrections' as small as possible, why should we trust a word they say? We have the spectacle of some major media "You can trust us" journalists, after the election, saying "Well, we don't really know what Obama believes", why should we trust you to do the job on ANYTHING?

And to every slimy jerk like Letterman, and the sleazes at Huffington Jackasses: you have no ground to stand on, at all, when someone finally goes after you, your personal as well as professional life. You said it was just fine when done to Palin and her family, so shut the hell up when someone starts digging into your family life; your friends.

You know, thinking about it, how about independance from restrictions on digging up everything possible on these people and broadcasting it far & wide?

A government with great regard for it's laws and soverignty;

unfortunately, it ain't here. Fortunately for Honduras,
TEGUCIGALPA, July 3 (Xinhua) -- Honduras' interim government announced Friday that the country decided to quit from the Organization of American States (OAS).

In a letter to the OAS read by Honduras' Vice Minister of International Relations Martha Lorena de Casco, it said "This government believes that inside the organization (of the OAS), there is no room for Honduras, for the states that love its freedom and defend its sovereignty."

The reading of the letter was made in presence of Honduran Acting President Roberto Micheletti
A very polite way of saying "Screw you, we're not letting you order us to disregard our laws and put that Chavez puppet back into office."
The interim government's announcement came after OAS chief Jose Miguel Insulza said in Tegucigalpa Friday that he would recommend the suspension of Honduras from the regional group due to its post-coup rulers' refusal to reinstate ousted President Manuel Zelaya.
You'll notice that these clowns have it down: a nation enforcing the law is a 'coup', and they must be forced to ignore their laws, or else. And listen to this BS:
"Zelaya is the only one that we recognize as Honduran President, and he must be returned to his position as soon as possible," Insulza said at a press conference.

"Honduras is exposed to an international sanction, because the world unanimously has declared this action as a violation of democracy. I have spoken with several people, and apparently no one wants to accept responsibility for what happened last weekend."

Gee, it's really nice for you to decide that Honduras should crap on it's Constitution just to make you and the Chavez puppet happy. And that 'several people' must not include the people in the legislature and Supreme Court who've said, loudly and in public, "We did this to enforce the law; no one, including the President, is above it."

Insulza, you're a fool. A power-hungry, arrogant little fool.

The response:
Enrique Ortez Colindres, foreign minister of Honduras' post-coup government, told media that the government would not negotiate with the OAS.

"We have a very firm position that we do not negotiate Honduras' sovereignty," Ortez said
To put it crudely , God-DAMN, I'd like to see more of that attitude in our government. Mr. Colindres, you're being cheered by a lot of people up here, no matter what our terrorist-appeasing, dictator-suckup President thinks.

Tam has a good question: what WOULD be the most patriotic thing to shoot

today? She does specify the firearm itself, not the target(politicians, etc.)

Independance Day,

and the 2nd Amendment:
Thanks to the Real King of France for pointing to this

I originally titled this post 'The 4th of July', until I read this from Lawdog. So I changed it. And I think I'll post the text of that document that politicians seem to dislike for some reason:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
John Hancock
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

'Disgusting' isn't quite the word,

but it'll have to do. The Huffington Post is noting Governor Sarah Palin's resignation by making retard jokes about her and her kids.

These are the people who bitch and whine about how conservatives 'don't care about people' and 'have no feelings for the unfortunate'.

Fuck you, Erik Nelson; you're a miserable, sniveling little excuse for a man. And if you ever meet her, or her husband- hell, probably either of the older daughters- I hope they give you the first-class ass-kicking you deserve.

You're slime.

Well, government couldn't run a brothel and make money,

why would we think it can run liquor stores?
More to the point, it isn’t working. And apparently has not been working since it was installed! It was not until the beginning of June that the state noticed there was a problem with their new toy, when they finally realized that they were only filling 65% of their orders. They claim the problem is fixed, but I have my doubts. After a month, with thousands of hours of overtime, and six "temporary" warehouses in operation, they can fill 80% of their orders. When they finally do get through the backlog, and go back to relying only on the system, let me know if it doesn’t immediately break down again.

Meanwhile, the state owned liquor stores can’t get product. The state license stores can’t get product. And the biggest pains in the butt is that restaurants can’t get product.
Those of you who read me religiously (all three of you), know how jealous of Seattle’s craft bar scene I am. But to go into a holiday weekend with no idea what inventory you can have must be a nightmare. And it’s going to be especially bad for the higher end watering holes, serving the more esoteric drinks
If you were running a business, how long would it take you to 'realize' you were only filling 2/3's of your orders? Not too damn long, I'd think. But then, this is a government-run 'business'...
But Pete Hanning, an owner of the Red Door in Fremont, said restaurants count on getting not just the most common liquors, but ones they can feature in specialty cocktails. For two weeks, he said, he was unable to offer a popular summertime sipper — a lemonade drink he makes with pear-flavored Absolut vodka. The Red Door has a large outdoor deck and depends on heavy summer traffic, Hanning said.

"The worst part is each week I'm not sure what's going to be on my load and what products I'm going to be out of. It creates a lot of undue stress," he said.
Yeah, when your supplier can't tell you when or if you'll get what you ordered, that's a stress-maker. Especially when they're about to raise the price on what they might be able to deliver:
Hanning said the pinch is compounded by the fact that a state alcohol surcharge takes effect Aug. 1, which will force bar owners to increase prices.

The surcharge, which will add between $1 and $3 to the price of most bottles of booze, was enacted to raise about $80 million to replace money legislators took from a liquor-reserve fund to balance the state budget
Government: it can't run a whorehouse OR sell booze efficiently, but socialized medicine will be GREAT! Yeah.

Friday, July 03, 2009

Just a collection of idiocy out there today

In (fG)Britain,
Escaped prisoners who are on the run will not be named in case it breaches their right to privacy, civil servants have ruled. The edict has been made even though many convicts are fully identified with photographs sent out by police at the time they go on the run.

Ministry of Justice officials say the Data Protection Act means they are unable to confirm the names of escaped prisoners still at large.Justice Secretary Jack Straw is being urged to investigate the ruling amid fears it could undermine public appeals to track down escaped prisoners.

The policy was revealed when the ministry refused a Freedom Of Information request to name inmates on the run from Holleseley Bay prison near Woodbridge, Suffolk.

I guess I shouldn't be too hard on Britain, it's not the only place with such morons. Tim Blair used to keep track of cases in Australia where people were told to watch out for people who'd committed robberies, rapes, etc., and there was a description with no mention of the race of the dirtbag. It was felt to be 'discriminatory' to actually mention that a black or white or Indian or whatever rapist was black or white or Indian or whatever.

I repeat, idiocy abounds.

raided the yeshiva of Homesh in Samaria on Wednesday and torched dozens of books of the Talmud and of the Five Books of Moses, leaving behind a pile of ashes. The arsonists ignored personal equipment, including beds, tables and chairs, and concentrated all their energies on Jewish texts.

“It was a horrible sight to see dozen of holy books of the Talmud and Bible burned almost completely,” said Rabbi Elishama Cohen, head of the yeshiva that has been the stronghold of the community the past two years. Homesh was one of four towns in northern Samaria that the government destroyed after expelling the residents during the “Disengagement” program four years ago.
This part is just disgusting, here's the idiocy(and more disgusting):
Communications Minister Moshe Kahlon commented, “Whoever has not yet understood with whom we are dealing should look at the pictures of the burnt holy books. If Jews had burned dozens of Muslim books, the whole world would be shaking.”
AND demanding reparations of some kind AND demanding the nasty Jews apologize AND demanding they make some kind of national apology AND...

Then there's the idiotic statement by Krugman, another Nobel Prize winner, that questioning Globular Warmering is 'treason against the planet'; response:
The actual 4.6 billion-year old planet, survivor of multitudes of asteroid hits, Milankovitch cycle changes, magnetic pole reversals, solar and cosmic radiation, myriad volcanic caldera collapses, mantle plume eruptions, etc., etc. doesn’t give a rat’s ass about a few degrees Celsius or what idiots like Krugman think.

Well, I have to move back into the 'disgusting' category:
Pakistan's top Taliban leader, Baitullah Mehsud, is buying children as young as 7 to serve as suicide bombers in the growing spate of attacks against Pakistani, Afghan and U.S. targets, U.S. Defense Department and Pakistani officials say.

A Pakistani official, who spoke on the condition that he not be named because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said the going price for child bombers was $7,000 to $14,000 - huge sums in Pakistan, where per-capita income is about $2,600 a year
Yes, it's another interesting action by devotees of the Religion of Pieces of People.
No, I'm not feeling tolerant; too damn many muslims have claimed that crap like this 'does not represent Islam' and then defended the scumbags who do these things.

That's about it for now, I've got some polishing to do.

Ok, I understand: according to Holder, it's not a 'hate crime'

if you're not a PC victim.
Under questioning, Attorney Gen. Holder was surprisingly forthright in admitting that the hate bill is not intended to protect everyone, or even the majority. He said only historically oppressed minorities were to benefit. This means Jews, blacks, homosexuals, women, etc. Holder made it clear that if a white Christian male, including a serviceman or police officer, was the victim of a violent hate crime by any minority he would have to find redress from traditional law. He could not avail himself of the triple penalties and rapid government/justice system response given a protected minority.

So since Holder had determined that only certain people('protected minority') deserve this special species status, I can call him a politically-correct bigot. As well as a sorry jerk.

Maybe President B. Hussein Cartman Obama is confused about Honduras

because he's so busy breaking the law here and trying to cover it up.
Key Republicans in both the House and the Senate are accusing the White House of giving “incomplete and misleading” information to investigators probing the president’s abrupt firing of AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin. In return, the White House is hinting that documents concerning its actions in the Walpin affair may be protected by executive privilege.
Openness! Transparency!!
After lawmakers demanded an explanation, the White House said Walpin had been “confused, disoriented [and] unable to answer questions” at a May 20 meeting with the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service. The Johnson case was discussed at that meeting, with Walpin harshly criticizing board members for their support of a decision to let Johnson off easy.

There’s no question that members of the board, both Democrat and Republican, were unhappy with Walpin’s criticism of them
(isn't that part of an IG's job? To upset people?). They agreed that Alan Solomont, the Democratic fundraiser appointed by President Barack Obama as chairman of the board, should tell the White House what had happened.

But now, at least three board members have told congressional investigators they did not specifically recommend that the administration fire Walpin. Instead, they simply wanted the chairman to express their concerns.

The White House claims it investigated the matter; Eisen told House and Senate aides that officials did an “extensive review” of complaints about Walpin’s performance before deciding to fire him. But there are serious doubts as to whether the White House did, in fact, conduct a serious investigation before getting rid of Walpin.

The three board members have told Congress that the White House did not contact them during the review. (One was told about Walpin’s firing at about the time it happened, and the other two were contacted days later.) No one from the White House contacted Walpin himself, or his top assistant, as part of the review
And so on. Fact is, even if there were legitimate reason to fire him, the law requires certain things, including time; and this law was broken. And, in the spirit of Transparency!!,
For its part, the White House is hinting broadly that it might invoke executive privilege to keep documents from Congress. “Your questions seek information about the White House’s internal decision-making process,” Craig wrote to Sen. Charles Grassley on June 30. “These questions implicate core executive branch confidentiality interests.” At another point, Craig pledged to cooperate “to the fullest extent possible consistent with constitutional and statutory obligations.”
Except where it'll cause a problem for the administration by revealing illegal actions and why they were taken, right?

And a bit more on the government of Honduras

having a 'coup' against itself:
The Hondurans are so concerned about potential despots, that Article 239 of their constitution states that any president who proposes extending his term in office is automatically removed from office. Article 313 of the Honduran constitution allows its Supreme Court to deputize the Honduran military to carry out its orders, including removing politicians from office who seek to extend a president’s term.

Ignoring the constitution, President Manuel Zelaya, a man less popular in Honduras than George Bush was when he left office in this country, ordered a “non-binding” referendum be put to the voters on extending his stay in office.

Glenn Garvin wrote in the Miami Herald, “After the Honduran supreme court ruled that only the country’s congress could call such an election, Zelaya ordered the army to help him stage it anyway. ... When the head of the armed forces, acting on orders from the supreme court, refused, Zelaya fired him, then led a mob to break into a military base where the ballots were stored.”
Let us remember, the ballots that were printed in Venezuela because they couldn't be legally printed in Honduras.
The Honduran Supreme Court, congress, attorney general and members of Zelaya’s cabinet opposed his move as unconstitutional. The supreme court ordered the military to remove Zelaya from office. Honduras has no impeachment process as we know it

In short, Honduras did follow their law; and demanded the President follow it. When he didn't they, in obedience to their Constitution, removed him from office. And our President, who took a long damn time to condemn Iran killing protesters and who smiles upon commie Chavez in Venezuela, immediately had a hissy fit and demanded Zelaya, who violated the law, be reinstated.

Tells you more about where our terrorist-appeasing President has his head.

Thursday, July 02, 2009

President Obama is a terrorist-appeasing bastard

Who's going to get more troops killed with this garbage.
About two weeks ago, the Obama administration released Laith Qazali after extensive negotiations with the Asaib al-Haq terror network. That network has long been in negotiations with the fledgling Iraqi government, dangling the possibility of laying down its arms, renouncing violence, and integrating into Iraqi society, provided that its top members — particularly Qais and Laith Qazali, as well as Ali Mussa Daqduq — be released. Realizing, however, that these terrorists were responsible for kidnapping and killing American soldiers in gross violation of the laws of war, the Bush administration had declined to release them.

The Obama administration has not only released Laith Qazali, it has been in negotiations to release his brother, Qais Qazali, as well. The negotiations and release were carried out in flagrant disregard of the longstanding policy against exchanging prisoners for the release of hostages. Undermining that policy endangers all American troops and civilian personnel — as well as the troops and civilian personnel of our allies — by encouraging terrorists to kidnap them to use as bargaining chips.

I guess this is the next step in his program of apologizing for America; turn loose people who murder our troops.

I've been blunt before, but tried to keep it in bounds; screw that. Obama doesn't give a crap about the lives of our troops, wants to suck up to tyrants and wants to screw over actual democratic governments. That's on top of pushing his own version of 'malaise' on us. This clown is going to wind up making Jimmy Carter look good in comparison.

And I'm wondering how many lives he's willing to throw away so he can play "I am the good Progressive President".

Something from Canada that won't surprise you

Among the factors determining murder rates, levels of gun ownership is among the most overstated and least reliable, in Mauser’s view. “There is no empirical support for the claim that gun ownership is related to violence rates,” he says.
From The lowdown on crime in Canada, thanks to Uncle for pointing to this.

So how's that 'You're safer in Britain because of their gun restrictions' meme

working out? Not real well.
Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it is revealed today.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries
But, but, handguns are BANNED! That makes them safer!!
In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million - or more than two every minute.
Well, apparently not.
The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, also show:

* The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
* It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
* The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
* It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.

But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.

In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677
And how's that compare to us?
The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609.
That's a flat amazing number; more than four times as many violent offenses per capita in the UK than here.
The figures, compiled by the Tories, are considered the most accurate and up-to-date available.

But criminologists say crime figures can be affected by many factors, including different criminal justice systems and differences in how crime is reported and measured.
Legitimate points. Which brings back the fact that the British government has been caught- more than once- fiddling the numbers to make things look not-so-bad; I'm tempted to say "Of COURSE they're going to try to reduce the impact of this."

There follows various "This is not as bad as it looks" stuff, including
'Violent crime in England and Wales has fallen by almost a half a peak in 1995 but we are not complacent and know there is still work to do. That is why last year we published 'Saving lives. Reducing harm. Protecting the public. An Action Plan for Tackling Violence 2008-11'.'
Like that "we are not complacent and know there is still work to do"; sets the proper tone of "We are going to save you. We haven't yet, and crime is awful, but we Published a Plan!"

And, on the 'reasons why', they have this:
Experts say there are a number of reasons why violence is soaring in the UK. These include Labour's decision to relax the licensing laws to allow round-the-clock opening, which has led to a rise in the number of serious assaults taking place in the early hours of the morning.
I'd say that's a symptom, not a cause; people who obey the law and give a crap about others' lives don't jump on somebody just because they can drink late. But, for the 'experts' and government, I guess it beats blaming people who commit crimes and idiots who don't hold those people responsible for their actions.

There are a number of factors involved in these numbers, but I do keep coming back to the fact that a country where, not that long ago,
It was common for subjects of the Crown to own arms,
It was common to put a pistol in your pocket when going out for the days business or an evening out,
Crime was low. Violent crime REALLY low,
is now a country where
Owning a firearm is highly restricted and gets you treated as a presumed criminal,
Using a weapon of ANY kind in self-defense, even in your own home, gets you arrested,
And crime, including violent crime, is HIGH.

Just noticed Kevin saw the same article, and gives it his treatment.

Ok, why the hell isn't this being reported LOUD in the news?

KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- A U.S. soldier has been captured by militants in Afghanistan, the U.S. military and the Taliban said Thursday.

A soldier mans a weapon at the rear of a U.S. Army helicopter over Afghanistan in May.

The unidentified soldier has been missing since Tuesday. U.S. forces are exhausting all resources to find the soldier, the military said
And this is not big news why?

Oh, maybe it's got something to do with this:
The news out of Afghanistan yesterday was bookended by a couple of Washington Post reports.

Bob Woodward on the ground at Camp Leatherneck reported this morning in an article ridiculously headlined, Preventing Another Iraq/US Says Key to Success in Afghanistan: Economic, Not Military, that the Obama admin considers it a “new era.”

The headline is not Woodward’s fault, except to the extent he buried and obfuscated his lede. He reports after the jump that National Security Advisor James L. Jones briefed commanders on the ground that there won’t be more troops, that requests for more troops will prompt a “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” response in the Oval Office.

That’s your lede, Bob. There’s your hed, Washington Post copy desk. Obama to Troops: “WTF?”

We can dicker if you like about whether he actually said that or not. But the president’s national security advisor only voiced in military slang what the president himself more formally enunciated with the unveiling of his Afghan strategy some months ago, when he indicated he didn’t want to be a wartime president. He liked the idea of running some counterterrorism ops and buying his way out of this one instead. Put another way, ”WTF?” (bold mine)

Here’s the exchange. Every time I read it, it’s more astonishing, as Woodward describes a briefing in Camp Leatherneck:
Nicholson and his colonels — all or nearly all veterans of Iraq — seemed to blanch at the unambiguous message that this might be all the troops they were going to get.

You really need to read this. And consider just how "We need to win in Afghanistan!" seems to actually mean "Without me actually having to deal with this messy war stuff."

Meanwhile, on Honduras

The Obama administration's actions towards Honduras continues to defy logic. On the one hand, Obama states that he is for the rule of law. Yet Obama meddles in the worst possible way in Hondurans' attempt to protect their country from a Chavez-style tyranny. Read Fausta's Blog for a full round-up of what Honduras was facing from this deposed dictator-in-the-making.
Honduras’s military acted under judicial orders in deposing President Manuel Zelaya, Supreme Court Justice Rosalinda Cruz said, rejecting the view of President Barack Obama and other leaders that he was toppled in a coup.

“The only thing the armed forces did was carry out an arrest order,” Cruz, 55, said in a telephone interview from the capital, Tegucigalpa. “There’s no doubt he was preparing his own coup by conspiring to shut down the congress and courts.”

Cruz said the court issued a sealed arrest order for Zelaya on June 26, charging him with treason and abuse of power, among other offenses. Zelaya had repeatedly breached the constitution by pushing ahead with a vote about rewriting the nation’s charter that the court ruled illegal, and which opponents contend would have paved the way for a prohibited second term.

She compared Zelaya’s tactics, including his dismissal of the armed forces chief for obeying a court order to impound ballots to be used in the vote, with those of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

“Some say it was not Zelaya but Chavez governing,” she said

No 'meddling' in Iran, but screw over Honduras in a rush; that's that progressive Hopey!Changey! for you.

Hopey! Changey! and Transparency!! (updated)

Following a testy exchange during today’s briefing with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas told that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.

“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.

“What the hell do they think we are, puppets?” Thomas said. “They’re supposed to stay out of our business. They are our public servants. We pay them.”

Easy answer to the question: no, they don't think you're their puppets; in many cases they KNOW it. You, earlier, and so many other members of the press have been so far in the tank for Obama that they knew they wouldn't have problems controlling the press; now you've decided you don't like it? Where the hell were you and some of the other "Do they think we're puppets?" people during the election? And up till now? Hell, an awful lot of you are STILL so far up his butt they need air piped in; so why shouldn't they think you're a puppet?

Generally speaking, I dislike Thomas greatly; it's nice to see her actually saying something about the Obama tactics.
Update: found this at Ace:
The president called randomly on three audience members. All turned out to be members of groups with close ties to his administration: the Service Employees International Union, Health Care for America Now, and Organizing for America, which is a part of the Democratic National Committee. White House officials said that was a coincidence.
Coincidence. Yeah. These people are all going to have noses so long...

Speaking of,
"I want to emphasize that the president has not seen the questions ahead of time, absolutely not,” Jarrett said at a “town-hall’’ styled forum on healthcare reform today at the Annandale, Va., campus of Northern Virginia Community College.
The president’s staff chose the questions - the first from a woman with her hand up and aides pointing at her.
Naw, no way he could have known what was coming...

These interventions (ongoing since 2007) have “systematically violated the letter and spirit of the Inspector General Act,” according to Sen. Grassley. IG staffers now fear retaliation – and with good reason. Their boss, Weiderhold, lost his job on the very day Amtrak received the Willkie, Farr & Gallagher report. It may be hot and humid in the rest of the Beltway, but every inspector general’s office is feeling an Arctic chill.

The transparent sacking comes just as Amtrak is awash in more than $1.3 billion of new federal stimulus funds. It comes on the heels of the unceremonious dismissal of Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general who dared to probe financial shenanigans by Obama cronies. (See “Obama’s AmeriCrooks and cronies scandal,” June 17, 2009.) And it comes on the heels of the stifling of veteran Environmental Protection Agency employee Alan Carlin, the researcher who dared to question the Obama administration’s conventional wisdom on global warming. (See “EPA’s game of global warming hide-and-seek,” June 26, 2009).

Question the timing? You betcha
...Amtrak’s vice president and general counsel is Eleanor Acheson.

Acheson, an old friend of Hillary Clinton, also has close ties to Vice President Joe “Mr. Amtrak” Biden. She hired Biden’s nominations counsel Jonathan Meyer to serve as her deputy general counsel. The two had also worked together in the Clinton Justice Department. Meyer called his hiring at Amtrak by Acheson a “happy coincidence,” according to Legal Times. (In another “happy coincidence,” Biden’s lobbyist son, Hunter, sits on Amtrak’s board of directors.) Acheson oversees the very Law Department accused of interfering repeatedly with the taxpayer advocates in the inspector general’s office.

...They zeroed in on Amtrak’s choice of Lorraine Green to replace “retired” IG Weiderhold. (Click here for their letter to Amtrak Chairman of the Board of Directors Tom Carper.)

Who is Lorraine Green? She’s a former Amtrak human resources executive and faithful Democrat donor with no experience in the inspector general business. Her expertise? Managing “diversity initiatives” for the agency. Watchdog out. Lapdog in.

I guess all this HOPE! and CHANGE! counts as Chicago Transparency!!: "You don't see this, or else."

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Well, I USED to like Subway

In the summer of 2003, he opened a second store on Gaston Avenue, a half-mile from Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas. He planned to open a third.

When Batie’s marching orders came in March 2005, sending him off to help train the Afghan army, he said he left the care and feeding of his two Subway outlets to his younger brother, Chris, franchisee Travis Brown and Brown’s wife, Natalie.

Sounds great, right? But Subway stripped Batie of his franchises while he was deployed citing a “[suffering]” business and bills. Hmmm, well, I suppose maybe that’s a reason. Business is business after all…

The amounts owed is in contention. What is certain is that Subway took the franchise back, and sold it as a remarkably generous price to the local Subway developers, who then resold it at nearly 400% of what they paid for it

I need to find the contact info for Subway.

But Senator Reid said we lost!

To Reid and every other slimy politician who tried to throw away troops lives for political gain, screw you. Especially those now trying to claim credit for that mission being accomplished. You suck, and we despise you.

So if we adopt their wonderful health-care system, where WILL Canada

send people? Kevin linked to this article; here's a piece of it, with some information I hadn't heard before:
Infant mortality rates are often cited as a reason socialized medicine and a single-payer system is supposed to be better than what we have here. But according to Dr. Linda Halderman, a policy adviser in the California State Senate, these comparisons are bogus.

As she points out, in the U.S., low birth-weight babies are still babies. In Canada, Germany and Austria, a premature baby weighing less than 500 grams is not considered a living child and is not counted in such statistics. They're considered "unsalvageable" and therefore never alive.

Norway boasts one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world — until you factor in weight at birth, and then its rate is no better than in the U.S.

In other countries babies that survive less than 24 hours are also excluded and are classified as "stillborn." In the U.S. any infant that shows any sign of life for any length of time is considered a live birth.

A child born in Hong Kong or Japan that lives less than a day is reported as a "miscarriage" and not counted. In Switzerland and other parts of Europe, a baby is not counted as a baby if it is less than 30 centimeters in length.

In 2007, there were at least 40 mothers and their babies who were airlifted from British Columbia alone to the U.S. because Canadian hospitals didn't have room. It's worth noting that since 2000, 42 of the world's 52 surviving babies weighing less than 400g (0.9 pounds) were born in the U.S.

It must be embarrassing to Canada that a G-7 economy and a country of 30 million people can't offer the same level of health care as a town of just over 50,000 in rural Montana. Where will Canada send its preemies and other critical patients when we adopt their health care system?
But our system is 'unsustainable' and needs to be changed to the same kind of mess that Canada and Britain has. Yeah. That'll work.

The Canadian health-care system strikes again,

with the all-too-usual results:
It seems that a Canadian couple gave birth to a premature baby this weekend in Hamilton, Ontario. Since Canada is just another Third World Hellhole where brain surgery is done with a 16" Poulan and a 6-pack of Moosehead, its not exactly a shock that NOT. ONE. SINGLE. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU for short) bed could be found for the child. I know what you're thinking: Russ, they couldn't find one single NICU bed available in the City of Hamilton for this baby? NO. They couldn't find one single NICU bed available for this baby in the entire PROVINCE of Ontario. You know, a PROVINCE? Sort of like a STATE, only 196% more ghey?

Luckily, Canada just happens to be the mildly retarded cousin of the United States of America; and like most families, we look after each other - even if the slow relatives are complete window-lickers who eat their own boogers in public. The baby was brought to Buffalo, NY, where she is enjoying the fruits of America's evil profit-driven health care system. If this was the end of the story, I'd be willing to smile and wish the happy hosers well with the addition to their family; however, as Paul Harvey used to say, there is ..... the rest of the story
Which involves a moron Canadian who pisses and moans about the parents having trouble getting to the US, and excusing that the reason they need to get here is THE CANADIAN SYSTEM COULDN'T TAKE CARE OF THE KID. But it's 'free' so he seems to think that's ok.

Socialized medicine; it'll give it to you, good and hard.

That President B. Hussein Cartman Obama is sucking up to Chavez

who says things like this, is freakin' disgusting:
”If they swear him in we’ll overthrow him,” Chávez blustered. “Mark my words. Thugetti — as I’m going to refer to him from now on — you better pack your bags, because you’re either going to jail or you’re going into exile.”
So our President, who didn't want to 'meddle' while protesters were being beaten and murdered in Iran, jumps right up next to this communist thug who's threatening to invade another country. And basically agrees with him.

I'm sure the Democrat Underground loves it; it's just so progressive!

If you've been wanting a copy of Monster Hunter International,

it ships in one month. You can pre-order at Amazon and various other places Larry lists in the post.

Get it. It's good.

Birds of a feather, indeed

Toward what end all these mea culpas? Perhaps it is a strategy designed, as he puts it, to "restor[e] America's standing in the world." Or perhaps he genuinely believes, as do many Muslims and Europeans, among others, that a great share of the world's ills may be laid at the doorstep of the United States. Either way, he seems to hope that such self-criticism will open the way to talking through our frictions with Iran, Syria, China, Russia, Burma, Sudan, Cuba, Venezuela, and the "moderate" side of the Taliban.

This strategy might be called peace through moral equivalence, and it finally makes fully intelligible Obama's resistance to advocating human rights and democracy. For as long as those issues are highlighted, the cultural relativism that laced his Cairo speech and similar pronouncements in other places is revealed to be absurd. Straining to find a deficiency of religious freedom in America, Obama came up with the claim that "in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation." He was referring, apparently, to the fact that donations to foreign entities are not tax deductible. This has, of course, nothing to do with religious freedom but with assuring that tax deductions are given only to legitimate charities and not, say, to "violent extremists," as Obama calls them (eschewing the word "terrorist").

Consider this alleged peccadillo of America's in comparison to the state of religious freedom in Egypt, where Christians may not build, renovate or repair a church without written authorization from the President of the country or a provincial governor (and where Jews no longer find it safe to reside). Or compare it to the practices at the previous stop on Obama's itinerary, Saudi Arabia, where no church may stand, where Jews were for a time not allowed to set foot, and where even Muslims of non-Sunni varieties are constrained from building places of worship.

In short, while it may be possible to identify derogations from democracy and human rights in America, those that are ubiquitous in the Muslim world are greater by many orders of magnitude. If democracy and human rights are held as high values, then all societies are not morally equal. This is a thought that cuts sharply against Obama's multicultural sensibilities.

And from a letter:
The country is bewildered that the world, especially the United States, is not on their side. Zelaya was confident of his plans to convert Honduras into a Venezuelan satellite. The Honduran people are proud of their constitution and are proud to have a functioning democratic system. Zelaya was replaced by a member of his own party who vows to see that this November's presidential election takes place. What happened was not a "coup" but a bipartisan effort to save the nation.

It is heartbreaking for me to see President Obama throw Honduras under the bus. He did not speak out when Zelaya was attempting to stage a sham "constitutional referendum" with ballots printed in Venezuela.

My mother immigrated from Honduras and is a registered Republican because she remembers how the GOP stood up to communists when her countrymen were afraid of Fidel Castro. Now, Hugo Chavez is threatening to invade her beloved homeland and an American president is not standing up for a free and democratic Honduras.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Took the Colt for a walk

and ran a box of ball and a magazine of hollowpoints through it. Just like shooting the .32 the friend has, with a bit sharper recoil. It ate it all, and out to about five yards(far as I shot it; it IS a pocket pistol) showed itself as capable of better accuracy than I am. At least with those sights. It's a good thing this points as well as it does; with those tiny things, aiming in anything but perfect light is as much guess as skill.

I will get a set of repro grips; these don't fit the frame quite right, and tend to shift in the hand a bit. Tam pointed to Brownell's as a source, and I'll check around a bit just to see what's out there.

Overall, quite happy with this piece. And still half-unbelieving of how it wound up in my care.

"Because we hate you, and you suck;

and that includes you airsoft guys, too."
Oh, man, I’m laughing out loud as I type this. Because all those Airsofters who’ve given me crap are now getting sued by HK! Not only do they not want you to have their real guns, they don’t want you to own toys that look like their guns. That’s a whole new level of hate.

Ironically, this is about the stupidest thing they could have done from a business perspective. So either the Airsoft manufacturers will pay them a tiny royalty, or more likely they will just alter the design enough not to be a trademark violation. If HK was a normal company, they would realize that they’re kicking their fan base and their stalwart internet defenders in the crotch, but you’ve got to remember that actually hating the people who purchase their products is standard operating procedure there

Talk about improvised weapons...

made from iron bedposts; charge made of pieces of lead from curtain tape and match-heads, to be ignited by AA batteries and a broken light bulb

Found thanks to Uncle

Some more information on the situation in Honduras

in which President B. Hussein Cartman Obama craps on our friends while sucking up to our enemies:
Here is more information on Mel Zelaya's move:
  • Zelaya couldn't get the ballots printed in Honduras since the referendum had been pronounced illegal by the country's Supreme Court AND the electoral board. Therefore, the government couldn't print them. No private printer was willing to break the law, either. So Zelaya had the ballots printed in Venezuela and flown in.
  • The Supreme Court instructed the military (who would be the ones doing the job) NOT to distribute the ballots to the polling stations.
  • Zelaya then
    led thousands of supporters to recover the material from an air force warehouse before it could be confiscated.
    His supporters broke into the military installation where the ballots were kept.

  • Zelaya's supporters started distributing the ballots at 15,000 voting stations across the country. This act placed him in outright defiance of the law, the Constitution, and the Supreme Court.
  • When the armed forces refused to distribute the ballots, Zelaya fired the chief of the armed forces, Gen. Romeo Vásquez, and the defense minister, the head of the army and the air force resigned in protest. The country's Supreme Court voted unanimously that Vásquez be reinstated.
  • Tuesday last week the Honduran Congress, led by members of his own party, passed a law preventing the holding of referendums or plebiscites 180 days before or after general elections.
  • The Honduran Congress, led by members of his own party, named a commission to investigate Zelaya. The Commission found (my translation: If you quote it, please credit me and link to this post)
    Zelaya acted against the mandates of legal and electoral laws, the Public Ministry, the National Congress, the Attorney General, and other institutions of the State, which had declared the poll illegal
  • On Thursday (h/t GoV) the Attorney General requested that Congress impeach Zelaya
  • The position of the Honduran Congress, the Supreme Court, and the attorney general is that the Constitution is to be strictly adhered to.

And yet President Obama said yesterday that the military ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was illegal and could set a "terrible precedent,"
Yeah. Having a country actually hold the President to the law and Constitution is a horrible thing, and he doesn't like that idea. Interesting, isn't it?

"MSM eating out of Obama's hand"

He writes that like it's news to us.
One need only look at his last press conference -- his first in daylight -- to validate that assessment. With the few hardened veterans who remain watching opened mouthed in amazement, Obama set up a scene that probably wouldn't have been possible "back in the day." He had arranged for a blogger from the Internet's Huffington Post to get a temporary press pass, told him what he wanted asked (a question from an Iranian citizen about his stance on that country's election protests) and then called on the person as though the whole thing were impromptu. Planted questions are rare but planted questioners are unheard of. Later correspondents went after press spokesman Robert Gibbs in what was described as a "food fight" over the incident at his regular daily briefing.
It is safe to say that had this been Obama's predecessor there would have been an enormous outcry lasting several days if not longer. During an unusually long press conference in the Oval Office in 1965, White House correspondents complained bitterly that there were people in the room who had been prompted by Lyndon Johnson and his staff to ask certain questions. It never happened again and the president's standing with the press took a hit
Part of the problem is that so many of those 'hardened veterans' spent much of the presidential campaign basically refusing to dig into Obama's past, his words and actions; now they're finding out the guy they went into the tank for considers them expendable, and they don't like it. Well, guys, join the club.

Obama's ability to prepackage a press conference has been enhanced by the accelerating decline of the print media. Newspapers that would never have dreamed of letting a president go uncovered are now nowhere to be seen, leaving a vacuum to be filled by online reporters with only a smidgen of experience or understanding.
And while the major broadcast correspondents are still there for the time being, under the Obama rules that limit the number of questions that are allowed and the pre-selection of those who will ask them, they are marginalized. Most reporters now find themselves just window dressing for TV with no chance of getting in a question
I'd argue that many of those online reporters have experience and understanding; the problem is, they were also- too many ARE- in the tank so far they need air piped in. Some of them are starting to fight it, but a lot of them are still covering for The Obama.

Nothing signified the end of the traditional, free wheeling give and take of this experience more than the forlorn image of the most recognizable person outside the president at the press conference. Much decorated Helen Thomas, formerly of United Press International and now a columnist for the Hearst newspapers, sat frail and unsmiling in the front row where she has been for decades. She tried once to get a question in only to be brushed off by Obama. A staff member even has usurped her role of thanking the president for his appearance.
Helen Thomas is as nasty and vicious a bigot as you'll find; I have to admit her being brushed off by The One, who she helped get into that office, is funny as hell. Payback's a bitch, ain't it?

Actual domestic violence is Bad, no question;

so is lying about it, especially by 'experts':
Lemon's Domestic Violence Law is organized as a conventional law-school casebook--a collection of judicial opinions, statutes, and articles selected, edited, and commented upon by the author. The first selection, written by Cheryl Ward Smith (no institutional affiliation is given), offers students a historical perspective on domestic-violence law. According to Ward:

"The history of women's abuse began over 2,700 years ago in the year 753 BC. It was during the reign of Romulus of Rome that wife abuse was accepted and condoned under the Laws of Chastisement. . . . The laws permitted a man to beat his wife with a rod or switch so long as its circumference was no greater than the girth of the base of the man's right thumb. The law became commonly know as 'The Rule of Thumb.' These laws established a tradition which was perpetuated in English Common Law in most of Europe."

Where to begin? How about with the fact that Romulus of Rome never existed. He is a figure in Roman mythology--the son of Mars, nursed by a wolf. Problem 2: The phrase "rule of thumb" did not originate with any law about wife beating, nor has anyone ever been able to locate any such law. It is now widely regarded as a myth, even among feminist professors.

A few pages later, in a selection by Joan Zorza, a domestic-violence expert, students read, "The March of Dimes found that women battered during pregnancy have more than twice the rate of miscarriages and give birth to more babies with more defects than women who may suffer from any immunizable illness or disease." Not true. When I recently read Zorza's assertion to Richard P. Leavitt, director of science information at the March of Dimes, he replied, "That is a total error on the part of the author. There was no such study." The myth started in the early 1990s, he explained, and resurfaces every few years.

Zorza also informs readers that "between 20 and 35 percent of women seeking medical care in emergency rooms in America are there because of domestic violence." Studies by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Bureau of Justice Statistics, an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, indicate that the figure is closer to 1 percent.

Few students would guess that the Lemon book is anything less than reliable. The University of California at Berkeley's online faculty profile of Lemon hails it as the "premiere" text of the genre. It is part of a leading casebook series, published by Thomson/West, whose board of academic advisers, prominently listed next to the title page, includes many eminent law professors.

I mentioned these problems in my message to Lemon. She replied:

"I have looked into your assertions and requested documentation from Joan Zorza regarding the March of Dimes study and the statistics on battered women in emergency rooms. She provided both of these promptly."

If that's the case, Zorza and Lemon might share their documentation with Leavitt, of the March of Dimes, who is emphatic that it does not exist. They might also contact the Centers for Disease Control statistician Janey Hsiao, who wrote to me that "among ED [Emergency Department] visits made by females, the percent of having physical abuse by spouse or partner is 0.02 percent in 2003 and 0.01 percent in 2005."

Read the article, it's worth the time. And consider just how many students are being fed this crap by teachers who, if they even know it's crap, don't care because it 'advances the agenda'.

Consider The Penguin Atlas of Women in the World (2008), by the feminist scholar Joni Seager, chair of the Hunter College geography department. Now in its fourth edition, Seager's atlas was named "reference book of the year" by the American Library Association when it was published. "Nobody should be without this book," says the feminist icon Gloria Steinem. "A wealth of fascinating information," enthuses The Washington Post. Fascinating, maybe. But the information is misleading and, at least in one instance, flat-out false.

One color-coded map illustrates how women are kept "in their place" by restrictions on their mobility, dress, and behavior. Somehow the United States comes out looking as bad in this respect as Somalia, Uganda, Yemen, Niger, and Libya. All are coded with the same shade of green to indicate places where "patriarchal assumptions" operate in "potent combination with fundamentalist religious interpretations." Seager's logic? She notes that in parts of Uganda, a man can claim an unmarried woman as his wife by raping her. The United States gets the same low rating on Seager's charts because, she notes, "State legislators enacted 301 anti-abortion measures between 1995 and 2001." Never mind that the Ugandan practice is barbaric, that U.S. abortion law is exceptionally liberal among the nations of the world, and that the activism and controversy surrounding the issue of abortion in the United States is a sign of a vigorous free democracy working out its disagreements.

On another map, the United States gets the same rating for domestic violence as Uganda and Haiti. Seager backs up that verdict with that erroneous and ubiquitous emergency-room factoid: "22 percent-35 percent of women who visit a hospital emergency room do so because of domestic violence."

Found the link at Insty

Monday, June 29, 2009

I've been asked a couple of times if I'm going to reblue

the Colt. Maybe.

That's not evading, that's the answer. On the one hand, it'd polish up nicely, and take a lovely blue. On the other...

Kim once wrote about how, if given the choice between a gun 'never issued, never fired' and one that'd been around the block and showed it, but in good operating condition, he'd almost always choose the experienced one. Generally, I agree. There's just something there.

Both my M1 Garand and Carbine were made early in WWII; both probably used in battle. I know the Carbine made its way to Korea at some point, too. Both show the dings and wear of use; the Garand had the barrel replaced at least once. There's something special about holding a rifle used to protect this nation, and save a lot of people, from an evil empire. Maybe more than once.

Looking at this Colt, it was carried. A lot. The finish is worn silver-gray, but there's no pitting. I think that at least some of the carry was tucked inside the belt or waistband; the wear is somewhat greater on the left side of the slide. Just some citizen, feeling the need for a little something in case of trouble in his travels? Maybe spending time in a ladys' purse when the man was away from home, or just by the bed? No telling. It's a tool that was used, as tools are meant to be.

Friend of mine, the gunsmith, has the first one of these I'd seen. It had been in a fire, and was in bloody awful shape; rusted, nasty. He had to soak it in penetrating oil for a week before, with a mallet, he could break the slide free; more soaking and working to completely break it down. Cleaning, de-rusting and de-crudding the inside and parts. Then the exterior. Usually, to polish a worn finish on something like this, you'd start on the flats(assuming you don't have certain buffing equipment and experience) with a file wrapped with wet/dry paper, used wet, and worked back & forth to polish the surface; this was so bad he started with the file, then moved on to paper. No way to get all the pits out, but he was able to work it to a very nice surface, frame and slide, and then blued it. And it's a beautiful job: he took something that could have been thrown away as hopeless and restored it to a working tool with a fine finish.

This one, the finish is worn but that's all, no nasty pitting to deal with, no rust, just honest wear. And I kind of like it this way. Maybe, someday, I'll refinish it; but for now, it stays as-is.

It's the only possible caption

"Ge' way from me booty, ye scurvy dog!"

It was downright nice outside when I got home last night,

but it's back to hot today. The front came through without triggering rain in this area, but the cooler temps were very nice. Actually, it's been 8-10 degrees lower today than last week, so even without rain, very nice.

Hot as hell in Fort Worth over the weekend, clean air alerts, the works. And Saturday night through Sunday morning, into early afternoon, little to no wind. As in not even the tiniest leaves on the smallest twigs were stirring. Not often that still in this region. Sunday morning helped set up the misting line over the back porch, and at first the mist was barely drifting.

Damn. I just checked my Sitemeter stuff, I've had visitors from Spain and Finland today. This here internet is somethin' wonderful.

If you've never been to Cabela's, and you get a chance, go. The one in Fort Worth has a drool roomGun Library, which is the room with the serious collectibles and safari-grade stuff; you can get a case of the vapors just walking in the door. Along with the Merkel double-rifles and 1873 Winchesters and Colt Navy revolvers, and such, in one case was a Pocket Hammerless in .32 that looked new. I mean, no wear at all. And they had the original box it came in. No, you don't want to know. And, in the main area, they actually had the bullets Dad wanted me to look for, so he's got a couple of boxes to load. And I got a box of .380 to help feed the new Colt; at this point I'm really glad I've been saving the .380 brass I found at the range.

Speaking of fine stuff, on Saturday was helping friend run some errands and, pulling into Ace Hardware, a few places down I saw a sign that said "Fine Guns", so we went there first. Stepped in and Shotguns. Doubles and singles and a few pumps, all Huglu made in Turkey. Plain and fancy, all with wonderful balance. Many with engraving that almost counted more as carving, beautifully done. And considering what you were holding, the prices weren't bad. If you're around Keller, the shop's at 1540 Keller Parkway, Suite 103, a little down from Ace. Very pretty stuff, including cases and shellbags and such. Their website's I think they're about to do some business, because friend had a list of people he was planning to tell about them.

Those white grips on the Colt? Inside they're marked 'Franzite' and 'Chicago'. Did a little digging, apparently they were a big supplier of aftermarket grips for handguns. I guess these are imitation ivory, which isn't bad; I'm trying to decide whether to get a set of repro originals for it. According to the serial number, this originally came with the black hard rubber. But the white doesn't look bad at all on it, so for the moment they stay on. If I want to get fancy I've got some nice walnut and maple in the garage, and a set of checkering tools...

Crap. Looking at Tam's place, I find there are people who really will look better dead.

Damn. I just looked at Kevin's place, and it's been three years since Acidman died. I've still got him on the blogroll; just didn't want to take him off. The man was living, as Kevin put it, a slow-motion train wreck, but DAMN he could write. And did.

Borrowed from comments on the subject of getting the attention of the morons in Congress who passed another bill without knowing what was in it:
ADMONITION, n. Gentle reproof, as with a meat-axe. Friendly warning.
- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Like I once said, "Just one little comet, c'mon..."

And one more thing:
TSA: "You guys seem to be treating this as a big joke. Why is such a serious matter so funny to you guys?"

K13: "Honestly?"

TSA: "Yes. Why is it so funny?"

K13: "Ma'am, you are afraid that we are going to replace the water in our 5 gallon water jugs with some sort of liquid explosive, is that correct?"

TSA: "Yes."

K13: "And that we might use a liquid explosive to conduct a terrorist attack on an aircraft, or the terminal. "

TSA: "Yes."

K13: "You are aware that as part of my job, I drive a rolling 8000 gallon capacity bomb. And seeing as I haven't crashed it into the terminal, an airplane, or a baggage cart screaming 'Allah Ackbar' yet, what makes you think I'd use a water cooler as an explosives cache. . . . "

TSA: ". . . . . . "

We got our coolers back the next day

Ref the situation in Honduras,

found this at Fausta's Blog:

Indeed, Honduras’ La Prensa states that (My translation: If you use this, please credit me and link to this post)

An official statement of the Supreme Court of Justice explained that the Armed Forces acted under lawful grounds when detaining the President of the Republic, and by decommissioning the materials to be used on the illegal poll which aimed to bring forth Executive Power against a judicial order.

Other sources verified that the president of the Congress, Roberto Micheletti, will assume the presidency of the republic in a few hours.

Honduran president Manuel Zelaya was detained this morning by the military in compliance with an order of the courts of law.

So the sitting President was breaking the law and refused to stop, and so the institutions of the nation, as required by law, acted.

So why all the condemnation by Obama and Clinton(Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the action taken against Honduras’ president should be condemned by everyone.)? Not only is Honduras having to listen to this, they've got that communist dirtbag Chavez saying things like
President Hugo Chavez has warned the Honduran military behind the coup today with “war” if anything happens to our ambassador in Tegucigalpa, or if the Venezuelan embassy is taken.

Chavez said that it would be “a declaration of war” and Venezuela would be forced to send troops. “The Venezuelan Armed Forces are on alert.”

“The military junta would be entering on a de-facto state of war. We would have to act even militarily. I wouldn’t be able to remain with my arms crossed knowing they are assaulting our ambassador.”

Yeah. Honduras is dealing with a problem, so of COURSE they're going to grab and beat up ambassadors. Uh huh.

President Obama and SecState Clinton need to shut the hell up on this. And stop crapping on Colombia:
The free-trade issue has become complicated by another urgent matter: Will Colombia grant a U.S. request to use the Palanquero military installation north of Bogotá as a U.S. air base, or "cooperative security location"? Mr. Uribe is still asking for ratification of the trade deal (FTA) negotiated in good faith and signed more than 30 months ago. Beyond this display of patience, America's most important South American partner has gone to great lenths to satisfy Democrats who've made charges of violence against labor leaders in the country. The undisputable fact is that under Mr. Uribe's leadership Colombians are safer than they have been in years.

Democrats nonetheless continue to prevent a vote on the FTA. Big Labor has simply drawn a line in the sand against any new trade agreements, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is complying. Colombia gets whacked.

The irony is protectionists don't gain anything by blocking the FTA. U.S. markets are already open to Colombian goods under the Andean trade preferences act. This new agreement would open Colombian markets to U.S. exports. Colombia may also soon have FTAs with Canada and the European Union, which would make U.S. producers even less competitive than they are now even as U.S. unemployment heads toward 10%.

We hear the White House will tell Mr. Uribe that the political needs of the Democrats' health-care agenda are too important to be disrupted by a trade vote. So Mr. Uribe will be told to tread more water, even as Mr. Obama asks Mr. Uribe for a favor

Tam, I'm not rich OR famous,

but I found one*

Hell with the news, I found something.

A while back I had a chance to shoot a Colt Model M, more commonly known as the Pocket Hammerless, in .32acp. Very nice little pistol. This led to discussion in places about it, and who wanted one, and that there are two models. Well, I went out of town to visit friends over the weekend. And there was a gun show. And in one of those combinations of "If I hadn't done this... I got one.Colt Model M.

In .380.

The finish is worn silvery, but there's no pitting. The bore is shiny and the action is tight. It was carried a lot and either not fired much, or the owner was careful about cleaning. The grips are aftermarket.

If you're not understanding the emphasis on caliber above, there were a LOT of these pistols made in .32, but a whole lot less in .380; they're harder to find and, consequently, more expensive. Disgustingly so. Which meant that, while I'd seen a couple of them, the prices were on the order of "Yeah, that's going to happen." Except that I lucked out. Hugely. I will not name the price because it would either cause health problems among certain people, or it might cause Tam to say nasty things about me. Or pay me a visit and hurt me. Let's just say that I'm very VERY happy with it.

That combination of circumstances... I just happened to find out about the show, and we almost didn't go. I almost didn't take any copies of my C&R on the trip. I didn't see that aisle-end display until on the way to the door to leave.

It's currently about to be detail-stripped, cleaned and lubed. After which, in the next few days, it will make a trip to the range. Yes, I have .380 ammo and I'm looking forward to it.

Update: I state that John Browning was a genius; among other things, the simplicity of this design is wonderful. But putting the grip safety/two springs/hammer/thumb safety all back together in proper relation either requires a house brownie to help or an Autobot with extendable manipulators, or extensive use of Bad Language of the type that used to cause your mother thoughts of soap. But it's back together now.
Added: Internally, there was a touch of oil on the sides of the hammer and a trace remaining on the trigger; otherwise, the thing was dry. That's not counting some dried stuff under the trigger/sear spring. Seems to be the usual of most old guns, they've either got a lot of old oil/grease/dust in them, or they're dry. That's not counting milsurps coated with cosmoline, of course. But no sign of rust or pitting on anything inside.
And, like several old auto pistols I've seen, the magazine spring and the bottom of the follower was coated with old grease and lint combined into a layer of yecch.

*Og wanted me to start this "Tam, eat your heart out!" I decided against, because for that she might make the trip here and shoot me.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

So the President didn't want to 'meddle' in Iran, but he's fine on meddling for real

in Honduras?
Read Fausta’s amazing round-up of what happened here. In a nutshell, Zelaya wanted another term as president so he decided to hold a popular referendum on whether he should be eligible. Minor problem: The Honduran constitution can’t be amended by popular referendum so the country’s supreme court ordered the vote canceled. Zelaya tried to go ahead with it anyway. Literally every other arm of the Honduran government — judiciary, legislature, military — was against him, to the point where the troops who arrested him this morning were evidently acting on a court order.

And yet Obama makes big speeches about 'respecting the law' when it's Zelaya who was breaking it? I wonder why...
Why such strong, unified opposition? According to one retired Honduran general cited by Fausta, it’s because Zelaya’s a Chavez stooge and him staying on would mean “Chavez would eventually be running Honduras by proxy.” Two questions, then. One: In their rush to drool all over themselves about “the rule of law,” do Obama and Hillary realize that it’s Zelaya who was flouting the rule of law here? I know The One’s a big believer in executive power but even he’d acknowledge that defying an order from the Supreme Court crosses the line (I think). And two: Why is Team Barry siding with Zelaya instead of simply staying out of it? The White House proved with Iran that they’re capable of maintaining very tactful silences for excruciatingly long periods of time. Yet today we’ve got not only the secretary of state but the president himself rushing out statements. Is this some kind of half-assed attempt to make nice with Chavez now that relations have been restored by supporting one of his cronies? What am I missing here?
I would guess that what he's missing is that 'Zelaya's a Chavez stooge' part; I think it would suit our socialist President very well to have a Chavez stooge stage a takeover of Honduras. Only the people of the nation and every branch of government said, to put it crudely "We are NOT going to let this shit happen!". And didn't.

Good on Honduras. And bad on Obama.

Somewhat less busy now

And the weather broke here over the weekend. Lots cooler now than Friday & Saturday, though no rain right here. Unlike some other years, though we could use some it's not a critical matter at this point.

More to write tomorrow; right now I'm tired